TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SleepyPoemsin2020 Archive

View 0 posts and 3,000 comments by SleepyPoemsin2020 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)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 3,000 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
2

Not really sure how any point can be "valid" if it's horseshit you (the general you) make up to justify how you feel rather than the reason for how you feel. Edit: mind you I'm not saying their arguments are made up. For example, studies show high Ns cheat more. But that isn't why they are averse to high Ns. It's horseshit to pretend like it has any bearing on their choices or feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 05:04 AM
3

It's a post hoc rationalization for why they feel the way they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 02:31 AM
2

Tbf, they don't always accuse women of lying. They heap lavish praise on any woman who validates their viewpoint on anything, thanking her profusely for being "honest."
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 03:55 AM
–

the homoromanticism is strong on this one.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 02:57 PM
5

Nah, that's wishful thinking. Revulsion has many causes. But the banana commenter is tired of something. Not experiencing revulsion.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/26 02:53 PM
7

Revulsion is my response. But it didn't start out that way. The revulsion grew from years of watching many, many men cross boundaries, pressure, manipulate, coerce, and do essentially anything they think they can get away with to get women to fuck them while ignoring or diminishing the human that body belongs to. While simultaneously often viewing the act of fucking a woman in some sort of fucked up way, say as a trophy to parade around with because they feel they "took" something from her. View…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/26 06:52 AM
2

Why so emotional?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/26 05:42 AM
–

Nah pretty sure you're just giving women a good reason to hate men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 06:38 PM
2

My guy, the only way to avoid this happening is to avoid men completely. You realize that, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 10:52 PM
1

They're welcome to. But IMO those men imo aren't worth shit or worthy of a relationship so they should stick to the streets. We all get to have our opinions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 05:06 AM
1

Everyone on this sub seems to think the mods have it out for them, but I never manage to see the unfiltered conflict that leads to these bans.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 06:56 PM
3

So again why is max Chad settling for Stacy lite?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:48 PM
2

So if he is one of the legendary Chads, why isn't he getting a looks match Stacy?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:22 PM
2

They look abnormally similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:21 PM
–

You argued Women Can't Be "Used" For Sex If They Consented But if most or much of the time this consent was claimed under false pretenses, this is a valid counter to your argument. You're still just trying to evade actually responding to any arguments against your OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 01:17 PM
–

It's telling that you have no real response to this comment so you just start throwing around extreme language and attacking the arguer rather than the argument. I'm afraid the only people on this post going through wild mental gymnastics are you and other men here wanting to justify acting like pieces of shit. And then some of you are probably the same fuckers who turn around and argue "bUt 99% oF Men ArE sWeEt LiTtLe AnGeLs."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/26 01:08 PM
–

Thinking men fulfill all companionship needs better than women sounds pretty homoromantic to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 08:02 AM
–

Just don't be surprised when a woman doesn't want to be in a relationship with a man who may be heterosexual but rather homoromantic or aromantic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 06:22 AM
–

Sure. Given you don't know basic shit about how most female bodies look....
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 06:50 AM
7

No, it's not. Strong argument there. You don't have to look like Eugenia Cooney to lose your period my guy. But I don't have time to educate the willfully ignorant. It's not my responsibility to prove your claims for you. If yoy have evidence of this, show it. You claimed it isn't true, and thus took on your own burden of proof. But this is such an easily googleable fact that this is just absolutely fucking lazy.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 06:35 AM
7

It is true that most women have cellulite and stretch marks. Google is your friend. Being emaciated is a standard pushed by society, by the examples I gave. It results in a lot of eating disorders and body issues in girls and women. Seems men often have little to no ability to judge what a healthy weight in a woman is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 06:29 AM
8

I think most of us are well aware that how most women look naturally is unattractive according to society at large. And particularly men. To be attractive, women are expected to: not be hairy, when most of us are naturally hairy; not have cellulite, when most women have cellulite; be emaciated such that we lose our periods which is the furthest thing from natural, but is heavily pushed as an ideal standard (e.g., supermodels, many current celebrities); not have stretch marks, when most of us hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 06:19 AM
1

Regardless of the truth of your statement, this is remotely relevant to how the sluttiness of men contributes to men's problems...how?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 04:30 AM
6

Eh I don't know about that. Easing the restrictions on blocking if we perceive someone as "bad faith" seems like a massive loophole that will continually be exploited and create echo chambers.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 07:48 PM
2

It's an ad hominem regardless of whether you want to frame it as attacking or not. A classic one. Frankly, if you demand not only sound reasoning but a full accounting of someone's background, history, and beliefs before engaging with validity of the argument they're making, while also refusing to acknowledge that multiple bad things does not make any one thing less bad or that there may be real differences in empathy levels between someone who will treat people they personally interact with as …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:35 PM
2

You have no idea if I'm being hypocritical or not. Accusing someone of hypocrisy is a classic ad hominem and entirely irrelevant as to the soundness of my argument. The only reason you are taking this route is because you have no actual rebuttal that it's fucked up and therefore, worse for men to sleep around than women, as women rarely think they're actively going around devaluing men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:44 PM
2

Back to the ad hominem. And now my faux intellectual dear, an ad hominem does not require that you insult someone. In fact it's often erroneously conflated with insulting. It's simply trying to attack the arguer as opposed to the argument. Now I could give an exhaustive account of why I am or am not a hypocrite as you allege, but it's entirely irrelevant as to the soundness of my argument. But nice attempt to downplay how fucked it is by framing it as "guys fumbling around." No, it's a deliberat…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:36 PM
2

Ah let's ignore that it's fucked up because there are other fucked up things in the world. We can be as shit as we want without criticism. Let's pretend that our choices while personally interacting with and being intimate with someone are on the same level as being in an economic system that our individual choices have a much more limited impact on and that we are much more dependent on. Yes, lovely fantasy you've got there to try to justify shitty behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:20 PM
3

It is not required that they consciously revel in it for it to be incredibly fucked up. Them being willing to defile and devalue someone for their own pleasure - even if they don't specifically get joy from that aspect - is sufficient.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:06 PM
2

Different treatment does often, but not always, stem from bigotry. I don't think most people will argue that different treatment is always inherently misogynistic. It's what's motivating the different treatment that often is. Therefore, I don't think this is a valid criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:54 PM
2

Be gone, tone police, if you have nothing substantive to add and want to nitpick.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:44 PM
2

Really? You can only critique all or none? Very black and white thinking. And literally nothing in this discussion had anything to do with arguments for "equality" so that's a random way to rope in another manosphere talking point.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:38 PM
1

Fantastic ad hominem.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:33 PM
2

Is basically modern world. Really? I've literally never tried to actively engage in activities with other people that I believe devalues them. Nice attempt to hand wave away this issue. My point if not that is good or bad, point is this is not hypocrisy. You guys will twist yourself into knots about why this allegedly isn't hypocrisy, but it's a double standard many view as hypocritical no matter how many cry about "wellz AkShUaLlY."
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:29 PM
3

You're right. It's even worse for men to sleep around. Because many of them view women with higher body counts as having less value. So basically, they enjoy going around trying to devalue as many women as possible. There is literally nothing more disgustingly fucked up and psychopathic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:15 PM
1

Cheap dick simply meant men needed to provide more to attract women. It’s always been that way. No, women didn't have a choice. Now they do. But cheap pussy… women made pussy cheap but also still wanna charge full price, and we’re dealing with this mess currently. Ya’ll want it both ways while still demanding men bring more to the table, all while bringing less of what men want. Yawn. Then quit bitching and move on.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 04:19 AM
1

This is just you reiterating that men are more akin to children, robots, or animals than grown ass human beings and frankly shouldn't be trusted with shit if they're incapable of holding themselves accountable or controlling their own behavior. They made dick cheap and now have to deal with the consequences.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 12:05 AM
1

If men are the ones unhappy with the current situation as you allege, the onus is on them to change it. Crying like toddlers in the corner while blaming women again, shows they apparently have zero actual agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 10:37 PM
1

Yes yes wahh baby men are helpless and can't control their own actions, it's all up to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 08:37 PM
1

Thank you for admitting that you won't hold men accountable for anything by stating that their actions don't matter and by refusing to acknowledge that men can say no to women and thus control when sex happens. I get it. You want to treat men like babies and hold them accountable for nothing because accountability is uncomfortable. You don't want to change anything about your actions so you externalize all blame to a group you're not a part of. A true example of a manospherian crying about accou…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 08:13 PM
1

Women could close their damn legs too but they aint so why would men? The gender literally powered by sexual desire? You a man were the one bitching about the state of things so the question is what you refuse to hold me accountable and want to blame everything on women. I mean the reason is obvious but... Women are held accountable because they are the one’s on control of the flow of sex. Again, it literally doesn’t matter if men hand out dick or not. It’s not men who decides when or if sex is …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 07:18 PM
2

Held accountable for what? The sexual revolution was on women, not men. Dudes were waiting for marriage to get laid as was expected of them. In other words, men acted like babies and went as far as women would let them and now take no accountability for the state of things that they bitch about now. They could close their damn legs and stop sticking their dicks into any willing participant and their problems would go away. Who’s a whore? Only certain men can become whores and only because women …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 07:05 PM
3

Yes men have never been held accountable and that's why there were no expectations regarding their behavior. Now they bitch reaping the consequences of being whores!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 06:53 PM
3

"it's simply nature for men not to take accountability for their actions." There is nothing stopping men from pursuing while also not passing out dick to anyone who will take it. But me personally? Yes I'd prefer to pursue and be left alone otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 06:29 PM
6

"Men in the past didn't have to be accountable for their actions so why should we be now?"
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 01:32 PM
16

And it still wouldn't be a problem for men if they stopped giving out free dick. Yet, many always try to export any accountability for their shitty lives to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 04:30 AM
4

I'd say many women like the idea of a man but are less enthralled with what they actually receive in a relationship with a man, which lead some to conclude that being single is preferable because the reality of pairing with a man is kind of ass, even if they have some baseline desire to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 03:07 AM
15

If men wouldn't freely pass out cock, they'd solve their own problems. But alas...
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 03:03 AM
0

Wahs baby menz have no accountability.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/26 02:56 AM
2

It's not a good comparison because you're comparing behavior and experiences to physical traits. I more apt comparison that many find offensive would be male preference for younger women*, for example, as that may be due at least in part to physical attributes. It's entirely different to feel entitled to experiences that you don't want others to have. But as a low N woman who gets the ick from high N men, I find high N men who want low N women disgusting af. I used to keep this to myself, as you…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 11:42 PM
6

Are you suggesting that a man who says I'd date any woman while conflating woman with young thin woman isn't delusional as fuck?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 05:22 PM
2

Men are made for war and hunting (if you believe in evolution). They are made to kill. They are made to protect their families from other tribes. Maybe, but even if granting that it doesn't mean that: They are made to lead. Having physical attributes that make you better at fighting does not necessitate that you are "made" to lead or that you'll be a good leader. This does not mean they don't have feelings or that they can't talk about them. It means they can't cry about them except in certain e…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 03:20 PM
9

Imo, at its root, this stems from a worldview that reduces sex to a conquest rather than a shared, mutual experience. If intimacy is viewed as a zero-sum game where a man "takes" and a woman "surrenders" herself emotionally, then a woman who engages in casual sex without catching feelings disrupts that entire inner narrative. This attitude is further demonstrated by the obsession some men have with getting a woman to do things with them that she wouldn't do with others. Essentially treating her …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 09:04 PM
12

As per usual, men holding themselves to a lower standard and acting like complete sluts if they can while judging women who act like they do or would.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 02:34 PM
–

Because when it comes to attracting men - we are the fisherman and you are the fish.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:48 PM
7

Fucking disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:02 PM
2

So the goal post is shifting from only looks matter to only characteristics that are innate matter? And are you arguing that some people failing to learn something means it cannot be done? Charisma is a skill. Like any skill, some people may find it easier to master, but anyone can enhance their charisma. But if you decide that it is something that cannot be learned, you probably will never learn it due to your self-imposed limits.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 01:09 AM
2

One of the most charismatic men I have met was short with bad teeth. Easily below average looks wise. Regardless, the fact of the matter is most people are average, and being average and charismatic is going to be a lot more desirable than being average and not charismatic. An average man's charisma can make him desirable to women who he otherwise would not be desirable to. However, if you want to cling to a fatalistic world view in which only the extremes are considered and true desire is only …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 12:10 AM
2

Nope. A woman can definitely desire to have sex with a charismatic man. Because he is charismatic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 08:28 PM
6

The summary of your comment is that you are devaluing every single way of valuing a person except for physical appearance which more or less affirms the OP. Objectively, there is really no difference between fucking a man because he's hot or fucking a man because he's charismatic, for example. They're both responding to external quality that has little to do really with "who he is" (or at least are incomplete). It's just that you subjectively have "othered" all forms of value other than physical…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 07:23 PM
2

So emotional and reactive lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 02:16 PM
1

More like using logic while you're repeatedly lashing out like a cornered dog. But whatever you need to tell yourself I suppose.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 02:06 PM
4

Really? Why would a beautiful woman drop her picture such that she would open herself up to stalking by the ass faces on this sub? But there's no reasoning with someone who is clearly reacting solely based on emotion. Regardless, my original point still stands. If you're going to hand wave away anecdotal experiences that don't match your fee fees, other people can hand wave away yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 02:00 PM
2

Got it, it's "relevant" because you're emotionally offended. Now tell me darlin', would you be so offended if you knew you were hot stuff?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 01:44 PM
2

How is it remotely relevant whether or not I'm Jabba the Hutt's long lost twin? On the other hand, whether men complaining here are average or below average is relevant the truth of men here complaining about what the "average man" experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 01:40 PM
4

Kind of like how the men complaining in this forum have yet to prove that their anecdotal experiences are representative of the average man versus significantly below average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 12:28 PM
10

Good example of male solipsism here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 05:06 PM
2

I mean it would have helped if you'd actually argued any of your points rather than just stating "no this is the way it is" without defining or arguing anything all the while refusing to address my questions and going off on vague tangents that are malleable.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 07:44 PM
2

You say....while offering no argument as to why. Look at it this way. If the "cost" (the risk of being de-prioritized) is higher, the "return on investment" (the emotional security of the bond) is low. I'm not saying it can't exist, I'm saying it is an irrational investment because it is objectively lower value. If you want to rely on some nebulous concept of how strong his fees fees are while ignoring every single objective indicator that the bond with a man is lower value, there's no helping y…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 07:02 PM
2

Oh I do understand there is more going on. Just vaguely handwaving to more going on however is not really an impressive defense that this bond with a man is worth it if he's worse at pair bonding than a woman and if dopamine for him overrides the effects of vasopressin and oxytocin. I'm not specifically addressing fidelity, but if a man will more easily de-prioritize a "pair bond" for the dopamine hit of a new partner, then his bond de facto is lower and of less value given he will jeopardize th…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:43 PM
2

It is not quite as strong in men due to dopamine (novelty can override the effects of vasopressin and oxytocin) So you're arguing that once this "bond" is established, this never happens? Also, I'd also argue that it's pathetic on its own to invest and become attached to someone who likely won't become as attached to you given all these "obstacles."
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:18 PM
2

If there are antagonists and it can be more easily overcome by dopamine, then pair bonding in men is relatively weaker. And a woman is pathetic to cling to one.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:08 PM
2

If pair bonding isn't as strong in men, it's lower level. I've rarely seen someone try to twist themselves into knots about the logical conclusion of their own set of beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:03 PM
2

And you're again arguing against a strawman. I'm not saying men don't get attached. I'm saying if pair bonding is not as strong in men then it's pathetic for a woman to cling to one.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 05:56 PM
3

I can't even pretend to tell how you think this vague statement is at all relevant. "Pair bonding," insofar as it exists, in men is either as strong or it isn't. You argue it isn't. Therefore, in that instance, a woman is pathetic to get so attached to a man who won't be as attached to her. Edit: and before you try to move the goal posts again, quoting from your OC: Pair bonding is a very real thing. It is not quite as strong in men
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 05:31 PM
3

That's just restating the same thing and makes no material changes. So again, if pair bonding is not as strong in men as you argued in your OC, it is really quite sad to get so attached to them. Hence, pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 05:22 PM
2

arent attached What the strawman is this? I said "as" attached. You spent your entire OC going on about how "pair bonding" isn't as strong for men. So, it's pathetic to be so attached to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 02:32 PM
4

Aw thats sad though Is it? Why the fuck would you want to be that attached to someone where it isn't reciprocal, as you argue in your OC? Edit: seems much more sad to me to cling to someone who won't be as attached. Pathetic, even.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 05:16 AM
6

If I'd been born and socialized as a man, considering my sunny disposition even sans greater amounts of testosterone, I would probably be an insufferable piece of shit. Given that I whine about male promiscuity, I'd probably be whinging about high N women while making up bullshit double standards about why it was ok for me to be a slut given men are handed these double standards on a platter. I'd probably be very arrogant. Female me would likely really dislike male me. Edit: would I be successfu…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/26 05:15 PM
3

So? That's life about *many things.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 02:02 PM
2

Why is it a hard pill to swallow?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 01:56 PM
–

Yet another good reason not to commit to a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/26 06:20 AM
5

Some people suck. But bear in mind from the outside it can be hard to accurately tell who sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:32 PM
1

By not dating them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:30 PM
2

Then women should stop saying how it’s mostly emotions they are attracted to. Do they really say this? Or is this an inaccurate simplification of common themes of what women say? Regardless, a majority of women still choose to pair up with men, even if they're uncomfortable/need to rationalize the way male attraction works. Also, emotional connection can increase sexual desire, and for a while can compensate for decreasing physical attractiveness, as it is probably the case with middle-aged coup…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 08:34 PM
2

it’s definitely not something men should be blamed for. I suspect this is where most of the defensiveness comes from with men. They feel blamed. But choosing not to pair with a man because of how male attraction works, or even just being bothered by it, isn't blaming him. It's accepting reality and figuring out where you fit in that reality. Often times, reality sucks ass compared to what we desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 08:07 PM
2

Attraction can change in form while remaining constant in magnitude. Even granting this, the fact that it is constant in magnitude may or may not be enough depending on the woman. Why is it a problem is physical attraction is replaced by emotional one if women are more into emotional attraction to begin with? It's going to depend on the woman. Some may be fine with it. Others will swallow their discomfort because they don't want to be alone. Others will lie to themselves. Others may choose not t…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:43 PM
2

Do you have any proof that this is a relevant consideration to all women who are bothered by how male attraction works? Is it fine for a woman to look at how reality is and thus conclude a LTR with a man isn't for her?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:37 PM
1

How am I "dodging" a question that was never asked? Did you ask me that? Did anyone else? But LTRs are notoriously bad at lasting, and even worse at lasting while both people are happy. But it certainly will probably last longer if a woman lies to herself about her partner's desire and how it works.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:29 PM
2

Do you think whether the majority of men cheat on or leave their wives for younger women is the only relevant consideration?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 06:48 PM
2

How high and mighty of you after being the one to start with the condescending attitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 11:35 PM
2

That OC was not describing the worst of men, as you alleged, just how their attraction and desire works. Which is a separate question of how a man handles it. Spelled out clearly enough or do I need to say things slower?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 10:49 PM
4

I'm not really sure how your comment is responsive to mine. I never made any claims that all men act a certain way based upon their impulses. That doesn't change that the fact that they have them. It does not change who they're most attracted to or the fact that their neighbor may indeed be more sexually enticing than their familiar wife, regardless of how they choose to act.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 10:39 PM
6

The Coolidge effect and the fact that men are most attracted to women around 20 years old are both well documented. Edit: for those unfamiliar with it, the Coolidge effect is a biological phenomenon seen in animals, whereby males exhibit renewed sexual interest whenever a new female of reproductive availability is introduced, even after sex with prior but still available sexual partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 06:51 PM
3

Twu wuv. While he beats off to 18-year-olds at night.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 04:41 PM
17

he owned me body and soul and you just don’t trigger that feeling in me Ick.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 02:08 AM
3

Probably in part because romance in fiction is less disappointing than it is in real life. Women are chosen in romance fiction because their mate views them as special. This really isn't the case in real life, where men lack selectively and many a woman will do.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 05:09 PM
1

Honey believe what you want. Going back to the original argument. My OC: So one 1) shut up and deal with it; 2) find someone else; or 3) stay single. Those are the only three paths Note that those are three independent options. The shut up was only tied to option number one. Not option number three. The or clearly notes these are three independent options. So no, I never said you couldn't complain and be single. We are done here.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:57 AM
1

You said its not an option I have, I am demonstrating that I very much do have that option No I didn't. Quote me. Well here you are 10+ comments deep on an argument about dating. Is that not indicative that the rat does in fact have a large ass? It means I enjoy arguing online. Not that I care what you do. But like I said, you can be delusional if you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:52 AM
2

I never said you couldn't complain and be single. You're fighting a strawman. Every single comment you made to this subreddit, a subreddit specifically made to argue with the opposite gender about dating. Are you so desperate to fool yourself? It's a place to debate gender issues, which are much broader than your specific dating complaints. But if you want to be delusional enough to think I'm invested in what you do, you do you boo, ain't no arguing that that level of ego.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:48 AM
2

There are others as I have explained. No. You've just noted your bitching online and thereby choosing option three. That is not another option, that's one of the ones I've listed out. every time a guy complains about their relationship struggles. Lmao yeah no. Extrapolating this from me responding to one comment chain is delulu That would be a full time job.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:43 AM
2

Oh it doesn't bother me. I couldn't give less of a rat's ass. It's bizarre to me ya'll have such an inflated sense of self that you think randoms online care what you do. But you're in fact not choosing anything different from the options I've laid out. As there aren't any others. As someone who also chose the stay single option because I didn't like my options, I have experience with this.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:39 AM
1

By bitching online you are choosing option number three.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:35 AM
1

It doesn't change the fact that you can either 1) shut up (as in, you can bitch but if you bitch non stop to her she's going to leave) and take it; find someone else; or stay single. Bitching online doesn't create another option.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:30 AM
3

I'm noting that your argument doesn't actually change your three real life options, while also noting that, as per usual, male perception of how men behave (as many men complain bitterly online) doesn't line up with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 06:29 AM
4

For the supposedly solutions focused sex, that does fuck all to change your actual options. Bitching online doesn't change your real-life options.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 05:19 AM
10

So one 1) shut up and deal with it; 2) find someone else; or 3) stay single. Those are the only three paths.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 01:28 AM
3

Men who lie to get sex are much worse. Garbage, as far as I'm concerned.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 03:29 AM
4

Geez OP, I wonder why women aren't comforted by you empathy dodging and dropping stats that don't show the whole picture.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/26 05:01 PM
2

Sure, if that happens, that's an improvement. I still am not seeing how it's relevant to my criticism of the OP, as it's speculative and not the current reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:20 PM
1

And this is relevant how? If in some future world AI porn wipes out the regular porn industry, that's not really relevant to the cards that we are currently dealing with. It has no bearing on the fact that there are innumerable legitimate criticisms of the current porn industry.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:14 PM
6

He went from red pill to black pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:55 PM
7

really? You think that single men are the center of the universe such that the multitude of criticisms about porn are mainly fabricated and what people really want to do is persecute men? I can't not even imagine having such a sense of self importance.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 06:20 PM
-1

Imagine thinking that criticism of a multi billion dollar industry that involves significant human trafficking and has ruined multiple relationships boils down to people wanting punish single men and stop them from having any sexual outlet. If this isn't evidence of main character syndrome, I don't know what is. Edit: to clarify, this is in response to OP's overarching claim: Antiporn is usually motivated by misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 04:36 PM
1

I certainly can decide that I'm not going to take them seriously if they won't take the misandry from other men seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 04:28 PM
2

They still have no right to bitch about women repeating ideas about male nature that they can't bother to call out when men say it!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 04:23 PM
2

Women are far more likely to take more offense when a man says something negative about women than when a women does it as well..... doesn't mean they agree when the woman does it, just upsets them less. Nah when it comes to women perpetuating misogynistic viewpoints they often get dog piled by other women. And rightfully so. Regardless of whether these silent men agree or disagree, they have no fucking room to complain about women believing what these other men say about men and repeating it ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 04:15 PM
6

You're assuming that the only rational choice is the longer choice. Quantity of life is not always superior to quality. Living a few more years with the bear and no subjugation can easily be superior to living 40 more years as a sex slave. In sum, if you're going to perpetuate this view of men, don't complain when women mirror it back and hate men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 04:08 PM
3

I didn't say no men call out RP view points. I said I almost never see them calling out RP viewpoints on male nature/men. what's your point? That many men agree with what blue haired feminists say about male nature but only get mad when women say it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 04:06 PM
9

So now you're arguing that the bear is worse than the man. But what if she disagrees with your analysis and would prefer the bear because it won't plot and scheme to force her into sexual servitude? Ultimately, if you're going to fuel a negative view of men, can you fault women for disliking or hating men based upon your view of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:42 PM
8

You're not answering my question. How can you fault a woman for deciding she wants nothing to do with men for believing what you say about them? Ie, choosing the bear, etc.?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:36 PM
5

So are these men calling out the rhetoric on men when TRP says or just when the blue haired feminist says it? Because I see a lot of men complaining about women saying men are essentially violent animals but crickets when another man says the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:32 PM
8

So if it's "a basic analysis of reality" that men will turn to violence towards women if they don't get sex, how can you fault a woman for accepting what you're saying and concluding no to men and yes to the bear?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:27 PM
6

I in general decline to believe biased generalizations about 50% of the population without sufficient data. Not "articles." Having data based opinion is something I'd recommend, as opposed to having strong views conflating what you feel is real with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 04:56 PM
6

ah so a war of the anecdotes fueled by bias. Not much to add to these sorts of conversations that'll have any value.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 04:51 PM
6

This is another assertion but it doesn't give me a reason so believe it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 04:45 PM
7

definitely more shown in women Why should we believe this?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 04:40 PM
1

I'm not missing your point. This is just a longer argument of your conclusion why it's ok that you decided not to date but why it's not ok she did. Or "sad" or however you like want to frame it. Like, of course you think your reasons make sense and hers don't. Because you're you and she's her. But you were met with understanding in your choice, and no extensive questioning at least that I've seen, but numerous guys here have taken offense to her reasons and have kept trying to argue that she's w…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 08:33 PM
1

So your choice is valid but hers isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 08:00 PM
2

You're also stating that no woman should dare risk a relationship with a man, because he might not find her as physically attractive down the road. If only life could be so predictable and perfect. I don't see any arguments about how women shouldn't pair up with men, just arguments of personal comfort based upon the data. Why isn't it ok for some women to be uncomfortable with the fact that men are by and large all most attracted to 20 year olds? Ultimately whether a relationship is worth it or …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 07:37 PM
1

I don't give a single fuck coz he has a shit load of female supporters. If women don't care about themselves, why tf should I? Ah got it. So if someone has supporters of the sex they harmed, then it's ok? How many male supports does this woman have? I mean, at least maybe the ones who committed the crime with her. You literally tried your hardest to downplay just how evil those feminists were to give her a platform Sigh. No. It's just not fucking relevant to what I was asking for. You're clearly…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 11:20 PM
-3

You're just enraged and shadow boxing in the corner. I never claim to be a feminist. Ultimately, I agree she's a piece of shit. Your example just really isn't responsive to what I was asking of evidence for. Are you appalled that Donald Trump's past is overlooked and he has been allowed into the most powerful position in the planet?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 11:07 PM
-3

Did they give her a platform because of what she did? Like I said, it's fair to think someone who did something like that shouldn't be given a platform. But not everyone agrees in blacklisting people for even awful shit they've done in the past. Look at the president of the United States, after all, who has sexually assaulted at least one woman, likely many, but his supporters are willing to over look that. And are you saying that her crime was any less coz she wasn't directly involved and inste…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 10:59 PM
-5

With male and female friends. I also don't believe she was the one who sexually assaulted him. Let's not pretend that the number of men who have raped and murdered women doesn't eclipse what women have done. Regardless, it's fair to think maybe she should have never gotten a platform. But we are specifically talking about women talking or posting about this sort of thing in a comparable way to what incel forums frequently reflect. So unless other women were they celebrating her crime from when s…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 10:49 PM
0

I've never seen a woman post about fantasizing raping a man, mutilating him, and torturing him, no. Kill all men is offensive rhetoric, but women saying this are not fantasizing about killing all men. Sex selective abortions also - in either direction - not near on the same level. I haven't actually seen women saying they hope men die in war, no. But unless they're fantasizing in gruesome detail about how they want men to die, that still wouldn't be quite on the same level. So no, I haven't hear…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:51 PM
5

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:12 PM
1

I'm not interested in defending OP's definition of patriarchy. Using his points to argue that his conclusion does not follow does *not mean I agree with them. It means I'm internally critiquing his argument and conceding points one through three for the purposes of this debate. So if you have an issue with the definitions at play here, take it up with OP. Just a couple of notes, however. This is a wrong analogy. The thing with patriarchy and why it's actually hard to get rid of, and why women up…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 05:41 AM
1

No. No system is that all-encompassing. It can heavily influence one area and have lesser effects on others. But ALL of it? ALL the time? That's fantasy. The human condition reaches out farther than any single system or philosophy could ever even attempt. I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. I'm using OP's definition of patriarchy, mind you, I'm not making a separate definition, and I don't believe I have misrepresented his position, else he would have probably objected on that fr…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 04:55 AM
1

Your assertion that it's logically invalid, is itself invalid. Pervasiveness and degree of harm are separate dimensions; something can be highly pervasive and only slightly harmful (which is my stance on patr.) You may not agree but it definitely passes the propositional logic check But you didn't just argue it is pervasive. You argued it affects power dynamics in most professional and social settings. Power dynamics affect the entire structure of society from the top to bottom. That isn't just …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:46 AM
1

That's what a debate is. To prove your side. No, I'm not trying to "prove" that four is wrong. I'm saying it doesn't follow from your own premises. This is a valid form of argumentation. Rebuttals do not require a positive argument. Yes I can, easily. Clickbait headlines are harmful, omnipresent, and also not that serious. Fast Fashion. Shrinkflation. All harmful but... among the top 10% things harming society? No. Clickbait headlines, fast fashion, etc, don't affect most aspects of society like…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:25 AM
0

I’m not interested in going on a tangent about how society should rank its priorities so that you can shift the burden of proof that you took on by making this post. I am pointing out the internal contradiction in your argument. You defined patriarchy as a system that shapes pretty much every human interaction, career choice, and mental health outcome, while causing harm to both sides. By your own definition, you cannot really separate any societal problems from this baseline. In fact, many issu…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:53 AM
0

Just accepting your first three points, you've admitted we are talking about a system that actively shapes every human interaction, career choice, and mental health outcome. The reality is that every status quo feels harmless to those who are comfortable with the baseline, but personal comfort doesn't change the fact that something shaping pretty much every facet of life is anything but minor.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 01:11 AM
–

I mean, that's what a significant number of men here do any time anyone says something that doesn't jive with how they feel the world is (and of course, lavishly praise the one or two women parroting their talking points for "telling the truth"). If those are the rules they're going to play by, why should the other side play by a different set of rules?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:29 AM
–

What in the circle jerk post is this asking TRP this question?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:27 AM
1

Tbh this was a part of male sexuality I was never able to make peace with. Because sex is a defining feature of romantic relationships, if a man will gladly sleep with most women, his other actions--and commitment--don't really mean anything to me. This was not a recipe for success when I dated, as I would inevitably become ambivalent towards investing anything in the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:15 AM
3

it isnt asinine, because men and women want different hings and desire different things, As per usual, this statement is, not only not entirely correct but also entirely irrelevant. most men desire most women, most women get swipes, most women have relationships, sex and dates Most men have relationship, sex, and dates. You're otherwise stating as truth the proposition you seek to defend - that most men want most women. But you've given no reason for me to believe it's true and ignore OC's point…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 11:32 PM
3

What do you base that on?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:59 PM
4

As you acknowledge in that comment chain, the fact that men can get into relationships does not necessarily mean they're desired. It does not mean women don't desire a small percentage of men. Many men's ability to get into relationships could be due to something like convenience. So to then turn around and demand "proof" that the groups women of women cited by OC are barred from sex and relationships is asinine. So to repeat your own argument back to you: your operation off the assumption, that…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:52 PM
7

Well look at this goal post shift. You acknowledge that men aren't barred from sex and relationships above, but argue it apparently doesn't count because: your operation off the assumption, that those marriages and relationships are operating of desire. But here, you're now demanding: proof that this supposed significant group of women are barred from sex and relationships So unless these groups of women are completely barred from relationships, it doesn't count. However, evidence that men also …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:33 PM
3

Most of your responses are entirely irrelevant as to whether men are chasing a small percentage of women. You're arguing that most of these are "valid" reasons, but that has no bearing on whether or not the result is that men are chasing a small percentage of women. Similarly trying to argue that older women don't want younger men the same way older men want younger women is, again irrelevant as to whether or not male preferences mean men are chasing a small percentage of women. And in fact supp…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:17 PM
16

An old ass man in denial, I see. Less than a decade until the quality of your sperm drastically drops off. Tick tock.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 05:11 PM
–

People feeling like something works doesn't have to be predicated on actual success, just the illusion or promise of success. We see this constantly with fad diets throughout the years. This is particularly true if the thing in question is an ideology that offers an explanation of the world that validates how the adherents feel, as this offers additional "benefits" that have fuck all to do with the actual success of the underlying belief system.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 05:20 PM
5

By investing more in themselves and not relying on men? By advocating for increased earning potential for women, improved maternity leave, etc? No matter how much a man makes, he can always leave or die. And odds are one or the other will happen, as most relationships don't make it. I agree costs of living can be rough for folks, but the best thing a woman can do for herself is work to where she does not have to rely on the man for survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:27 PM
2

So then hypergamy didn't work for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:21 PM
4

So most modern women you know are supporting their husbands and children - suggesting they earn more - yet you say they wouldn't be comfortable marrying someone who earns less than them. Did they all just have bad luck that their husbands lost their jobs or started working less hours after marriage? It doesn't line up. Edit: if the financial support they're providing is supplemental and their husbands still earn more, seems like being hypergamous didn't do much to insulate them from this type of…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:14 PM
4

I'm confused, OP, because in another comment you say: Most modern working women I know are working full time jobs to support their husbands with the ever increasing cost of living, while juggling domestic work and having/raising children. Which appears to be in direct contradiction to what you're saying here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:04 PM
9

Do all couples with children that you know have a man who earns more? Because I certainly know couples where he doesn't and they're doing fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 07:08 PM
4

I mean, it is. It's the act of marrying someone with higher social status or wealth. But particularly with women earning more, they don't need to marry up in order to help secure a more stable position for children they want to have. They can potentially even marry down and still have a partner that can pick up the slack if need be. But of course in pilled spaces, it's taken as something innate to female nature, and anything and everything pretty much can be hypergamous. I agree I'm not convince…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 07:07 PM
3

It does, but generally speaking it does not necessitate hypergamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:57 PM
8

Wanting a man with sufficient income or potential to pick up the slack if necessary does not necessitate that he earn more than you.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:53 PM
1

No, I'm talking about pushing boundaries as they are commonly understood in the context of relationships which is where someone has decided this is the limit and you will go no further. Trying to connect with people in a respectful way when you're unsure of what their boundaries are is not boundary pushing. I don't have a boundary of never giving out my number. No one does. If I've decided I won't give my number to Bob, that's a boundary. But he doesn't know that right off, so he's not pushing a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:10 PM
1

Comfort is not submission, anymore than you being comfortable around anyone else. Asking for numbers isn't pushing a boundary. It is a question of consent, because if someone wants you closer, you're not pushing their boundaries. It's when they don't that you are. Trying to manipulate an uninterested woman into anal sex is pushing boundaries. Escalating an interaction that she's responding positively to isn't. Asking for a number isn't pushing boundaries, but trying to keep pushing after she has…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:14 PM
1

This sums up why Gen z men are fucked. Anyone who views a mutually enjoyable activity for two people who are attracted to each other as requiring submission or boundary pushing - just gross. Couldn't imagine a bigger ick. Neither are required for escalation. Flirting is not boundary pushing, depending on the context and social cues. Ya'll just really seem to have no concept of of how to do these things consensually, apparently.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 06:20 AM
2

As a woman who doesn't like porn, I'm not "creeped" or "weirded" out by it, I consider it akin to cheating. Complicated by the ethical issues associated with porn that men seem usually happy to overlook to bust a nut. The extremely high rate of porn usage discouraged me from wanting to commit to a man, but disengagement is not a gender war.... ...not to mention I'm a minority in how intolerant I am of porn use.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 06:08 PM
1

Have no idea where you're getting that from. We were clearly discussing an example where it's clearly respectful, that doesn't mean there aren't others. It also doesn't mean that it's always respectful to try to kiss someone. It's not. The context, relationship, and social cues matter, but again, that's of course something you're trying to bypass altogether with this line of rhetoric so you can just throw up your hands and say "whelp, I can do whatever I want because it's disrespectful no matter…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 11:50 AM
1

Ah yes, the fount of truth. Incel memes. If she's creeped out by him she's not going to be going out on a date with him. Again, context matters and it's a factor you're predictably ignoring. The expectation is that dates will lead to some form of physical intimacy. If he leans in for a kiss on a date and she turns her head, then it's a rejection, but rejection doesn't mean his actions were disrespectful. And part of being respectful involves noticing if your attention is unwanted and then stoppi…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:49 AM
1

The exact line that divides innocent and disprespecrful itself is not written in stone and can vary from person to person. The vast, vast, majority of the time someone you've been dating leaning in for a kiss isn't going to be viewed as disrespectful, even if unwanted. This is just more weaponized incompetence. But this is not something you can put in a manual. Doesn't justify weaponized incompetence. If the woman makes a big issue about it and tries to sue the guy for sexual harassment then his…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 02:19 AM
2

In this example, what the fuck do you think them leaning in is? By pathologizing innocent interactions and putting them on the same level with shit that does violate boundaries and is disrespectful, you do both men and women a massive disservice. But it does make it easier for men to not learn body language, not learn nuance, and just do whatever he fuck they want because they'll argue it's "disrespectful" no matter what they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:01 AM
1

Read the chain you responded to. If you don't think it's applicable, you're welcome to tell me why but I'm not going to spoon-feed the conversation to you that you jumped in on.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:04 PM
1

Only at the extremes. Most men who struggle aren't ugly enough that it's hopeless. It's just a way to avoid accountability and externalize blame to the outside (here, women and their "ridiculous" standards)
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:53 PM
1

I'm clearly disagreeing with a particular comment and not taking on the shield of defending everything in the OP. But nice deflection attempt.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:46 PM
-2

Maybe, but I never said they did. Why immediately defensive? I was contrasting two examples that were clear enough that hopefully a toddler could see that one is respectful and consensual while the other is clearly not.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:34 PM
0

If you want to convince yourself that all escalation is boundary pushing and that there isn't a difference between kissing a woman a guy has been dating who leans in when he does, compared to say kissing a random woman on the street who is actively trying to get away, you have zero fucking business giving anyone advice because you're only going to make things significantly worse for all women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:37 PM
-1

Have yet to provide advice and have no desire to, but thanks for also showing that some women are piss poor at communication.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:24 PM
0

I'm debating. Why the fuck should I be giving advice?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:40 PM
-1

I'm debating. Why the fuck should I be giving advice?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:40 PM
1

Did I say they were supposed to know or that knowing was a prerequisite to treating someone respectfully? I'm pretty sure I noted I prefer someone to ask, but that kissing someone without asking is not always disrespectful.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 06:33 PM
-2

No, I'm not gaslighting. Ya'll have your heads so far up your ass to always jump to that. Body language is real communication, context and relationship matters, and you can touch and kiss someone without being disrespectful. So no, it's not always disrespectful to kiss someone without asking, although I personally prefer it if someone asks.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 05:57 PM
-2

The fact that you think kissing someone is inherently disrespectful and can't be done respectfully says something.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 04:16 PM
0

Unlikely, as many of the men here would rather blame their lack of success on factors they can't change than ones they can.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 02:40 PM
10

Either way, the current path is leading toward major disruption. Good. Burn this shit down.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:30 PM
3

Yes, high N men give me the ick.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:59 AM
5

I’ve not seen a single indicator that most men like women for anything unrelated to sex. Even the most uncharitable take of male nature generally assumes men also like women for their domestic labor. But I'd also say many men value women for their companionship, platonic or romantic, which generally involves liking other aspects of their person.* I'd say it's more accurate that men tend to prioritize sex above all else and can resort to very shitty tactics to get sex. While I'd say that's someth…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 03:00 AM
–

Could you get anymore anal? What are you, the fucking tone police?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 07:07 PM
1

And don't deflect with the "burden of proof" and "the blue pill doesn't make any claims" nonsense Lmao In other words, you don't want to fight against TBP. You want to fight against a strawman of TBP you've made up in your head.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 03:09 PM
7

How convenient. "Men and women are different whenever men want to use these "differences" to dodge accountability."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:50 AM
0

And yet, at all ages, they cheat at a similar rate or more than women. Imagine what they would do with more options lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 05:51 PM
36

Leaving isn't coercion. But beware the partner who constantly threatens to leave over every little disagreement or issue. They're emotionally manipulative and coercive, and you'll do yourself a favor by leaving them. Unless you just enjoy putting up with constant bullshit and making yourself miserable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 04:00 AM
1

It's impossible to demonstrate the value and necessity of the prosocial systemic safety network that my post is presenting without arguing that its removal would cause total chaos. Disagree. You can absolutely make pro-male arguments without including an implied threat. The reason you included it was because, like most men in these spaces, you likely don't give a shit about actually improving things for men, you just want to get back at women, which leads me to: My objective was never to make yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 07:02 PM
0

So my criticism of your post earlier, that "[t]he implied coercion will never garner respect, appreciation, or belonging" stands. You want to argue that men play a critical role in society, but any respect or appreciation for that role is going to be lost if you hedge it in coercive language. Humans are social creatures and at our core we cooperate with other humans. But if someone, like the abusive husband, starts arguing "yeah you'd starve to death without me," that social bond fractures. Real…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 06:44 PM
1

Your argument is not your motivation, and I think we both know why you won't actually state your motivation. But, you could always clear it up by saying what it actually is!
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 06:01 PM
1

And rather than address the fact that it's obviously not hypocrisy that's the issue, you make more unwarranted assumptions about how you think I feel and pivot back to repeating your post. Yet again. So again, what are you hoping to accomplish with this post?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 05:35 PM
1

Hypocrisy is doing one thing and saying another. Criticizing the group with the most power in society is not hypocrisy, it is in fact a logical conclusion for any grievances, because if they are largely responsible for the features of the system, they are also responsible for the flaws. And returning to the applicable abusive husband analogy - the fact that the husband pays the bills does not then excuse everything else he does from criticism or reproach.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 01:32 PM
1

Do you not understand what motivation means? There's something driving you to make you want to post this. Just reiterating your post doesn't address your motivation for doing so.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 12:49 PM
1

The comparison to an abusive husband is a complete emotional derailment No, it's an accurate analogy of what you're doing. It's not particularly my fault you don't want to see your reflection. Pointing out this material blind spot isn't an abuse tactic, instead it is just stating a logistical fact that mainstream discourse ignores, which is the whole point of my post. And tell me, what is your motivation for doing so?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 12:30 PM
1

Again, I really don't know what you are trying to accomplish with this rhetoric. The fact of the matter is humans are social creatures that have been heavily dependent on social structures for survival since the dawn of time. But turning this into a gendered ("just imagine how you would be raped and killed without the "good" men") is like a macro version of the abusive husband who tells his wife she would never make it without him. The implied coercion will never garner respect, appreciation, or…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 11:48 AM
1

This conclusion doesn't necessarily follow. Maybe there are some women who will have casual sex without expectations of safety etc., but that doesn't mean that's not a factor limiting other women from participating. So, if safety was guaranteed, you might get more regular participants.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 01:36 AM
2

Whatever helps you sleep better at night.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:42 PM
4

Thank you for showing you're 1) a bad faith actor; or 2) incapable of basic reasoning. Using a different example, women should be able to exercise their autonomy. But if a woman conspires to get all women to suddenly stop working in healthcare - part of our societal infrastructure that relies largely on women for work on the ground - in order to kill multiple men depending on these services, that's sociopathic. If you can't or won't see that because you want to pretend you're not advocating for …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:39 PM
6

If you don't want to participate, feel free to walk away. I have no desire to force men to do shit. As I said, please do walk away. But if your aim is to cause something worse than gilead, as opposed to just exercising your own autonomy, that is straight up fucking sociopathic and shows your ultimate strategy is to subjugate women and kill the rest. Frame it however you want to help yourself sleep better at night. But you're not better than people calling for a violent dickpocalypse if your aim …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 06:15 PM
8

Great. Then do it. And when women don't all die because we are not helpless children please make sure to stay away. Men or women withdrawing from society suddenly would cause death, but many remaining people would find a way to survive. But I recognize that you're, like many men on this sub, probably too misogynistic to believe that women are actually people who can figure things out and survive so... Edit: also just to point out how fucking disturbed your train of thought is and how it highligh…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 05:37 PM
3

Then you're having a separate conversation from the one I'm having. I am specifically addressing the dystopian world outlined in the OP which is one where there is no more disagreement about civilized society but rather no civilized society and women specifically are violently suppressed by men and treated as currency.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 04:37 PM
2

Lmao where the fuck did you pull this from in the context of the post? It's the one contemplated in the OP in which men violently suppress women any time they say something men don't want. Edit: see from the OP: Without this male-supported safety net, society would instantly collapse into historical barbarism where women might as well be treated as currency or property.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:03 PM
1

The one contemplated in the OP in which men violently suppress women any time they say something men don't want. Edit: see from the OP: Without this male-supported safety net, society would instantly collapse into historical barbarism where women might as well be treated as currency or property.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:02 PM
7

Every western "misandrist" can only safely be one thanks to the infrastructural support of a vast network of men. I was responding to your title which you just repeated. If women were violently retaliated against by men any time they endorsed anti-male rhetoric, I'm just arguing you'd multiply misandrists tenfold, and they could safely be so by staying quiet and sticking to underhanded methods. Therefore, your conclusion is wrong. The entire rhetoric of this post honestly is one bound to increas…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:01 PM
19

No, a woman could safely be one in a dystopian society where men have relegated women to absolute second class citizens. Maybe not openly, but odds are, particularly if said women had come from a society in which they knew freedom, significantly more women would now despise men. Your ability to abuse your strength gained purely through an accident of birth does not grant you the power to control how other people think or feel, or what they say behind closed doors.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:43 AM
3

But no they want to control what we do We are not "controlling" you by choosing not to be in a relationship with you that is unfulfilling. You're trying to revoke informed consent by hiding information that is material. Just don't bitch when women say men lie and can't be trusted is all I can say.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 05:20 AM
5

Respectfully, if someone views porn use as a sort of violation of fidelity, inevitable relapses in and of themselves suggest that the more fulfilling option just may be to never commit to a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 05:13 AM
3

We will try to work things out as much as we can, than dumping our partner at the slightest inconvenience Lying to get what you want isn't trying to "work things out as much as we can." It's lazy, entitled behavior that destroys trust.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 05:09 AM
6

It's not really your business. A lot of women on here don't even think they have to be honest about their sexual history with other men. First of all, history is not the same as what someone does in a relationship, He made no promises to me before the relationship. Second of all, I'm not one of those women that argues the past doesn't matter. It does. But pray do tell me why it's not my business in a monogamous relationship whether he will continue to use other women's bodies for sexual gratific…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 01:30 AM
12

Correct. But I'm entitled to leave someone over his masturbation habits, and he's not entitled to decide what reason is important enough for me to leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:09 AM
7

He doesn't get to decide what is an issue or non issue for someone else, so while you're correct he'll likely lie, it's fucked up and entitled to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 11:52 PM
5

And you're demonstrating you lack of reading comprehension by confusing me with OC and having no understanding of sub rules. The fact that you have to resort to insults and can't hold a civil conversation doesn't bespeak well to your own critical thinking skills, so maybe don't throw stones in glass houses.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 11:03 PM
–

Critical thinking and this post don't belong in the same sentence.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 10:58 PM
1

If it were about genitalia only, then women would not discriminate against feminine men, and men wouldn’t discriminate against masculine women. Do you really think that pretty men have significant trouble getting women? A large part of why many women don't like "feminine" men has a lot to do with his behavior, mannerisms, etc, and less to do with how he looks. But of course what constitutes a "feminine" man in these spaces is often a moving target. And as a woman who appreciates very feminine me…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 11:53 PM
22

isn't just fairer – it's a recipe for social peace. And yet: this logic feels obvious to most men, but absurd to most women. Why? Because women don’t experience sex as a scarce resource to compete for. They experience it as something to choose carefully. So when men talk about “equalizing outcomes,” it sounds to women like entitlement or coercion. That gap in lived experience is why the same argument that clicks for us sounds crazy to them. The only way to "equalize outcomes" is to turn women's …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 04:02 PM
9

And you think she's been respectful right from her first comment If she wasn't, all the more reason not to be surprised later if she doesn't become respectful. You can disagree with someone, but personal attacks aren't okay Personal attacks are against the rules of the sub but I can't say they're morally and worse than how he was acting. In fact arguably less so. So none of it is "ok" but it's par for the course.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 02:32 PM
9

He's not being remotely respectful. He has earned no respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 11:02 AM
1

First guy is definitely not average. I agree he's prob like a 7 (generally speaking - not really my cup of tea).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 11:03 PM
-2

Nah, average guy in the street is cuter than this guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 10:54 PM
1

I'd say second guy is below average but first is above average.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 09:25 PM
0

Keep coming up with ways to deflect why you can't support what you "know" with anything other than fee fees and bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:35 PM
0

Look at those goal posts move even more. Edit: tldr your opinion is based upon how you feel and bias and doesn't really have a basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:20 PM
1

And then told another commenter that you didn't believe her when she said she is turned off by men with a roster. Nice try to move the goal posts though.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:11 PM
3

Whether you call it "high value" or "high mate value," the exact scientific term David Buss uses in the paper you cited, the distinction remains the same. A man who can get other women proves he is attractive. But a man who chooses to run a long ass roster proves he is practicing a short-term mating strategy. Studies show that for both men and women, long-term desirability drops sharply as a person's lifetime partner count increases. Promiscuity makes a man good for a casual hookup, but statisti…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:03 PM
2

Preselection doesn't mean women want men who have chosen to be promiscuous. A heavy roster history signals a short-term mating strategy and a high risk of cheating, which is a red flag for a long-term partner, not a compliment. Studies also consistently show that women prefer a high value man that is low or no N count over a high N count man
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:50 PM
2

I'm doubtful you've read it. How does it support your argument? If resource acquisition is so important to women in assessing mate value, a man with a long ass roster is massive risk, as he has shown that he is willing and likely to squander her investment in him. Studies also show that promiscuous men are indeed more likely to cheat so... That fear isn't misplaced.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:43 PM
2

Such as?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:23 PM
2

It has social and biological basis backed by years of studies so yes What studies? my reasoning is based on applied logic and centuries with of human evolution and intersexual psychology Such as? Edit: I mean this is just a longer wordier version of "go outside bruh." It has no substance and is all fluff.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:19 PM
3

How do you "know it's true"? How can you be sure that disagreement is not just genuine disagreement? How are you sure your knowledge isn't flawed? Does it even have a basis?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:10 PM
4

Entirely asinine and borderline megalomaniac to believe you "know" the truth about a different group of people with entirely different experiences from you.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:03 PM
–

If "bluepillers" basically all agree that there are no valid criticisms of leftist gender ideology False premise, so the conclusion doesn't follow.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 01:47 AM
3

Valid choice. Relationships are a lot of work.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 01:35 AM
13

You guys can also support yourselves without expecting anything of men, then as well, but you won't. I not only support myself without any help from a man but have taken over a large portion of my parents' expenses due to their health issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 07:55 PM
1

What a disgusting creature. If you have to resort to insults, you don't have an argument. Pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:22 PM
1

primarily about hatred is widening it, not making it narrower. No, it's narrowing the fuck out of it. Hate is an internal feeling that can always be dismissed because it can never be proven. And honestly is not a big driver for a lot of the prejudice you see. Another thing is that the person you responded to gave you mirriam webster, cambridge and collins dictionaries to which you responded with Wikipedia and Bab.la and other more obscure webs - if I had to pick one side of sources here to submi…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:17 PM
1

No, you just picked one type of definition that excludes men as the targets despite most definitions are made up by the hatred itself as a criterion. I never excluded hatred from the definition. I said it's not only hatred. My guy, I'm arguing for more to fall under misandry. Arguing that it's only hate actually makes it much easier to dismiss claims of misandry because oh she's just scared or she's just hurt, she doesn't hate men doesn't matter if prejudice is part of the definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:08 PM
1

Your anecdotal observations vary from mine. Certainly on this sub and in other manosphere spaces, the people that paint men in the worst light are men. Even though they're competing with a number of female misandrists on this sub. The entire red pill ideology is pretty fucking misandrist in addition to being misogynistic. Moreover, men still control the institutions that enforce systemic prejudice against men. Men dominate in government but haven't gotten rid of the draft. Men control the courts…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:03 PM
32

You aren't going to be out fighting boars with spears these days, so what are you going to specialize in? And why can't men specialize in cooking? You can learn recipes from books. And other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 02:40 PM
1

Exactly. I'm not here to give men advice on dating, I'm here to discuss an debate gender issues
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 05:31 AM
–

and female to male transgenders have higher rates of detransitioning What are you basing this on? I don't have indepth knowledge of the topic but a preliminary search strongly suggests the opposite. For example: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8213007/
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 11:15 PM
1

If your goal is to prevent misandry from being dismissed, the last thing you want to do is try to narrow the definition of the word to mean only hatred. Because this is what some manospherians do to misogyny to try to make it toothless. Because hatred is an internal feeling, someone who holds the most atrocious viewpoints about the opposite sex can deny hating them and there's nothing you can really do in response except speculate or argue as to their internal feelings, which is a fools game. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:56 PM
2

Nope that's twisting the logic. I can absolutely be a misandrist. I never said otherwise. But I have no idea why OC came out boiling about "accountability" because I'm arguing men assist in causing prejudice towards men. It's a fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 04:46 PM
1

And there are plenty with more than just hatred of men to include things like prejudice or mistrust of men (which require prejudice) as the other commenter and I discuss below. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/misandry https://ahdictionary.com/word/search.html?q=misandry https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misandry https://onelook.com/?w=misandry But the fact of the matter is that the commenter I was responding to and the manosphere at large use misandry in …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 04:43 PM
1

This whole post reads as a strawman, because I don't see blue pill - which is no set ideology and just means not red pill - identifying people arguing that women like bisexual or feminine men as much as straight or more traditionally masculine men. I personally, though, do think that what constitutes a "feminine man" in these spaces is a moving target, and that many women do like their men to have a mix of traditionally feminine and masculine traits more than the manosphere would have you think.…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:42 AM
3

It's a hot take to expect straight women to be interested in bisexual men. As a straight woman who has no issue with bi men, I never understand this line of reasoning. They're men. I'm a heterosexual woman which means I'm attracted to men. It always seems like 1+1=2. Heterosexuality is not only being attracted to people who have the same sexuality as you.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:12 AM
1

What's an example of what you're talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 05:01 AM
2

Eh I'm not even sure what's being argued about. Then let's call it there. I've spent enough time trying to carefully explain my positions that continuing at this point would be a living example of a sunk cost fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 03:53 AM
4

I don't really know enough about either situation to have an informed opinion. But a couple of notes. How much do you think your belief that women will defend other women is affecting what data you notice? For example, wasn't half of Kouri Ritchins's jury female? The didn't defend her. They convicted her ass. I'm also really not sure that rooting for your gender in a situation like this has much to do with accountability. I mean, if a man is accused of sexual assault, men will come out in droves…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 03:50 AM
2

Well I don't know what to tell you. Those are the ones that encompass what I'm trying to say. I meant the two you ignored are more comprehensive. Google AI search is Gemini powered and is going through a lot of sources to get that definition. Wikipedia also has a significntly more indepth discussion of misandry than the other two sources you listed. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to. I'm at work right now, and I'm just replying when I have time. After looking at them, I guess I kind of see them as sti…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 03:22 AM
1

You're not. You can individually be a misogynist, or you can choose to fight against it, but alone, you have jack shit control over misogyny at large.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:59 AM
2

I would disagree. 2 of the 4 only mentioned hatred and that's it. Nothing about prejudice. Yeah, the two that have a much more comprehensive discussion/analysis of misandry. And of course you ignored my two additional sources, and the fact that your own original comment I responded to called something other than hatred misandry. Even if it was a joke, it clearly acknowledged a broader definition of the word. You accused me of essentially lying to get away the repercussions of my joke I don't thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:57 AM
2

None of these sources affirm that it must always be in the context of power dynamics and oppression. Agreed. As I explained, I inferred that part due to your mirroring with misogyny and given systemic prejudice tends to have a much bigger impact that individual prejudices. And the broad understanding of misandry, in your own sources as noted, absolutely includes prejudice. But the broad understanding of misandry encompasses more than hatred. To give a couple more: hatred or distrust of men from …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:39 AM
2

Like it or not, both the word misandry and misogyny are used in contexts outsides power dynamics and oppression. Just like the word racism. As I'm sure you're aware, academically, the word racism means more than just "prejudice or hatred based on race". It refers to power dynamics and oppression. But the word racism is also used in a context outside of that, to simply mean "prejudice or hatred based on race Yes, they do. But the dictionary definition hasn't been this narrow - again - for decades…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:10 AM
2

Well first of all, I meant misandry as "hatred of men". Then you're not talking about misandry. The definitions of both misandry and misogyny have included more than hatred - including ingrained prejudice - for I believe close to 30 years at this point. And this appeared to have been recognized in your original comment, as viewing a group as having a problems isn't hatred. Or perhaps you were pulling the typical manosphere card of trying narrow the definition of misogyny in that comment. But als…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:49 AM
3

I am curious though, do you have any evidence that suggest misandry primarily comes from men? Some of its anecdotal, which of course comes with significant inherit limitations. For example, that the most anti male things I heard as a little girl were from my dad, not my mom. That accusations of misandry are levied as a way to shut down criticism of misogyny by men who do not seem to really care about the impact misandry has on men and will turn around and endorse misandrist viewpoints. But also,…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:08 AM
3

unable to take accountability For what? Edit: are you insinuating that I am powerful enough to be the cause of misandry? Why thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:53 AM
0

I never said men don't believe or act prejudice towards other men. I simply said they don't like the idea that they have problems as a group. They're not contradictory, nor mutually exclusive. You said they don't like it and that's misandry. Yes, people are irrational enough to both not like something and get upset if someone else points it out while simultaneously acknowledging or reinforcing those viewpoints instead. But the mirror you're trying to make doesn't work if misogyny is primarily co…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:36 AM
12

Men don’t like the idea that they have serious problems as a group. Dude, this is just not true. Men are some of the biggest promoters of prejudice towards their own group. Men don't trust other men and this is seen most blatantly in how male relatives often don't trust men around their sister/daughter etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 11:03 PM
3

Seems like a solvable problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 01:27 AM
11

Didn't downvote you either. You do realize that more people read than comment on every post right?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 06:13 PM
7

You constantly claim these things but I've never seen it. Have any links?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 05:56 PM
–

Tbh I also find it weird that a number of straight women are turned on by lesbian porn. But my guy you are obsessed. It ain't healthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:13 PM
5

Correct. If I'm to the point of marrying someone, no sex alone is not sufficient to end the relationship. Let's say they develop a disorder that kills their libido. Sucks, but I'm not going to end things with them over it. But I'm very sexually possessive, so if he still wants to have sex but just not with me, then at that point that's not just lack of sex. No sex combined with other factors - such as infidelity - offer grounds for ending it. No sex combined with other non-sexual factors too (sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 08:25 PM
1

I didn't say it was wrong to be open to remarrying. I'm saying it's evidence that romantic partnerships arent that special because they are indeed replaceable. I could never replace my mother. But my hypothetical husband could replace me and would probably be dating again in a year or two after my death.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:48 PM
1

Respectfully though that's a you problem. If I was married to someone for over a decade and then they died, I don't know if I'd ever be able to marry again. That would be devastating. And I find it really concerning that a lot of people don't think it would be and think a life partner would be very easy to replace. It's not a me problem. It's a demonstrated reality that people usually replace lost partners and sometimes quickly. Men in particular tend to replace their partners quicker than women…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:40 PM
1

But in light of that, do you think men would know whether you are someone who can offer them that? Whether or not men think I could would depend on his presuppositions about women. But they can't know for sure. And, possibly ironic given the position I've taken in this debate, truthfully I'm not a hopeless romantic. It's a nice ideal, but in practice, romantic partners appear to be more placeholders than anything. If they're lost, they will be replaced, and often quite quickly, even if the loss …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:24 PM
1

That's a non-answer, and you should be able to tell that. If men, even a significant minority, can't offer a relationship where women also feel like that special someone (by, say, viewing her value as primarily from her pussy), that's going to result in a large number of women not "gaining" much from heterosexual relationships with men. Possibly even a majority of women, as compatibility also matters and not just whether men can offer being that special "someone."
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 06:16 PM
1

I never said my observations are objective reality. OP said: Women have very little to gain from heterosexual sex & relationships and men don't care OC said: I thought relationships were about finding that special someone. Me: ok but how many men can offer that (and gives example of group of men have many who wouldn't). And he won't answer. Truthfully I don't think he can because I don't think we have that data. I have no doubt that some men are hopeless romantics, but I don't think OC's comment…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:08 PM
1

Just because someone doesn't prioritize sex at the cost of everything else doesn't mean they're broken.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:37 PM
0

Emphasis on the "snide." Just because someone doesn't prioritize sex at the cost of everything else doesn't mean they're broken.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:34 PM
6

Maybe you're dealing with diminished arousal from overmasturbation too and a reboot could help you get your libido bac And straight to the snide insults and insinuations when you know nothing about someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:32 PM
-1

Again with the "all men." I never said anything about all men. Why are ya'll incapable of actually engaging with the arguments I make rather than attacking a strawman?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:30 PM
1

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:28 PM
0

My comment never said that men here are representative of all men. I used them as an example and asked how many could give what OC indicated was the purpose of a romantic relationship. It is worth noting however that the veil of anonymity may lend itself to people being more honest than they would otherwise be, so just because you don't see many men talking like this outside of online spaces doesn't necessarily mean they're a tiny, unheard of minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 04:02 PM
-1

all people of a certain group are a certain way, you're just automatically off base. Already jumping to the fucking strawman. I never said all of the group is like this. I asked you how many are capable of offering what you state and said many here weren't. Go outside This is such a tired fucking excuse for the behavior of men on the Internet. Are they going to be more honest when I'm interacting with them in the real world or when they're under a veil of anonymity? But I have been outside. A lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 03:59 PM
0

I mean it depends Oh you're right. Look at all the women lining up to be only valued for their pussies? There are tons of them waiting to build a "special" connection with men who view them as a sex doll only and don't care that much about anything else with them! You're off base in your analysis. I think most men like most women just want to find that special person. I'd say you're off base on your analysis, as I don't really see this. How do we figure out who is right?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 03:47 PM
18

a special connection with someone else who you could literally never grow tired of spending time with But how many men actually offer this? Certainly not many of the men on this sub, as they're constantly bemoaning how they don't really care about anything except feeling like a sex god to women and wax eloquent about how superior they are for not having standards. About how boring women are and only have their pussies to offer. Does that sound like a special connection to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 03:43 PM
1

Sure. But it becomes less useful at a point. Because we don't agree. You think I'm conflating arrogance and confidence and I think you're not following the definitions. I don't see the utility in continuing the conversation. It's not going to provide greater clarity or less confusion at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 04:20 PM
1

I agree confidence can be perceived as arrogance. But: difference between arrogance and confidence is knowing if it is based on facts and reality. But here's the issue I have with this. I don't see either definition of these two things actually requiring this. Again, if confidence is just being certain in your abilities, that doesn't necessitate that your confidence in yourself can't be misplaced or even that it has to be based on anything in reality. If arrogance requires someone being unpleasa…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:57 PM
1

It's easy for most people to underestimate how complicated things can get in literally every single area of life. From my observation, someone who is certain in their abilities is more likely to make the error and be confidently incorrect. They just over estimated their abilities/ knowledge. But here's my question. We both appear confident in our viewpoint here. Does that mean that whoever is wrong must be arrogant? There's no room for honest mistakes and just overestimating your knowledge or ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:44 PM
1

Yes. And being certain in your abilities can lead to being incorrect about things you don't know shit about, without exhibiting arrogance. That is, being unpleasantly proud and behaving as if you're more important than or know more than other people.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:28 PM
2

No it's not. I provided the definition of arrogance which is entirely different from what you're just claiming out of the air. This is the no true scottsman of confidence. You've turned it into a moving target.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:20 PM
1

I'm not talking about arrogance. I noted the definition above. I'm talking about confidence. People who are very confident are more likely to end up confidently incorrect, even without being arrogant. This is just a fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:16 PM
2

No, I disagree that the definition of confidence means it's always positive or that if you're confidently incorrect that must mean you're arrogant. Edit: note, pulling from Miriam webster, this is the definition of arrogance: an offensive attitude of superiority shown especially by excessively confident or rudely dismissive behavior You don't need to exhibit this to have misplaced confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:11 PM
0

I don't think being confidently incorrect necessarily entails arrogance. There seems to be an assumption that confidence is always good and if there's anything negative about it, then it's not actually confidence but something else. I disagree with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 03:04 PM
-1

Meh, confidence is overrated. Men already have a massive problem with being confidently incorrect/confident about things they don't actually know shit about. Male humility is vastly underrated. Yes, I know this is only tangentially related. That's why I'm under automod.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 02:55 PM
0

I have no desire to be in a relationship with someone without emotional reciprocity. I also have no desire to control other people. It's not my problem if you can't see the clear difference there. Choosing not to engage with someone because a relationship with them is not enjoyable is not the same as telling them they must do X. All I'm arguing is that even accepting your premises, your conclusion is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 02:00 AM
0

Bruh you're not even remotely getting the point. But honestly thanks for providing support for my argument repeatedly in your answers lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 06:32 PM
2

decentering women without making it sound sexist women would be much for it This is what trp was False. Sorry, can't "gaslight" those of us who have been here the whole time in your attempts to whitewash OG TRP. It has been deeply sexist from the start, with its emphasis on women allegedly being AWALT--that is, monkey branching, hypergamous whores who are incapable of more than opportunistic love and are the biggest teenager in the house. Defining those beliefs as anything other than sexist defi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 06:19 PM
0

Blue pill is not a competing ideology*, it just means you don't believe in red pill voodoo. Reality concerns many variables and factors. It's erroneous to assume that because you did X and got Y result, X must be why you got Y result. Maybe X got you the results, but subjective observation about anecdotal accounts offers limited evidence, as you won't be able to really tell how much of a role X is playing compared to other factors. Much less as to whether X will get people Y on a broader scale a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 05:58 PM
0

And that affects the unfalsifiability of the red pill how? That only increases the unfalsifiability issues, which are repeatedly seen in red pill discourse. Yeah X approach didn't work but there are other approaches. If none of them work, the issue is you, not the red pill. And of course for the people it does work for, they're taken as "proof" of the red pill while other factors or possibilities are ignored.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 05:21 PM
6

Yes, the logical conclusion, following the line of reasoning above, is to be a life long virgin as having sex with any man is degrading or bad. Not to save yourself for any man. Edit: or, have sex with women but not men. That's another option, for women who are attracted to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:24 PM
5

Blue pill is not a competing ideology. Blue pill is anything that is not red pill. It just means you haven't drank the red pill koolaid.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:12 PM
6

If you believe so, how do you know it was the red pill and not just a coincidence? They don't. But, the cult that it is, the red pill is unfalsifiable. If someone is successful with it, it was because of the red pill. If someone wasn't, it was because they didn't red pill right. Thus, if you join the cult, you are met with a certain degree of safety that what you now believe is true no matter what happens with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:06 PM
0

So, then, accepting your argument as true, which I don't: There's nothing in principle that creates a zero sum game where men getting what they need means women can't get what they need, or vice versa. This is incorrect. The man can never give the woman, whose goal is to be valued for who she is and build a life with someone with emotional reciprocity, what she wants. Thus, being in a relationship with a man for such a woman brings no value.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 01:16 PM
2

Note that these two things are not mutually exclusive. A man can both really like being around a woman and want to be with her for a long time while simultaneously that woman can really prefer that man's dick in particular over and beyond all others. There's nothing in principle that creates a zero sum game where men getting what they need means women can't get what they need, or vice versa. Even if I accept this highly transactional premise, which I don’t, it actually defeats its own point. You…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 05:00 AM
1

So not even attempting good faith engagement.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 07:50 PM
-1

What passes as clear cut manipulation requires both intent and calculation. Happen to have an argument for this goal post move? Why does it require both to "pass" as "clear cut"? Why is behavior that only "passes" as "clear cut" manipulation worthy of condemnation? But I guess it makes sense to muddle the concepts here too. Activist speech always does that by routine, and it's colored off strongly on dating discourse. The irony of this statement given your whole argument hinges on muddying water…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 06:30 PM
12

OP, you seem to think that manipulation must be planned, 100% intentional, and calculated, and that people never make up ad hoc excuses after the fact to make themselves feel better about how they acted. Neither of these two things are the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 01:49 PM
12

Say sex bots become a thing and a woman has sex with 100 realistic male-looking sex bots but has never even touched a real penis--what is her N count?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:32 AM
6

The logical conclusion is to therefore have sex with no men. No exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 10:48 PM
8

And I'm entitled to continue to judge the fuck out of men for their preferences!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 05:28 PM
7

No point in debating, because most users are man-hating feminists. They even make up shit to justify their hate. The (significant) majority of people here are men: https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1gbz24w/ppd_survey_results/ So are most of the users here struggling with internalized misandry? This sort of comment is a fantastic microcosm of the manosphere's victim complex that is not based in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:01 AM
1

Some of them. A number of them are also definitely taking the AWALT line ("it's impossible to avoid them (unless you avoid women) because that's how women are").
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 01:26 PM
8

Many men tolerate shitty women because they're bigoted enough to think AWALT and that tolerating this is a necessary evil in order to get sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 04:53 AM
1

Extremely slowly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:51 AM
–

I don't really want to show off my body to get attention from men. I personally want to be able to just exist without my body being sexualized. But part of the reason this is the case is because my brain has categorized male attention as inherently degrading. This comes from decades of being in male-dominated spaces and hearing about how (many) men talk about women and female bodies. By subconscious decided I didn't want to be on the receiving end of that attention. However, I believe my opinion…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 06:08 AM
1

Hell if I know. She sounds creepy as fuck though. I'd keep your door locked.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 09:59 PM
0

I mean, most of those aren't denying that looks matter. They're denying that they're dispositive or that men have a much harder time getting partners. Those are the real points of contention. But also.... If you're trying to make a point about "society," poly people are an odd minority. Not "society."
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 01:49 PM
1

I prefer men thin, pretty, and gentle/easy going. I prefer big hands, deep voices, and no facial hair. Bonus points for things like long hair, makeup, and painted nails.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 06:27 AM
1

Are men stupid enough to believe sparkly eyelids are real?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 11:46 PM
2

Except for a large plurality of the US population.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 05:23 PM
1

I have to give it to the far right - their misinformation works. They've successfully created a narrative that endorses a false dichotomy where men are stuck between the red pill and some straw man narrative about what main stream society says. what alternate structure can we recommend for men Literally anything else. TRP is a praxeology* that relies on a very misogynistic and specific narrative about how society and women (AWALT) work. So again, literally anything else. I don't see it as health…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 05:17 PM
1

I'd also say that normalizing a deeply misogynistic belief system and putting on the same level as other groups that don't endorse the same level of offensive beliefs at their core isn't doing anything good. If you haven't, go to TRP main subreddit and read the sidebar. Read the top posts. Read more about AWALT, how women love, and strategies recommended for red pill men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:48 PM
1

But there really truly are people both men and women out there who feel enriched and sexier, more whole, by expressing their love and loyalty through traditional gender roles. And it's not kind or accurate to just indiscriminately call them all manipulative assholes that hate women. It's also not accurate to conflate all groups that want traditional gender roles (such as tradcons) with the red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:24 PM
8

Their existence doesn't really surprise me, coming from a conservative, religious background where many women displayed internalized misogyny and belief in male superiority. But the fact that many of them want men despite endorsing TRP of male nature is what's more unique to RPW and extremely fucking bizarre.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:44 PM
29

Lol OP is trying to argue that pick mes are loved, but inadvertently shows how invisible they are by not being able to spot one in the wild.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:21 PM
1

I'm very much part of a conversation on whether hook up material is better than being husband material because I have opinions along with anyone else. And actually, no, it's not a majority of women that go around having casual sex. It's a minority. But they're welcome to pump and dump community dick, I just find it nasty.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:39 PM
1

Not to me. To me they're just gross and I avoid them. I don't have casual sex. Used ass community dick is bleh.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:24 PM
1

To me it is, means they're useless.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 06:11 PM
5

So you disagree with the definitions on this sub and are trying to redefine blue pill by what you feel.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:39 PM
4

Literally didn't read the rest of definition, jfc. It's "generally" but not necessarily and as I said in my first comment, TBP and TRP: shouldn't be seen as two contrasting ideologies so much as one strategy and set of beliefs about the world and another group that satirizes and disagrees with it. So, again, TBP is just disagreeing with TRP. It requires nothing else. Edit: also, it is main stream ass advice to hit the gym etc. You're strawmanning the fuck out of mainstream advice to make TRP loo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:36 PM
2

From the jargon basics on this sub: To BPers, "blue pill" is basically disagreeing with TRP, usually with it's stance on women, relationships, and/or science. Generally by agreeing with societies mainstream view of these matters (hence, the blue pill). There's no set philosophy or goal other than disagreeing with RPers, so /r/TheRedPill and /r/TheBluePill shouldn't be seen as two contrasting ideologies so much as one strategy and set of beliefs about the world and another group that satirizes an…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:28 PM
3

Blue pill is just literally not red pill. It's not a competing ideology. It's the atheist to the specific claims of a theist. It just means you don't believe in TRP. Even by the definitions of this fucking sub. There are varying blue pill beliefs because it's anything that isn't red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:24 PM
–

Watch what they do, not what they say. I've been in manosphere spaces for over 10 years and they spend a shit load of their time coming up with why women are to blame for the choices of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 06:19 PM
1

I can outdo you: Manosphere men and accountability. Never seen a group so obsessed with self victimization and lack of accountability for themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 04:11 PM
2

Threads like this always show how many men are fucked in the head.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 04:10 PM
3

This "if there's no absolute proof there's no crime" is divorced from reality. The "crime" happens regardless of whether there's 100% proof or not. The man knows if he lied to use someone to get sex, and he's a piece of shit even if he lies yet again about lying to get sex. But also, odds are, if a man plays a game of acting like he wants an LTR and then bails right after sex, he was lying his ass off to get his rocks off. He's also massively entitled to expect the other person not to be upset a…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 04:05 PM
2

Could easily be 60.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 07:18 PM
5

Humans having strong opinions about things they know fuck all about is unfortunately pervasive, and not just in this area.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 06:24 PM
0

If a man subscribes or associates with a group that argues that women are say the biggest teenager in the house or incapable of more than opportunistic love - I frankly don't give a shit how "nice" they act. Their choices either directly or indirectly endorse the dehumanization of 50% of population and that's sufficient to not want to have anything to do with them. TRP is a hate group cloaked in white. Simple as.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 06:49 AM
4

And I quite dislike the way male sexuality works. But alas...
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 04:22 AM
6

This really doesn't support that it's ok for men to sleep around if they're going around tainting women.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 10:17 AM
2

Yes, where men have a higher sociosexuality. But thanks for confirming you have no basis for how you feel things are.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:33 AM
2

Men, including me, are overwhelmingly in favor of going back to early marriage like society used to set expectations for. Given men are more open to casual sex, happen to have any support for this conclusion?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:26 AM
2

One post is shit evidence and doesn't even really address what you're arguing for. You just want to justify being a slut (if given the opportunity) while not wanting a woman who is like you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:20 AM
3

One woman's post from 11 years ago justifies a ridiculous double standard? Plus her SO obviously didn't reach the threshold of "good enough" which is different from "best."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:16 AM
2

The demand for women not to engage in the same slutty behavior they do is the opposite of being fine with "good enough." And if women are picky, why would they want to be some man's "good enough?"
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:04 AM
6

Why is it reasonable for men to expect to be their wife's best when they'd gladly slut it up, thus ensuring their wife won't be their best, if/when given the opportunity?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 05:39 AM
1

I need to work on my resting bitch face because men and women both seem to find me approachable and will try to talk to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 08:29 PM
3

Sex and status among other men. They don't think women can be on their level because they're egomaniacs who are too preoccupied with their hallucinated magnificence to see how boring they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 03:06 PM
0

Yes men face problems. On an individual level, men and women can face a lot of similar problems in their daily lives. On a more broad group level, men need more grace to depart from male gender norms if they so desire (but will this ever be possible as long as anything feminine is viewed as lesser?), greater bodily autonomy (no draft), and more equitable outcomes in the criminal justice system. I think you can recognize these as problems that need solutions without always devolving into the oppr…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 11:30 PM
4

Do you want to get rejected dozens of times before even going on a single date, I've chosen to be single for almost 13 years now. I literally don't give a shit. passed over for jobs and promotions in favor of women Sorry but this isn't a universal male experience and women are still definitely passed over for jobs in favor of men. Just because men are men and still viewed as more competent for having a penis. told to shut up about your problems because nobody cares? I don't enjoy talking about m…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 12:18 PM
8

Being ignored is better. I much prefer it to attention that is dangerous and means jack shit because the person giving it would gladly give it to about anyone with a set of tits. Attention that ignores who you are as a person and often reduces you to an object. You're also blinded by your own privilege. I quite dislike being stuck with a female body because of how it's sexualized and objectified by society. Knowing any male partner I have will have the "tool" part of his brain light up. Give me …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 06:28 AM
9

This is your privilege talking Right back at yah. You're so blinded by your privilege of being treated consistently like a full human being you really can't understand how negative the other side of the coin is.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 05:15 AM
22

I'd argue that what you choose to do and how you use your agency has far more to do with who you are as a person compared to looks that you were born with.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 03:50 AM
3

That's not my preference. That's the hypothetical guy's preference. I don't have an income limit preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 08:08 PM
2

I’d stop watching porn if I was in a relationship. Easy to say, but if you have a deeply entrenched habit, possibly much harder to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 08:07 PM
5

It's not arbitrary. It's important to me, and a man using porn sucks the joy out of the relationship for me. So yes, I'd filter him out. I could make the same argument that he'd rather filter out someone who he could love, spend time with, and grow old together just because he doesn't want to give up his digital harem. See how that works? We all have different things that are important to us.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 08:02 PM
1

I want a monogamous relationship. Getting off to multiple other naked women is not my idea of monogamy. no women who make under $60k/yr I think that's reasonable, personally. Nor does it necessarily indicate that he thinks women making under that amount are all gold diggers.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 07:41 PM
4

A BMI above 30 is not only unusual among people within my age range, but harmful to the woman’s health. I would also argue that my no porn standard is reasonable because it's entirely within a man's control and men lived without porn for much, much longer than they've had it. Yet, most men watch porn and will often throw fits at their digital harem being questioned. Similarly, regarding weight standards, the likelihood of obtaining someone who isn't fat depends somewhat on where you are. In the …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 06:40 PM
1

You could choose to be the perpetual victims if that's what gets you going. What the random ass irrelevant rhetoric? Recognizing that courtship is a tiny part of LTRs is just reality. Women do. They're smarter that way. No, women do hard things all of the time. Especially when it comes to men. You can choose to sleep through the day. Sun shines upon you nonetheless. What hidden truths do you really think you enlightened me on here? Like tf?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 05:02 AM
1

Not really. It's a big part. Over, say, 10 years? 20? My ass. They in fact are, or else women would never be in relationships with them. That's poor reasoning. People don't only engage in things that are easy. Eh, not asking for your advise here. Just helping you understand the facts. Trust me, I'm also not asking for your advice, and I've not yet been enlightened by any new truths in this conversation. But yes, life is easy when you stop expecting anything from women. Great. Same with not expec…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:52 AM
0

It's the man who puts massive amounts of time, effort and energy into courting their partners in straight relationships. If I had to compare, I'd say that even the mid and ugly women get partners pretty conveniently when compared to men Courting is a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of an LTR and women carry a disproportionate burden later in the relationship. Hence, the need to put massive energy and time into maintaining an LTR. Men aren't easy to be in LTRs with. So they're raping their girlfriends?…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 09:25 PM
1

And yet they end up with an "ideal option" that's not as hot as their hook ups. Not necessarily, no. This is a wild assumption that smells like it's based on rage bait. Ugly and mid guys do have girlfriends though. Go figure. Poor girls stuck with guys who are using them for sex because the guys would value a quick fuck over someone who will put massive amounts of time and energy into them. I'm so glad I prioritized other things over maintaining an LTR with man. Shit's garbage level value, altho…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:38 PM
1

Eh.. Almost anyone can do that Yup. And if you hang out and socialize where hook ups happen, odds are, unless you're butt ugly, you'll hook up at some point. If everyone was happy being single, there would be no relationships forming at all A lot of women are happier single than in a subpar relationship. So they wait if and until they have an option for an ideal one. If she has 5 guys who can make her "feel comfortable" then she picking Mr. Abs Maybe. Or maybe she will pick the funny guy with a …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 06:23 PM
1

that makes no sense It makes a lot of sense for someone who is happy being single. Why compromise on looks if you're happy without a man? Of course the relationship man needs non physical features as well. Which adds to his overall desirability and value. so women go for the hottest guys available. Or the guy who is available and makes them feel comfortable when they're horny. I've never hooked up. No desire to. But my friends who have aren't suddenly dropping their panties when Chad walks in. T…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:08 PM
1

Or I can not waste time on something that is a net negative.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:55 PM
1

Or maybe you're projecting. Maybe some women do date the men they desire most.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:54 PM
1

I'm not projecting anything but if you say something like: The majority of women can’t make men feel as desired as women who engage in casual sex with them. But say you value relationships just as much, you're full of shit. The one that makes you feel more desired is more valuable, and I would not want to be in a relationship with someone who viewed things that way, regardless of how they try to lie to themselves. Edit: you're refusing to actually engage with what men say and just keep fighting …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:01 AM
–

Again, you try to move the goal posts to fight an easier foe. Kindly engage with what OC and OP said, which clearly place higher value casual sex. If I need to remind you The majority of women can’t make men feel as desired as women who engage in casual sex with them. Just like the men who will bitch and moan about how much they want casual sex and how they'll lie to get it. etc. If a man views relationships in this way, he should stick to casual sex and leave women who want relationships alone,…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 04:12 AM
–

OC stated: Anyone with one eye and two working brain cells can understand that it is much more difficult and rarer for a man to get casual sex. Any ape could get a committed relationship at some point in his life. If someone views a relationship as something any ape can get while casual sex as some hard impressive thing, it's clear which one they value more. And that's fine. Just so long as they go casual sex or bust and don't fall back on a relationship to get sex while secretly wishing they co…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 03:49 AM
–

Valuing casual sex to this point implies a lower value for relationships. And I wish men who felt this way wouldn't then try to get some poor woman into a relationship that he will always view as less valuable than a woman who would be down for a quick fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:54 AM
–

Similarly, given many men will shit on relationships as not being worth much, I'd argue that: The majority of men can’t make women feel as desired as men who only want relationships with them. Now this is a simplification that isn't going to be true for all women, certainly. But so many of ya'll demand gold while offering coal in return.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 02:16 AM
2

My advice is to change nothing and bitch on the internet. It must be good advice, given how many men follow it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 09:19 PM
1

Note, from this sub's explanation of TBP: There's no set philosophy or goal other than disagreeing with RPers, so /r/TheRedPill and /r/TheBluePill shouldn't be seen as two contrasting ideologies so much as one strategy and set of beliefs about the world and another group that satirizes and disagrees with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 07:24 PM
1

Blue pill is defined as the dominant cultural viewpoint. No it's not. It's literally just what isn't red pill. Your straw man definition is obvious and has no evidence to support it. Literally read the fucking red pill side bar. The TRP sub. What I'm saying are fundamental red pill beliefs. There are numerous articles arguing these points about women going back well over a decade. My attempts to speak out against the hatred that I faced that destroyed my mental health as a child is not DARVOing,…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:52 PM
2

Blue pill just means not red pill. It includes a massive amount of different ideas and view points. It in no way is some organized group that thinks that men who don't meet dominant cultural norms deserve to be selected out of the gene pool. That is an absolutely insane strawman. On the other hand, red pill is a much more cohesive group that does have underlying ideology that, for example, women are incapable of more than opportunistic love and the biggest child in the house, etc. Regardless whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:36 PM
2

I'm comparing one hate group to another. Red pill ideology is what is hateful.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 06:14 PM
5

the holy thing to do Perhaps if men would stop being whores, they'd have a leg to stand on. But, almost zero can follow the holy directive of the Lord (Matthew 5:28): But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Thus, men do just keep being whores.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:21 PM
8

Would you ever be friends with a man who fell into this category? Sure. Would you ever date someone who maybe subscribed to these beliefs before but has genuinely changed? This one's a harder, in part because from the outside, it's hard to tell who has genuinely changed. If it was a thing when he was very young, maybe. If he was a rampant misogynist as a grown ass adult, very unlikely.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:46 PM
3

Oh no, I'm an old hag past my peak. Guess it's time for my witch era.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:19 AM
-2

Besides, didn't the things you're saying come from later influencers? No, this is OG red pill. The whitewashing of the red pill is the later development. Don't forget the left-wing part, which shows that I care about human rights and equality. If you think being a leftist necessitates these beliefs, I've got a bridge to sell you.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 01:47 AM
-1

"I'm not a nazi because I believe in the anti jew stuff, for me it's just because I'm about the good stuff that is apart of nazism." I possibly risk getting my comment removed for race-baiting, but hopefully it illustrated my viewpoint on your response adequately enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 01:10 AM
-1

I'm all about expanding compassion, not limiting it. Yet, you identify with a group (red-purple) that believes AWALT and that women only love opportunistically and and are the biggest child in the house. So, personally, I don't buy it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:47 AM
4

Sykkuno is a piece of shit and his girlfriend is pathetic as fuck, but it's hard to say if her hurt is performative, or if she's just humiliated that the drama came out. I'm not sure why you'd assume she loves him.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:52 PM
3

I don't like asking other people for help for much, but I'm somewhat lazy and about as flexible as a board so that's something I might ask for help with.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:53 PM
4

I will admit living alone is inferior in one aspect. There is no one to assist with zippers. On the plus side, this may enable me to start a side hustle as a contortionist.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:35 PM
3

Go play video games instead. What do you expect me to do while I'm in queue?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:16 PM
6

I wish more men wore makeup and had long hair. With the constant push for men to be more "masculine" - from both many men and women and conservative groups - I recognize I'm unlikely to see this born out in reality. Sad day.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:11 PM
3

Because I'm a villain, possibly a malevolent Russian bot, trying to convince more men and women to remain single to cause economic destruction and utter devastation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:00 PM
–

The IRR of 0.55 already reflects population-level agreement. Squaring it (approx 30%) correctly measures shared consensus, so 1 − r = 0.45 is a misinterpretation. Averaging across the population doesn’t change that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 03:18 PM
–

You are confusing correlation with variance explained (r2). In statistics, the shared consensus is the square of the correlation. With an IRR of 0.55, the shared agreement is 0.552, or approx 0.30/30%. The remaining 70% consists of unique individual taste and measurement error. Even if you attribute a portion of that to noise, the unique preference remains dominant. On the other hand, even with a high consensus of 0.70 about who is unattractive, the shared variance is only 49%.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 02:37 PM
–

I mean, if you take OC's claim very literally, sure, it’s not true that everyone is attracted to completely different things. There is moderate consensus in attractiveness ratings. However, an IRR of 0.55 means that roughly 70% of the variation in women’s ratings is unique to the individual, not shared. So while it’s true that many people agree on who is generally attractive, the majority of preference is still personal. Framing this as ‘women mostly like Chad, but some with glasses, some with t…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 01:32 PM
17

There is no deception possible in the first place unless you are looking to trade resources for sex. Two people find each other attractive. They have sex. Everyone wins. Not even remotely correct. It's deception about intentions. Your subjective experience of sex is not the only way to experience it. Just like a man may legitimately enjoy giving gifts to a woman who loves him (or indeed, people in general can enjoy giving gifts to loved ones), that joy can turn to bitterness or resentment if he …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:24 AM
23

Sex can (and should) be enjoyable for both parties. But it won't be if it's "extracted" through deception, which is a one way street.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:00 AM
3

Literally this is one of the most bad faith mischaracterizations I've seen on this sub. And that's saying something.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 08:50 PM
11

So "secretly gay." So if a woman experiences zero subjective feelings of attraction to women, but can be turned off by a man with gross attitudes even though she's attracted to men...she's gay. I'll keep that in mind. Definitions do be moving.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 04:00 PM
15

So unless a woman is attracted only to physical attributes that can never be affected by anything the man does...she's not hetero, even if she is exclusively attracted to men? What is she? Nominally hetero? Asexual? Secretly gay?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:54 PM
2

Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 12:30 AM
4

2) lie about it and watch it anyway So in other words, these men are weak ass, pathetic bitches who will lie like a child to avoid putting down their own boundaries.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 06:48 PM
1

Good, now debunk what I said with sources. You first. Because I've looked for support for yours and can't find them. Anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:54 PM
1

Nope, and people often make posts in response to other posts lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:14 PM
1

Nice goal post move as I never said accumulation didnt play any role in any number we are looking at. There's a difference between pulling stuff out of your ass and not citing your sources. I didn't cite my sources, but they are easily google-able. It's so basic and the knowledge is widespread that it's kind of like asking to cite sources for the sky being blue. It's widely accepted that the rate of extramarital sex spikes after a certain age, particularly for men. A spike that did not exist bef…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:13 PM
1

Because people aren't random number generators and their behavior is driven by factors around them. Someone getting inspired randomly to post about younger women being more attractive, when there is another post arguing that this is problematic, is less likely than someone being inspired by the prior post.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 05:32 PM
1

Given that his post was posted at the same time as a post arguing that men make long term relationships unsustainable due to their attraction to young women, I disagree. I don't think people like to be determined as unfit for a relationship or the cause of relationship problems regardless of whether shaming is involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:04 PM
1

So again, the assessment itself is not shaming. You can also shame while assessing, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:44 PM
1

That's speculative at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:25 PM
1

Again, this is pulled out of your ass.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:10 PM
1

No, it's not just cumulative. You're literally pulling this out of your ass.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:09 PM
4

Men's likelihood of cheating has a much sharper incline as they age comparatively.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 05:16 AM
-1

Assessing someone's viability as a long-term mate based upon how their attraction works isn't shaming them. It's dealing with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 04:03 AM
-1

Options for fucking. If OP's conclusion is correct, then those options for fucking aren't realistic options for long term relationships. So, again, the fact that women have options for fucking is irrelevant to the OP's arguments I'd say.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:47 AM
6

so what? deal with. I did. By choosing *not to pair up with a man long term. So are you conceding that your argument that women's romantic lives are never affected by men's preference for youth is false? Because, again, the rest of your comment is just saying women deserve it or arguing men have it worse. It's irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:09 AM
7

They're paying again, for attention from young women. Which seeing how most women treat and talk about and to their husbands I can at least sympathize. So you're saying anecdotal city offers a better explanation for the data than multiple studies showing men lust after young women no matter their own age? Why do you think that?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:04 AM
10

They're paying for attention from young women. They're delusional if they think the onlyfans girls give a shit about them. But thanks for reminding me of additional evidence. The overwhelming majority of men using only fans for attention from* young women are married.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:00 AM
8

Literally men liking younger women has not affected the sexual, dating, romantic lives of woman at any age. Men past a certain age are significantly more likely to cheat than younger men. Which is certainly consistent with men struggling to remain monogamous to their aging wives. Not to mention, the many older women who have been left my their partner for a younger woman. It's a cliche for a reason. Men being most attracted to younger women absolutely affects women's romantic lives. Edit: the re…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:45 AM
3

Preach.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:20 AM
0

Overall, 95.1% reported having recently used at least one of the strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex and had not consented. I don't understand why more of you don't join me in cat lady land. It's so much more peaceful here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:10 AM
3

Humans are driven by their perceptions of the world. When women's issues are prominent, so are the arguments against them. Say, leading up to the 19th amendment, the man next door who you thought was just a nice dude might now admit he doesn't think women should have the right to vote because they're too unstable and emotional. Even your brother may suddenly admit he's against women voting. You make some progress, but in doing so, you are also exposed to a large amount of ugliness, and see more …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 05:35 PM
0

Then they're making a choice and I'm going to roll my eyes at their bitching.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 04:40 PM
8

is asymmetrical and only leads to resent. If you have a much lower workload than your partner and still expect them to do most of the chores, that will also likely lead to resentment even if it seems fairer to you if you're earning more than them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 04:05 PM
1

Black bears would most likely run from you. I have run into them. They're scaredy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:28 PM
3

I will tell a woman that if she treats men like shit she can't complain about misogynists and that how he feels after she has treated him like shit is 100% on her. That doesn't "justify" him treating other women poorly, but she has forfeited her right to complain and deserves the negative views towards her. Same as a man who treats women like shit. He cant complain about misandrists and deserves all the weight of that negativity. Karma, and all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 07:21 PM
3

That is straight delulu.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 07:12 PM
3

You really don't think there are people who hate or have ingrained prejudice towards men? We on the same planet? That's a misandrist.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 06:43 PM
3

Oh I assure you they do. And they're growing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:41 PM
2

Nah, misandry doesn't come out of nothing. Its actions like what you're going that cause it. Edit: and mind you, if you treat someone like shit and they have feelings about it, it's 100% on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:09 PM
6

And more misandrists are born. Just don't bitch about women who think men are trash.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:14 PM
–

Like come on ya'll, it takes minimal effort. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:45 AM
–

Click on the link.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:29 AM
–

Yeah, I believe that's the latest one.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 10:58 PM
–

This is male dominated sub by a fairly large amount, according to the last survey. Edit: note this is in response to: However it only appears one gender's opinions are supported. Because whilst this sub loves to blame women for all the evils of the world, if men aren't supported in this sub, the call has to be coming from inside the house.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 09:59 PM
–

I didn't say you didn't. I said this is what it looks like for someone not to. Reading comprehension is important. Could you technically view women as individual humans and act like this? Probably so, I cannot speak to your internal workings but your behavior doesn't really indicate so. From going to bat for OP's honor and accusing women of misquoting him even though you could see his comment was edited after it was posted. To mocking some random woman who disagrees with you on whether OP made a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:15 PM
1

Holy batman of assumptions. Out here demonstrating what it looks like not to view women as individual humans and instead a malevolent conglomerate.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:42 PM
2

If it were an honest mistake, he should have edited with a note. Instead, he shadow edited after multiple people called him out. So no, I'm not inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:43 PM
2

So they do have intuition super powers. They just have to learn how to use them. Good to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:56 PM
10

Men on this sub: mock alleged female intuition. Also men on this sub: argue women can properly vet a man while knowing fuck all about him. Ain't no way a woman really knows jack shit about a man she has talked to for a few hours.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 02:34 AM
1

Here yah go. https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/1sd7olu/comment/oegl753/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button Edit: well doesn't seem to be working give me a minute. Edit2: it's working fine. Edit3: ah I see he edited it, and you're going around white knighting for him. How cute.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:43 AM
1

That was a direct quote from one of his comments. It is absolutely not a misquote.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:42 AM
1

Straight up crazyville in this response. Unless you're going to actually engage and quit making shit up and stonewalling, go waste someone else's time.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 09:36 PM
1

I did. Try reading more carefully, apparently. It's funny. You've actually hallucinated a whole victim scenario where you're standing up against the injustice of a big bad wolf by "refusing to play along" but in reality are just sticking your nose up in the air and refusing to actually debate the very thing you brought up. Bravo. Points for creativity, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 09:23 PM
1

You gave jack shit of an argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 09:02 PM
3

Well that's the thing I don't think women are human and the nuanced social sense Says Op. Anyone who views you as subhuman in anyway is not worth engaging with.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:59 PM
1

Why does this seem to be true? Why are some men offended by it and women not so much? This is what I'm wondering. I don't understand why it's so offensive to a number of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 02:45 AM
2

You're the one refusing to actually engage. You said no problems would be solved. But I pointed out one that would be. That is, even if men don't care about respecting or liking their partner, which many do, at least men wouldn't have to deal with boring women if they were gay. It's a bonus, as I said in my original comment. Many men like to complain that most of their dating woes are caused by women. So if they're not stuck being attracted to women, those dating woes go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 11:06 PM
3

See my comment fleshed out above. So evasive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:37 PM
3

Definitely not a lie. I've seen many men lament about how boring women are, how they're all the same, how they're not on the same level of men etc. etc. The same problems as before when men could not choose to be gay. Such as? Seems like at least they wouldn't have to deal with boring women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:36 PM
4

But I'm not. I'm basing it largely on what I've heard men say. So what problems would remain if men could choose to be gay?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:22 PM
3

Hypotheticals play an important part in pointing out truths even though they themselves may not be true. This is the case for all hypotheticals. Frankly, your aggressive insistence on concrete thinking and refusing to engage with reasoning that you don't like the implications of does speak volumes, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 09:44 PM
5

It's not a false premise. It's considering a hypothetical situation and the logical consequences. And frankly, if a man would be happier dating men if he could become gay, I'm not sure why I would want to date him because he's trapped in his heterosexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 09:35 PM
3

People can't control their sexuality. However, if men could choose to become gay, I'm inclined to agree with OC that many would be happier dating men. It's not just that men would be more likely to approach sex in a way they'd prefer. For many men, the people they actually like, respect, and admire are men. So if they could enjoy fucking them too, that would be another bonus.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 09:25 PM
–

My comments in no way argue that studies are moot. That's a strawman. I'm criticizing OC for th exaggeration and hyperbole. And yes - it applies to all people. Reality is generally more nuanced than a lot of frustrated people want to portray.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 07:59 PM
3

Absolutely. The problem is that it is almost always painted as men's own fault while completely ignoring the larger systemic and social issues as well as women's influence, and when it comes to women's issues it's always seen as larger systemic and social issues and men's fault while dismissing women's own contribution to the stasis of their gender role. By who, though? "Feminists" are often thrown around as the proverbial boogeyman in these spaces, but most feminists I've observed addressing th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 04:00 AM
7

A longer comment with more ass pulled statistics. Again, are you capable of actually supporting your points with data? Of course actual data supports a more nuanced picture, with women more likely to do some of the activities addressed and less likely to do others so that's why you ass pull stats instead. Are you capable of recognizing that men contribute to the own stasis of their gender roles? E.g., proposing to a man can be considered humiliating and emasculating to the men it happens to whic…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 08:23 PM
11

Another ass pulled statistic. We are in a messy transition period, but the reality is far more nuanced than your bad faith attempts to try to blame women for everything and treat men like unaccountable babies.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 07:40 PM
14

99% of women are not like that. Based upon anything other than how you feel? This stat is highly exaggerated and pulled straight out of the ass.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 07:16 PM
1

Sure hun, whatever you say, keep vastly overestimating your value in one off online interactions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 05:08 PM
0

If there's no demand, production will do nothing to initiate a healthy market. Market demand acts as a vacuum that production will inevitably fill. In the case of the adult industry, the sheer scale of the profit potential creates a 'race to the bottom' where human rights are often bypassed for the sake of meeting that demand at the lowest possible cost. Hence the exploitation, etc., that inevitably follows the intensity of the demand for adult content.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 03:29 PM
1

Triggered lmao. I don't give enough of a shit about some random redditor to want to even try to "manipulate" the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:37 PM
0

I'm well aware. But you're going to attract toxic women by being a manipulative shithead. So just don't be surprised about what you end up getting with your strategy. OP reminds me of manosphere men bitching about how all women want is money and then go on websites for sugar babies.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 06:58 AM
1

Re: cold approaches, I don't like being approached. Literally ever. I've rejected 100% of them. But I'm one woman. I can't imagine why I'd want to force my opinion on other women who disagree. I'm not out here trying to create the hive mind. Re: consumers of explicit content vs women who create it, you've got your wires crossed. The demand creates the market, not the other way around. I do judge women who make it their life's goal to get men off. I can't imagine a more meaningless existence. But…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 04:52 AM
3

If you go out of your way to attract toxic women, just don't bitch about the consequences of sticking your dick in crazy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:19 AM
5

Unless I have a reason to believe bots will become conscious, I can't really be concerned with them given how much suffering of conscious beings there already is in this world. And at this point, I don't see any indication that they will inevitably or even possibly become conscious. If they became visually indistinguishable, there would need to protocols in place to make sure women and girls were not abused or exploited under the guise of being bots.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:50 PM
–

Most of the time, women who care about porn care about their man watching porn. Most women also don't want a man who only wants them for sex. Ergo, women don't care that men who only want them for sex watch porn, although they may be critical of the industry. The bonus with sex bots is they may result in less harm and exploitation of women and girls. Better, imo, than having an underclass of women deemed as unworthy of relationships and "used" to satisfy the unrelenting male sex drive.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:20 PM
–

What is the debate? Having men who only want sex from women ignore women is pretty much the dream. So seems like a good thing all around for people.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:25 PM
4

People can have preferences, and OP isn't arguing otherwise. Are your really arguing that preferences are in some ivory tower that can never be questioned or criticized? That can never be based on biases or stereotypes?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:30 PM
7

If I base the conclusion that Jesus exists on such an absurd basis, saying nah, you're support is shit is sufficient. Half assed posts only deserve half assed replies.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 08:02 PM
–

Rebuttals can be just pointing out that OP's reasoning is shit. If I post that I saw Jesus this morning on my morning walk and I post about it arguing Jesus is therefore real, it's enough to point out that my personal observation accounts for shit, there is no need to (and in fact it's impossible) to "prove" that it didn't happen or that Jesus doesn't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:26 PM
–

Right. Because the next time I make a post about how X group is inferior based upon my anecdotal experiences the burden of proof is definitely on them to prove my half assed assertions wrong. Rather than just pointing out the fact that I gave shit support for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:17 PM
6

*colored by the media you consume. And still not a single original thought in this post.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 05:14 PM
7

The lack of original thought Op says, while regurgitating the same shit manospharians argue for on a daily basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:43 PM
0

Yes, but they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 09:14 PM
3

While I don't disagree with all of the points made, posts like this are irritating because they are circle jerk fests. Most of the top comments are agreeing and trying to tie it into their practically sacred belief structure. Incredibly boring. I'd whine about this under automod, but there isn't one.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 04:09 PM
7

For those of us who don't have a flair, it's the only place we can comment on ask women posts.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 05:19 PM
3

No and yes. Pussy grosses me out, and bottom surgery results for trans men are kind of meh, often, for trans men who decide to go through it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 05:08 PM
0

Casual sex has zero appeal to me. If I want to have sex with a man, then I'm going to want more than sex. But this was also a major factor underlying why I did not find romantic relationships with men satisfying either. Because men tend to be a lot more indiscriminate with who they'll have sex with, my brain sees sex with men as meaningless. Anyway, I think I'd be better off if my brain was more closely aligned with folks who do have casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 03:42 AM
1

yes, I am.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 01:45 AM
5

Last went on a date now 13 years ago, and I'm happier than when I was trying to make romantic relationships with men work. I'm not sure what you mean by subsequent journey?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:47 PM
3

It is extremely disturbing to feel validated by engaging in an activity that you believe devalues or harms the other participant. Like seriously, what the fuck? Edit: tried to edit for clarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:21 PM
–

So if a woman tries anal and finds she dislikes it, she's treating her future partners like shit for not wanting to do it? Sounds like the only solutions is to just never be willing to try things lmao. Edit: it doesn't have to be "anal" it can be anything (e.g., having sex on the first date) and the conclusion is the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 03:08 PM
2

Be sure to spread this truth among your fellow men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 03:39 AM
4

Dudes of PPD never failing to spread misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 02:01 AM
3

I mean, your entire argument hinges on redefining words as they are commonly understood without any basis, from what I can tell. Why should we accept your definitions? You're asserting they're right but giving no basis, and your made up definitions fly in the face of common definitions of these words. For example, the first definition of demand from Miriam webster says it is "an act of demanding or asking especially with authority." So, my most unreasonable and untouchable "standard" is that I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 07:08 AM
1

Empathy is great to have. It's not one of my strong suits. I used to have more of it, but I've had trouble hanging onto it after spending now over 10 years in manosphere (and some other toxic) spaces. Honestly, if you want to retain your empathy, best to take breaks from spaces that have inflammatory rhetoric because we are affected by stuff we hear all the time, regardless of our intentions not to be. I also don't know how reasonable it is to expect randoms online to have empathy. Sure, it's gr…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 06:31 AM
1

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting them. Regardless, how we choose to respond to those internal feelings matter. People can have feelings and opinions for how we choose to respond to how we feel. And frankly, even if it's coming from a place of hurt, if someone's being an asshole, I don't think anyone is required to empathize with them. Man or woman. I'm not a very nice person I know, but I also don't expect empathy. But also I'm not using those phrases to say men must want to pump and dump or anything…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 06:39 PM
1

The men who fall under the label of "lonely" men include men who are lonely and want a girlfriend and men who use the term lonely because they think it's more acceptable than saying they are horny or strongly desiring sexual validation and gratification. They will even argue it's a type of "loneliness." For men who want a girlfriend, they probably aren't looking to pump and dump. But we have men here who constantly bemoan how being husband material is a bad thing and how they long to be "used" f…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:37 PM
1

you say “some men have explicitly said they would pump and dump if they could”, then that’s fine? Listening to what people actually say and incorporating that into an observation is reasonable. But what you did previously was extending this to a broader group of men who struggle with dating. Those two groups aren’t necessarily identical. And by saying a lot of men “would if they could” your claim exhibited prejudice against men who speak about loneliness I never said they were identical. I said …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:58 PM
1

You made assumptions about my internal motivations and thoughts by telling me to get male friends, by telling me to look around, by "empathizing" that it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking most men will hurt you etc. Which I haven't. My claims are not illogical or bigoted. The straw man you're constantly fighting is, and that's why you're fighting it because it's an easier thing to attack and will get your positive feedback on this forum. Can you quit pearl clutching and strawmanning my po…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:01 PM
2

What most men can do doesn't really tell us what most men would do if they were able to. I also don't know that most men haven't pumped and dumped once or twice, and the reliance on a pattern of behavior is not compelling. Are you sure the pattern of behavior isn't - pump and dump as many women as you can (might be zero, might be one or two) then settle down? And if you genuinely believe PPD men are largely reflective of real life, it might be time to touch grass anyway I don't. But I'm somewhat…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:52 PM
0

Good lord. I'm literally just listening to men who say they're going to try to, for example, lie to women about relationships to get casual sex. Men who have otherwise not had any luck. I'm saying there are some men in group X who would do Y so they're not two separate groups. Why are you so determined to insist that observing anything negative about men must be dismissed? I'm not making assumptions about their behavior I'm listening to them. Would they act differently from what they're saying i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:44 PM
1

As I said, I was never making the case that most men do. I don't know how many men would, but you're not offering any evidence for your assertions. You can claim something is a statistical minority because you feel it is but you need evidence to prove it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 02:36 PM
1

I'm not making any claim about most men. I'm taking issue with the claim that the groups are completely separate. Also, a man can pump and dump a woman or two for funsies and still have a 6-7 N count. It's not always a long pattern of behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:59 PM
2

Funny that you're expecting human behavior to be logical and assuming if it isn't, then it can't be real. The fuck? Regardless, I said would. So clearly, as I made clear in my first comment, some of the men I'm talking about are men who can't pump and dump but clearly would if they could. We have multiple such men on this forum. We also have men on this forum who have pumped and dumped, at least so they claim, but have still complained about being lonely. You really think being able to pump and …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:56 PM
3

Some of them, not the majority here A lot of the worst men here are "purple pill." You were defending blaming all men for the misbehaviour of some No I wasn't. I was asking why it was unjust for a subset of men who would pump and dump to get treated like they would even though they haven't had the opportunity. I was taking issue with you saying they are two completely separate groups (men who would pump and dump and men who are lonely) because it's horseshit. There is overlap. Open your eyes. Re…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:39 PM
-3

That’s an assumption. No, it's not. Many men here admit this. #notallmen but certainly many of them. Because it’s based on prejudice It's prejudicial to not meet up with men who would pump and dump you if they had the chance? These men? Only a fraction about men speaking out about loneliness is displaying this rhetoric. How do you know it's only a fraction?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:24 AM
-7

These are not the same men. The men who pump and dump are not the same men who are complaining about loneliness. It’s not the fault of the latter that the former does what they do, is it? I mean, given many of them would pump and dump if they could, why is it an injustice for those men that they reap what they would sow? Not to mention, rhetoric from these men that women are only worth pumping and dumping, for example, also absolutely contributes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:17 AM
1

Sexual dimorphism has been decreasing over time, but existed in the first place largely due to male-on-male competition. The bigger stronger ones killed the smaller weaker ones and got the women. The decreasing sexual dimorphism has been due in part to women's choices and changes in social structure.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 02:31 AM
3

No, they don't have to. If they don't like their options, they have the fucking agency to say no and spend time on other things or keep looking. Would ya'll quit infantalizing men?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 02:20 AM
1

There are entire graveyards and prisons full of men who do bad things to women. Not so much for women who do bad things to men. In fact, feminists are calling for an end to prisons for women. Weird goal post move. We are talking in the context of dating here, where men never hold men accountable for anything and cry that women should be accountable for both themselves and men. Not to mention, men commit the vast majority of violent crimes, and most often against other men. So even if we do refor…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 08:52 PM
–

Men now just jump through the hoops. It's painfully obvious men don't expect any ROI anymore. It's all in the way they're acting. This is something men need to stop doing. Like why do you all constantly demand accountability from women for every little thing but can't hold your fellow men accountable for shit? Vaginas is like women who say "dick is cheap." PPD will punish me for "witch hunting" aka showing you the women posters saying this, but they say it a lot right on here. But now who calls …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 08:12 PM
–

without offering any in return If women aren't offering anything in return, then men are irrational to jump through these hoops. This is more damaging to a man than you realize. Actually, I suspect I understand it a lot more than you realize. In contrast to the Pollyanna view around here regarding how women are raised, I had a father who would physically abuse me if I dare cry over a missing animal. As a result, I buried and hid my emotions. I still do. I also haven't found most men (or women) t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:55 PM
–

The ones treating average men like disposable actions figures, by and large, are men in power, not women. Not wanting to fuck a man is not the same thing as treating him like a disposable action figure.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:09 PM
18

Personally, I'd rather be dead than have my only leverage depend on prostituting my body out. So, if that's the only alternative, so be it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:05 AM
2

an inquiry that is built upon the foundation of a false dichotomy that started in the comment I responded to and bled into your initial response. As for what I find interesting, I find it interesting that people with niche interests who have trouble connecting with others would rather blame their perceived superiority for their difficulty connecting with people than the fact that their interests are incredibly narrow.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:28 PM
1

For someone so intelligent, I would think you'd be able to spot a false dichotomy before actually posting it. Speaking, you know, of logical errors.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:20 PM
2

If only even "intelligent" men were half as interesting as you've deluded yourself into believing.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 03:02 PM
1

I remember working 8 hours five days a week rather than 10+ hour days six days per week. Easy mode tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 08:11 PM
6

We shouldnt be shamed for calling women liars based on no evidence So you don't want people to be able to have opinions about the opinions you have?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 06:35 AM
2

People who are very intelligent in terms of IQ are often absolute dumb fucks when it comes to navigating human relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 06:01 PM
4

I accept it. This is why I chose not to pair up with a man long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 04:26 PM
1

You know literally fuck all about me. Studies show most men are open to casual sex. You're really telling me they wouldn't want to have sex on the first date? Get the fuck out of here bro.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 04:25 AM
6

But, women enjoy dates Speak for yourself. It was fucking miserable.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 06:14 AM
10

vanity metrics. Height. Income. Status. Aesthetic. Social proof. These are easy to measure and easy to compare. They’re visible, so they become the filter. then.... Two things have to align.. First: strong mutual physical attraction. Thats not shallow, its biology. If that’s not there, it doesn’t start. Uh, the reason a number of women say like tall guys, is because that's what they're attracted to. Like, how are we distinguishing between vanity metrics and traits associated with strong mutual p…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:39 AM
1

Assume a horny man is lying about his intentions until proven otherwise. He will likely prioritize his dick over informed consent.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:37 PM
2

The best. If I ever start thinking perhaps I'll change my long-term single status, a quick trip to ppd will cure me of such folly.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 01:00 PM
3

That's most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 11:50 PM
5

But likely a shitload of overlap between guys who want a low N woman while bitching about not getting sex after a date or so, based upon what I've seen.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 03:53 AM
1

attraction to dominance is completely independent from what women want in long term relationships This is what you said my position was. But this is completely off base. Studies do show that dominance is less appealing for women in long term relationships than short term. But that's not my position. The reason I pointed it out was to point out evidence indicating that while women may be attracted to dominance, the man likely expecting her to be submissive to him could be a byproduct of that domi…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 03:09 AM
4

Ah yes, the fluctuating definition of hypergamy that allows red pill men endless plausible deniability and goal post moving.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 03:01 AM
1

I made the comment in the context of a post discussing relationship hierarchies. I thought that made it clear enough, but I could have been more specific. Overall, I don't disagree with your characterization of what women generally want in relationships, though I don't think that means that women on average are naturally even sexually submissive. A lot of variables are involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 02:37 AM
1

You might have a point if you weren't strawmanning my position, and if I were the one trying to support uncalled for assumptions with Bayesian statistics to support a broader claim. But I think it might be helpful to look at it from a different angle regarding something you're likely biased against believing. Let's say Sue argues that generally men want to compete and be dominant over other men. Mary disagrees, arguing that, on a population scale, men are statistically more likely than women to …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 12:31 AM
2

OC is clearly arguing women want to be submissive to a man they love in a relationship more generally and that is what I'm arguing against.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 09:09 PM
2

You do you, but that doesn't make it egalitarian. Regardless, my issue is with the argument that women are naturally submissive in relationships more generally, not sexual kinks.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:53 PM
1

Ah the Bayesian statistics card. Should have seen that one coming. Your Bayesian statistics mean shit if the underlying assumptions are erroneous. If the starting assumption is biased or logically flawed, then the "math" you do on top of it will always yield a biased result.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:50 PM
2

I was talking about being submissive in the relationship not just in the bedroom. But also, why do you think you're relationship is egalitarian if you're submitting to him in the bedroom on a consistent basis? Isn't that more a hybrid relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:35 PM
1

You don't seem to realize you're committing major reasoning errors that invalidate the probabilistic conclusions you're trying to draw.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:26 PM
1

There is zero basis for what you're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:20 PM
1

No again. Being attracted to dominant traits doesn't mean you want them directed at you or that you want to be submissive. Nothing I said implies that. Why are you so stuck on that? What I said is the data is consistent with some women being attracted to men with dominant traits but not wanting to be be treated as submissive, hence why they value other traits in long term mates.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:12 PM
1

Why would you assume that attraction factors in how someone with the traits you like might treat you? You're expecting attraction to be rational why lmao? I mean some women being attracted to dominant men for short term relationships but less so for long term is the disparity playing out in real time. Looks like they think dominant traits are attractive, but come to recognize that dominant men often don't treat them how they want to be treated. So they're for casual use only.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 08:00 PM
1

Why would I believe this? Whats the reason they'd be completely independent? Based upon human behavior? Attraction is involuntary, but people's preferences change over time as they get more experience because they figure out what they actually want. But honestly what you appear to be failing to ask yourself is why you think they must be connected. Why would you assume that being attracted to a person with some dominance associated traits means you want to be dominated by him? If I'm attracted to…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 07:40 PM
2

Some women being attracted to dominant men for short term encounters on some studies does not make it "probable" that women want to be submissive to the man they love because there's no connection between what traits you are attracted to and how you want to be treated. And dominance is, again, a liability for long term relationships and seen as far less desirable. Egalitarian relationships are diametrically opposed to one partner being submissive. If one is, it's not egalitarian.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 04:54 PM
2

I mean, you seem to be trying to push the narrative hard given you're questionable leaps of logic. If you want to redefine submissive out of what it means - that is inclined or ready to submit or yield to the authority of another; unresistingly or humbly obedient per one dictionary definition, for example - then who is really shadow boxing?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 04:41 PM
3

Yes, but on a population scale why would you assume this is the case for such a number of people that it would change the average? Attraction and how you want to interact with someone you love are two entirely separate circles. Again, this is very flawed logic. You're trying to say "because women like oranges, they must naturally want oranges to be thrown at them." Not to mention, preference for dominance significantly diminishes for long term relationships Being submissive also doesn't mean you…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 04:33 PM
6

why would it be that complicated in most cases? It's not complicated that attraction towards someone and how you want to interact with them can be two different things. E.g., men who fall in love with a woman who likes to dress provocatively and then is upset when she continues to dress this way in a relationship. The fact is the vast majority of women express preferences for egalitarian relationships. If you're listening to them on preference for dominant men, maybe also listen to them on their…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 04:17 PM
4

Some do, particularly in short-term encounters. But this is a flawed leap of logic that not only ignores individual differences but conflates attraction with how a woman might want to interact with that man. A woman can even want a dominant man to be submissive to her, for example. Edit: not to mention, many women have had this you're submissive shit pushed on them ever since they were tiny girls...and that sort of thing can affect people while having nothing to do with what they're naturally in…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 03:56 PM
7

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 03:32 PM
–

The word ignore indicates something other than just minding his own business. Like do I greet him in the morning as a generally friendly thing to do and he just ignores me, for example? If someone I'm being friendly to just ignores my attempts to be friendly, I'll assume they want to be left alone and respond accordingly. And it would leave a negative impression. On the other hand, if he's just quiet and keeps to himself and responds only minimally to direct attempts to talk to him, I'll again a…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 03:31 PM
4

But that's not what OC's talking about. He's perpetuating the rhetoric that women are attracted to men they feel inferior to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 09:05 PM
21

Women are naturally submissive. That's why men have to keep reminding them and trying to coerce them into a submissive position.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:31 PM
–

I like em skinny and not very muscular.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 06:14 AM
–

And I wish male sexuality worked differently. But it doesn't. So is life. Get over it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 06:07 AM
1

Ya'll live in the fucking twilight zone thinking most women are fucking "Chad" while being strung along in hopes of locking him down.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 06:04 AM
0

No, the prevailing RP belief is that men, particularly desirable men, gatekeep commitment when there is already a sexual relationship. Except, men are the ones who are going to need and want a relationship more in the vast majority of instances. They're going to be falling in love sooner. They're going to be worse off single. etc etc. The exception doesn't make the rule. It's like saying "women do X" when in fact a teensy minority of women do X. Fucking stupid and failure of a generalization. So…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:18 PM
0

Scarcity because women are gatekeeping relationships. The exception - a small number of guys - does not make the rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 07:23 AM
1

I prefer cute and pretty boys, and I'm disproportionately attracted to men of Asian descent. For example, if someone asks me who I think the hottest celebrity is, I pretty much always think of Yoo Seung Ho, particularly in his role as Yeo Woon. I am also drawn to men who tend towards feminine jobs, hobbies, or mannerisms. I love it when men wear makeup. A man who I normally wouldn't even notice will suddenly be a lot more interesting to me if I learn he legit enjoys knitting as a hobby. Etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 11:21 PM
-2

The belief that men gatekeep relationships assumes women value commitment more. But that assumption is questionable at best given men are more dependent on romantic relationships than women (also see a discussion of this study here, discussing that men are more eager to enter into relationships, express more desire for a partner when single, fall in love more quickly, say that they love their partners sooner, and are less likely to end relationships).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 06:30 PM
2

That's not an equivalent scenario, as low N women who don't want a promiscuous man are not applying a more lenient standard to themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 07:46 AM
5

Again, these situations are not all comparable to each other, and even if granted that men are complaining because they feel entitled but wouldn't necessarily have casual sex, most men jump at casual sex. Thus, if a man is complaining about not having access to casual sex, odds are he'd jump at it if given the chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 05:34 PM
7

I mean feeling entitled to someone's body is fundamentally different than feeling entitled to attend a concert. These two situations are not remotely the same. But, regardless, if I'm banned from something I don't give a shit about, I'm not going to complain about it non stop online, which many of these men to, so I don't find that argument convincing. Additionally, there's the fact that most men do jump at casual sex given the opportunity, backed by multiple studies, so odds are...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 05:20 PM
6

But there is. Many men complaining, for example, about being "locked" out of casual sex kind of gives their hand away.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 04:57 PM
11

Nah, what's sexist is men applying a more lenient standards towards themselves, as the vast majority of men bitching and moaning about N counts are either total sluts themselves or would be a complete slut if given the opportunity.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 04:33 PM
2

It's clear that it isn't sex For me, it is. Not that I would expect him to have no experience at my age, but that it's something he doesn't just do with anyone he's attracted to when horny. Without some degree of sexual restraint, commitment from a man doesn't mean anything to me. Unfortunately, most men are promiscuous when given the chance. Which should explain why I gave up on dating lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 06:25 PM
3

The Blue Pill is in denial about women's flawed humanity, while the Red Pill just shames women for it Total bullshit. Very few "BP" fail to recognize women are flawed. That's a fiction created by TRP to make their blatant dehumanization of women (e.g., the core of the damn ideology argues women are incapable of actual love) appear to be just criticism and something more benign than it actually is. Their criticism of women for shit men would do is similarly not granting them the grace of being hu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 03:00 PM
6

Surprised to see it here? Really? Because of all the places I'd expect to see misandry, it definitely doesn't surprise me that it pops up on a sub where men recurrently threaten the dickpocalypse, repeatedly talk about how women are only good for their pussies, repeatedly argue that it's necessary to lie to and use women, argue that women are vapid, boring, and intolerable....etc etc. Like what do you expect? That a woman will always be "the better person" and always suck it up for the good of u…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 03:50 PM
4

No. My preference has aged with me. I was attracted to 18 year old boys when I was a teenager. Now they're ridiculously young and I visually prefer to look at men with some signs of aging.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 03:04 AM
1

Vast majority didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 02:41 AM
2

Ah yes, true oppression. Hampered access to a virtual harem a mouse click away for sexual gratification that men didn't have access to for hundreds of thousands of years.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 02:16 AM
2

Fair. But that's not the only awful and life changing thing people can go through that can give more perspective. For example, sometimes, maybe someone lost a spouse, but has otherwise lived a charmed and privileged life. A single dude who has gone through more adversity would reasonably have more perspective on a lot of things.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 11:11 PM
3

I mean it can make sense if their opinion is about something that marriage could give them more of a perspective on. Reasonably, a mother may know more about cooking for kids than a chronically single lady. But why give more weight to the guy with a dead wife for reviewing films? Doesn't really seem relevant, at least for most movie reviews.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 11:05 PM
3

Given that there are a lot of stupid, delusional, and dysfunctional people married with kids, I'd say it's risky to assume their opinions are grounded without any further info.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 10:49 PM
5

And I don't care if they don't care, I'm just discussing sex on a forum for discussing that type of thing, and it's kind of odd to keep pivoting to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 03:42 PM
5

And it's also the truth that there's nothing more meaningless than sex with a man. Let's not conflate desired with meaningful.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 03:38 PM
5

If a man will fuck any Sue, Sally, and Mary when they're horny and constantly bitch about getting casual sex, don't expect some of us not to roll our eyes when they then go on about how "meaningful" sex is.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 03:30 PM
4

Well let me ask you OP: can men truly love? Throughout all my experiences and others I know, the men “liked them” for their bodies and what they did for them, not the person themself. People say men are always after a maid and sex and they’ll use you for what you offer then once you stop putting out or something younger comes along, they cut you off for the next best thing. Starting to lose faith in my romance future. It just feels too shallow.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/26 07:32 AM
1

Right, uhh, just don't read the OP's title and half the comments here.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 09:57 PM
3

It’s not a strawman because this is what you keep implying I'm not implying shit. You're reading it into my comments because it's easier to attack then my actual argument If a woman has other options - such as investing her time in a rewarding career instead - why would she want to pair up with someone who: 1) is most attracted to teenagers and early 20s women, while she is going to inevitably only getting older; and 2) is lowering her value with his dick by adding to her N count according to hi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 08:55 PM
5

The fact that you say “lowering her value with his dick” is an incredibly misandrist thing to say That's the manospherian view point, just phrased in a way that they may not like. Women who come into contact with more dicks become progressively less valuable. Most red pill men agree with this to some degree. That's the whole reason there's an obsession with N count and men complaining about women riding the cock carousel. The obsession that purity is a value that the woman is expected to bring, …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 08:40 PM
6

10 years in red pill spaces and their obsession with dating barely legal women. Obviously they can't go around openly saying they want 15 year olds. But let's say that this conclusion is wrong and instead men are stuck on women in their early 20s. The conclusion remains the same. Why would any woman with an alternative want to pair up with a man who is going to lust after 19-20 year old women as she inevitably ages, while lowering her value with his dick?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 07:48 PM
6

Per the red pill, men are aggressive, polygynous, ephebophiles. But before you go #NotTheTrueRedPill about parts you disagree with, the view that men are most attracted to teenagers and that women lose value if they come into contact with dick is sufficient to make partnership with a man a net negative if you have other options. What are plus sides to committing to an ephebophile who is going to keep lusting for teenagers and who lowers your value?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 07:40 PM
4

Nah I'd say, given my conclusion was based on the manosphere world view and arguments, the red pill is actually quite misandrist and makes men look like shit. But feel free to just toss insults around and clutch your pearls rather than articulating a coherent argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 07:30 PM
3

Regardless of whether you want to argue on the specifics of what manospherians say about when a woman "expires," fact of the matter is, the logical conclusion of their worldview and arguments is that partnering with a man is an incredibly dumb idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 07:20 PM
1

First, in your OC, I'm sorry, but if someone doesn't give a fuck that children die of preventable causes, I'd argue they may be more sociopathic than they realize. But then this comment makes me doubt you're using care appropriately, because you routinely make category errors. If your family member dies, you're devastated. If someone in your neighborhood dies, you get upset. Because you were emotionally attached to them. That's a separate question from having empathy for someone. You can have fu…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 03:50 AM
1

I didn't say the original argument was semantics. I said that your response, which is like saying "well, B is true" after someone says A is true, is semantics because it's not actually engaging with the core of the argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/26 02:31 AM
1

I mean, my comment was taking OP's post and your comment at face value. I don't frankly have time to go back through your all's comment histories to see what context I might be missing. Something can be logical and technically correct but still irrelevant, which is what I'm contending your argument is, at least on its face.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 08:37 PM
2

The reason why it is a necessary but insufficient condition is precisely because all romantic relationships need/require some form of distinct physical intimacy or physical contact but not all people who engage in intimate physicality are, per se, in a relationship. It would be necessary because not having intimate physical contact would entail a platonic relationship BUT not all people who engage in intimate physical contact are in a relationship. This is semantics and frankly somewhat of a str…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 07:40 PM
4

Another stunning advertisement as to what women are missing out on by not dating the "average man." Who could possible resist?!
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 12:58 AM
1

It's not off topic, because it's challenging your underlying framework for why you think it's acceptable for men to use female bodies for their pleasure, the woman's informed consent be damned. And I don't know why we have to assume such a thought exercise can only be considered if implemented as a societal wide measure. That's not what we are doing with individual men choosing to try to get around female consent. What if an individual woman decides to go around quietly euthanizing men who lie t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 12:34 AM
1

Your tacit admission was about the degree of harm caused by the alleyway rapist in comparison to the man lying for sex. I actually think it can vary. It depends on the specific circumstances and the woman in question as to which causes more harm. Another reason utilitarianism is kind of useless when setting rules. And no, I don't think you're a consistent utilitarian, based upon your unwillingness to concede that it could be okay for me to steal someone's credit card to make myself happier. But …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 11:05 PM
1

There is no tacit admission. The fact that you think I'd judge the nurse who rapes the woman in a coma or the man who lies to get sex any less harshly than the homeless man who rapes someone in an alley shows me you're still failing to see anything different from your distorted utilitarian perspective. My ultimate judgment does not turn on precisely how much suffering they do or don't cause - although you're underestimating the harm men lying to women about sex causes. Again, men lying to get se…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 10:42 PM
1

Even if you disagree with everything above you cannot genuinely believe he is no better than a rapist. A woman raped in an alleyway by a homeless man is going to be multiple orders of magnitude more psychologically harmed than a woman who just had a early dating phase end. And a woman lied to by men and used for her body is going to experience multiple orders of magnitude more suffering than a woman in a coma who was raped by a nurse and never finds out, or an incel with no family that is quietl…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 10:27 PM
1

She wouldn't be attracted to him if she knew the truth. So again, she is not attracted to him. And if sex is a "need" his gross ass is not entitled to gourmet food at the price of someone else's pain when he can pay for beans and rice. No, stealthing is a violation because unprotected sex is an act she didn't consent to. It is not merely an act she consented to under a false illusion. So perfectly fine if he lies about having a vasectomy to hit it raw? Regardless: withholding material informatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:41 PM
1

She wants who she thinks he is. Who he's lying about being. He's the only asshole here. Even though he could pay for it. He's not 'starving,' he's just entitled. She is not having her bodily autonomy violated. If she is decieved into having an act committed against her that she didn't consent to (like stealthing), then she has been violated. But that's not what's happening. She's just having sex which she did consent to. Again, consent is only valid when it’s informed. You even admitted that 'st…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 05:08 AM
1

Ok then her sexual feelings for him are not equivalent to that of a prostitute's. Yes, they are, because neither actually want him. He just is so disgustingly entitled that he thinks he's justified to hurt a woman to get the sex he wants, rather than just paying for it if it's a supposed "need." And her "bodily autonomy" is not being violated by her choosing to have sex with someone. Consent through deception isn't real consent. So yes, the man in this scenario is violating the woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:46 AM
1

Not even remotely close. Just continued rationalizations to behave shittily. For example, a woman who views sex as something intimate to be shared with someone she loves isn't leading a man on. But she likely wouldn't want him if she knew the truth about his intentions. She has done absolutely nothing deceptive in this scenario. Men's desire for sex is not more important than a woman's bodily autonomy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:35 AM
1

Here's an idea: take some of that money and buy sex if it's that important. The woman a man deceives doesn't really want him any more than a prostitute does. The only difference is that in one instance, the woman, so long as she hasn't been trafficked etc., isn't hurt or used like an object.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:28 AM
1

Spoken like someone who has lived a life of privilege.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:19 AM
1

It's not. They might be happier with it, but they don't die without it. There's a shit ton of things that could make me happier and better adjusted with more money. So again, I'll just be sure to let the random ass person I steal from that it's really their fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:13 AM
–

is a tacit admission that going without it for prolonged periods of years actually does warrant lying to get sex. Absolutely not. I was pointing out the disgusting absurdity of comparing sex to food - as going without food will kill you in short order. Going years without sex doesn't. I'm over 12 years without sex close to 13. Perfectly healthy. And certainly wouldn't be justified in deceiving someone to get sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:52 AM
–

Ah yes and I feel sorry for all the men dying after not having sex for a couple of months. It's absolutely just like not having enough food. And I'm glad we agree that anyone who has means that I want but don't have is fair game to violate, deceive, and steal from. They're "wealthy" relative to me. It's their own fault for not giving me what I want.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:44 AM
–

You're not appreciating the importance of money.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:35 AM
2

Funny that you chastise me for not reading carefully and jumping to conclusions when I never said you accused me of anything. I said you're shadowboxing in the corner against claims I haven't made and making shit up to justify it--that is, you're arguing against claims I haven't made that you say "women" make and trying to justify it by assuming that I'm as morally bankrupt as many of the men on this sub and would blindly defend women for being shitheads.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:17 AM
–

So, in other words, as I said, shadow boxing in the corner against claims I haven't made and making up shit to justify it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:04 AM
–

Am I them? No? Good.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 01:58 AM
–

I have no doubt in your ability to shadowbox in the corner against claims I haven't made. Such is a regular occurrence on this sub. But certainly if I start arguing that women are justified in treating men poorly because men won't just give women what they want, by all means feel free to "flip the script."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 01:39 AM
–

And here we have some typical manosphere externalization of agency. Men are never responsible for their own actions. Even though you could argue similarly that lying to bypass those standards actually justifies the 'pickiness' you're complaining about, as it proves that being cautious is necessary to avoid being misled. But thanks for the rationalization. I suppose if I want to steal someone's credit card, I'll just inform them that it's their fault, because if they would have just given it to m…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 01:24 AM
5

It's not imaginary, unless you're contending that men aren't all most attracted to women in their early twenties. I think most young women - often uncomfortably - have been on the receiving end of that attraction from a taken man who still lusts for younger women although he's with his older wife. Unsurprisingly, cheating statistics show that male cheating increases massively as they age, quite likely because they struggle with monogamy, particularly to an aging less attractive wife. It's not a …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 11:21 PM
5

Two things. First, knowing that someone's attraction to you is based on very fleeting circumstances such that they'll fairly quickly find you progressively less attractive over time is not equivalent to the scenario you're proposing. It's one thing to recognize that you're not the most attractive person in the world. Vast majority of us inevitably aren't. It's an entirely different thing to expect a woman to be okay with being in a relationship with someone who, for the vast majority of the rela…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:52 PM
7

If it's inevitable that the "good man" you're talking about will only be less and less attracted to us - and quickly, literally a matter of a few years... then all around it's a shitty deal The "deal" you were discussing with OC, text quoted above. And you're again trying to make this weirdly personal. I never said I'd get a uniquely bad deal. I'm arguing that in general investing in a man, for reasons noted by the OC who brought this up, is a poor deal with poor ROI. So, some women should consi…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:10 PM
6

I never said anyone was making me take a shitty deal and have no idea where you pulled that from. I'm arguing that choosing to invest in a man who gives you a shitty deal is a worse use of your youth than* investing in other things that will give a better return on investment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:52 PM
4

That's life. Nobody can stay in their prime. Gotta make the best of it while you can. Or...don't take shitty deals?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:29 PM
4

Recognize male attraction is low value and stop caring what they think. Unless you die young, you'll be spending most of your life outside of the group men are most attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:09 PM
5

start a proper family before your time is up. Sure, if only her husband wouldn't continue to be most attracted to teenagers/early 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:07 PM
1

Oh I believe past matters. That's why I judge tf out of men for their past.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 04:32 PM
1

I don't ask or want anything of men personally. Just don't expect me to give a shit either.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 04:05 PM
2

Empathy is not my strong suit. However, I used to be a lot more empathetic. In this particular context, I think being in manosphere spaces over 10 years and watching the same misogynistic talking points, threats (e.g., the dickpocalypse), and dismissiveness of problems women have repeated to ad nauseum has significantly eroded my empathy for male loneliness. It also probably doesn't help that I likely have compassion fatigue from my work and personal life more generally. So to answer your questi…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 02:20 AM
1

And I don't want to be in a relationship with a man who'd fuck any Sally with her tits out. Yet alas, here we are.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 01:47 AM
–

But my assumption is that once entered into that relationship everyone is accepting of what it is, consenting, and happy to it. What do you think the odds are of two men being happy with this arrangement long term? It’s no different than how men have polygamous marriages with multiple women in many countries It would be different though, in that countries where men have multiple wives have a social acceptance that a woman with multiple husbands won't see in almost any country. I’m curious could …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 07:24 AM
–

People are allowed to change their minds, and if they did, and I suspect they likely would, I would be backed into a corner. Practically, it's a good situation to avoid, even if in theory it holds some appeal.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 03:06 AM
–

Yes. Except to be fair, that would mean they could have other partner(s), which I would not be okay with. So, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 02:35 AM
3

Personally I wouldn't say hugging is a particularly intimate act unless it goes into cuddling. Regardless, I rarely even hug family or friends - people I also care about - much less so I go around hugging anyone and everyone. No thanks. Kissing sure, but I don't go around kissing other people on the lips. Literally never.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:28 PM
1

For example, cuddling.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:04 PM
1

So many behaviors that you consider intimacy between partners (from your female point of view) are something you do daily towards everyone around you. You know fuck all what I consider important for intimacy from my f, f, female point of view. Because I can guarantee you I'm not doing them with everyone around me. Does that lessen the importance of those behaviors in terms of intimacy between partners? If you're doing it with anyone and everyone - yup, it does.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 04:00 PM
–

Appeal to common sense isn't an argument, it's a fallacy. It's just trying to support feels by claiming it is self evident. And nice straw man. Again, it's not that they're looking for married men. It's that women who just want some quick NSA sex are going to be looking for men who want the same thing, and many married men are going to fall into that category. On the other hand, more single men than married men are going to be looking for relationships/more than just sex, and single women who ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 10:11 PM
–

Based upon?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 09:57 PM
–

Honestly wouldn't be too surprising. For example, emotionally unavailable women/women who are interested in no strings attached sex will have a lot of customers. It doesn't even mean they're having multiple affairs going at once. They could just fuck married man A one month, married man B the next month, and married man C the month after. All of those men have now cheated with one woman. And the woman they cheated with may or may not know they're attached.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 08:30 PM
–

But, it is. Just like men can have multiple affairs going at once. There's nothing impossible about it. You can argue one explanation is more plausible over the other, but arguing it's a mathematical impossibility is asinine and incorrect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 08:27 PM
–

Not always, no. Regardless, see the edit above.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 07:58 PM
–

Then, for women who want multiple sex partners, sounds like affairs with married men who just want a quick fuck could be right up their alley. Edit: regardless, that's just another possibility that shows your statement that there was only one mathematically possible explanation was blatantly false. Boy math, SMH.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 07:51 PM
–

Mathematically, the only way this is possible is if a a large percentage of single women are dating men in relationships with someone else. This is incorrect. It could also be, for example, that these men are sharing a smaller number of women. All women who are dating married men know the men are married and are only dating them because they are married. Of course. Because cheaters definitely never lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 06:32 PM
–

Watch what they do, not what they say.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 03:48 PM
–

Sorry but no, men being indiscriminate in who they'll sleep with is a broadly accurate generalization. Most men getting approached by a vaguely pretty girl will fuck her if she's down. Yet many of them will wax eloquent about how important sex is for "intimacy."
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 03:02 PM
–

OP definitely doesn't have a chip on his shoulder.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 07:30 AM
–

Men say sex is an important part of intimacy for them, yet will by and large fuck anything remotely the right shape. So I don't understand why I should take such claims seriously. Rather, I'd say being so indiscriminate with who they fuck undermines claims of how important sex is for "intimacy."
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 03:54 AM
–

The only one throwing a tantrum is you when you faced mild criticism, but nice projection.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 06:02 PM
–

Oh I'm not mad. Sounds like someone can't handle criticism without getting mad though. Chill out dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 05:59 PM
–

I don't have a problem, it's just weird to ask people a question then ask someone else to decipher why they responded the way they did. Why not ask her why she responded the way she did and ask them why they responded the way they did? Or you can just make up shit in your head about why people responded the way they did, as I suspect you're unlikely to accept an answer that doesn't confirm your own biases.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 05:50 PM
–

It's incredibly weird that you're asking her what other women are thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 05:26 PM
–

I wouldn't have gotten to this point in the first place, but assuming I did for the sake of the question, I'd block him after telling him he's a piece of shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:31 PM
1

Men who don't value being considered husband material don't deserve to ever be someone's husband. They're for the streets.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 07:44 PM
5

Virgins good, hoes bad Except virgins that judge me for sleeping around, fuck them. So in other words you get pissy when people judge you by your own standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 02:13 AM
1

A distinction without any real meaning as a pathetic attempt to justify a bullshit double standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 01:48 AM
1

I can pretty much guarantee that most average women who are happy in their relationship do not believe that their partners don't care about their personalities. If they believe that men don't care about women's personalities, they believe they've found the exception.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 04:21 PM
2

They resent this man because in their words "it took him making a whole human for him to see the humanity in women" With that premise is it OK for men to hate women who despite otherwise being good human beings do not understand men until they give birth to male children and more often than not, fail to understand even then? No. As many have pointed out, resentment is not the same thing as hate. Secondly, "not understanding" men includes a whole ass range of things outside of failing to see the …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 05:51 AM
2

Women don't But many do. Preferring low to moderate N partners means they're judging high N men negatively. Terms like "community dick" don't come about through lack of judgment. One study I believe from 2023 even indicated that male promiscuity is viewed less positively than female promiscuity in the context of short term relationships. I feel like most women know inherently that their promiscuity was a mistake, and most probably regret it after marrying their husband, even if they never admit …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 10:37 PM
8

And yet women view promiscuous men as more attractive (sexually successful), and less promiscuous men as undesirable (non-promiscuous/virgins are treated the worst). Actually, studies consistently show both men and women prefer partners with low to moderate N counts. Men are usually the ones most impressed with male sluts, whereas a number of women may just be overlooking their promiscuity given other factors. The same way many men may overlook promiscuity in a beautiful woman. Of course, promis…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 08:28 PM
7

You can't compare the top men who pump and dump women in their young 20's to the average man described in OP's post. The average man struggling to get laid isn't the one doing all those things you mentioned Men sure as shit can be judged by their stated desires as well as their actions, and many of these little ol' average men lament their inability to pump and dump and treat women like shit. And constantly belittle and insult promiscuous women. You want more women to enjoy fucking casually more…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 07:43 PM
2

Yes. If a woman thinks men are trash but is still obsessed with relationships and/or sex with them and complains about being lonely because they can't get a man--who they think are inherently trash--I'm gonna struggle to empathize.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 05:07 AM
5

Most women are here to debate. Not give advice. Edit: not to mention, dudes here have big opinions on the female experience despite understanding fuck all of what it's like.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 02:11 AM
1

1) Eyes, but not really deep set eyes. 2) Facial symmetry 3) Other - large hands Honorable mentions: thick and preferably long hair and deep voice.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 02:01 AM
6

You sure all would say that you understand men having a dry streak and all, sure. And then OP keeps going around asking... so why do you think you can emphasize with man having a dry streak? Why make this assumption? Personally, empathy isn't my strong suit. Not great, but it's true. I in particular struggle to emphasize with a lot of "lonely" guys who are obsessed with fucking female bodies while often despising and/or looking down on women. But as I've chosen celibacy for the last 12 years, I …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 01:52 AM
4

it's way better than the reverse. Nope, because when a high N woman ends up with a low N man it usually isn't because she felt entitled to be a slut while expecting him to treat sex as something more special for her. High n man + low n woman is like peanut butter n jelly Nahh, for many women who view sex as something special and intimate, high N men be tripping to think their hand-me-down dick is special to her after it has been passed around the community. What's truly superior is people who vi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 03:44 AM
9

So? I find men who want to stick their dick into 50 women and then settle down with a low N woman gross and insulting.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 11:41 PM
1

If men feel the need to constantly crow about their preferences, with many often insulting those who don't meet it, they are inviting criticism. Simple as. My opinion: Men who hold themselves to the same standard: respectable. Men who don't: gross. If you don't want to hear people's opinions on your preferences, stop inviting criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 04:30 PM
1

Only to a small extent. “Social skills” typically get you your “looksmatch” on Tinder as a guy. Being more physically attractive than someone makes it difficult to tell if you did anything right or wrong I'm not talking in terms of doing right or wrong actions. I'm saying if you choose to spend time with women who fuck casually you won't be interacting with those who don't. So your experience with women will largely include the somewhat small percentage of women who engage in casual sex. If you …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 05:17 AM
1

You're quite defensive. Do you really think that your personal experiences aren't affected by how you choose to interact with others?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 04:15 AM
2

So you're using tinder--which is dominated by men-- to make assumptions about women and assuming women who won't sleep with you right off aren't attracted to you It's fine if that works for you, but you've got to realize it skews the type of women you're interacting with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:44 AM
1

Women who don't want to date promiscuous men aren't necessarily looking for a "provider," though it may be more common for them to be doing. You say you don't give a crap, yet you started out this comment chain saying "people are tired of the gaslighting & internet trolling that suggests otherwise." So....do you care or don't you? Make up your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:06 AM
0

Pretty privilege is a thing, and you clearly think you're hot. But again, for women who don't like promiscuous men, you've likely devalued yourself by your actions, and they'd likely pick a less promiscuous "version" of you over you. So, best to stick to women who don't dislike promiscuous men. Which it sounds like you're doing. Pity you admit to being a misogynist, but at least you're honest. Further evidence that avoiding dating men is honestly a superior choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 02:44 AM
0

clearly don’t care much Sure a number don't, but many who do care are unlikely to think that the traits that allegedly make promiscuous men "superior" to their female counterparts are that impressive or make up for the negatives.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 02:28 AM
5

Rage bait* post by a conservative man to get people pissed off at women. As per usual. And of course stereotyping bi men as effeminate. That said, OP is onto something about conservative women in particular being less likely to date bi men. As conservatives overall are significantly less likely to date bi people. So if you're a conservative bi man... Have fun with that lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 10:27 PM
19

Your post conflates liking with being attracted to. These are two separate things. A number of women who are attracted to men indeed don't like them. On the other hand, women who aren't attracted to men can nonetheless like them. That aside, who is surprised that some men feel this way? The only thing that is absurd is when these men then wax eloquent about how much men love women, while said men often clearly openly despise women and just want to fuck their bodies like a living sex toy.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:24 AM
4

The double standard exists for men and women for a reason. For the average guy, hooking up with an average girl is NOT an easy feat, whereas a girl can pretty much hook up with soooo many guys compared to her "looks match". This key difference is why women being "sluts" is inherently a bad thing, and a guy being a "slut" is completely different because that man must have some KEY trait that DRAWS women to him since naturally they are far more selective. This logic is asinine. If something being …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 02:21 AM
1

lmao now that is true rationalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 01:04 AM
1

Then why does he have to pay for it? Why does he have to trade internships for sexual favors?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 12:22 AM
2

Uh, she is doing it because she's being paid. But keep living in your delusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 11:27 PM
2

Dick is already a low value commodity. Do ya'll really think any woman actually wants his dick that he's having to pay to get sucked? Like, really?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 09:31 PM
2

destroying young white boys self esteem Please. White men remain pretty much the most desired type of man. And a small minority of white women doing weird shit is not healthy to get hung up on.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:54 PM
2

Getting mad at a minority of ppl for living their lives in a way you don't like is a ridiculous waste of time. Like why the fuck do you care if they want to advertise their fetish for black men?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:45 PM
2

I don't know if they are or arent. But let's be real what you're mad about here. White women dating black men. Get over you self man.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:19 PM
2

Because it pays? Because a few are into it? Regardless, again, most women aren't. You're looking up niche content and then getting pissed at 4 billion people over it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 09:15 PM
2

You think specifically seeking this content out and thus training AI algorithms to show you similar shit isn't skewing your view of reality? Most women making porn are in it for the money. You can find exceptions for everything. But exceptions and people with weird kinks are the exception and not the rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 08:15 PM
2

No point in continuing a conversation with someone this disconnected from reality. Let me state it simply one more time. Women in porn are fucking those men and letting those men do things to them for money because it turns men on not because it turns them on.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 07:16 PM
2

Porn is largely male fantasy and not based in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 07:12 PM
2

Women reject men for not putting them in their place sexually. They are submissive. They don't tolerate passive men. Incorrect. The idea that women are innately submissive is questionable at best. Also, the choice isn't between "putting women in their place" and passivity. There is a whole lot of middle ground there. I won't stop analyzing the behavior of women and which mens sexual power they choose to submit themselves to. So maybe you should start by sticking to the facts rather than your fee…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 07:06 PM
2

They still want to be under male sexual power, regardless of how they want to experience that power. They want to be used and taken and treated like a sexual doll by men they deem attractive. Sorry, no. This is just frankly incorrect on multiple levels. A majority of women don't engage in rough sex, and a non-insignificant number who have didn't ask for it. Most women are flexible and not strictly submissive when it comes to sex. Things like emotional intimacy and consistency are linked to femal…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 03:04 PM
2

You just ignored my statement. If porn is only for male gaze then why do all the women porn creators never choose asian men to fuck them for example? Why the fuck would they be if there's no incentive for diversity because men just want to see women get fucked and degraded? Women film their desires and film the men they like having sex with all the time. Its all over the internet. You're looking up shit that makes you hard and then extrapolating it to female nature. Truly hilarious. Tell me. If …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 02:49 PM
3

If its for the male gaze then why are not all males represented equally in porn? Because ya'll prefer to see women and not men? The fuck kind of weird ass reasoning is this? Don't lie to yourself I'm not. But you're fucking delusional if you think porn made primarily for men has fuck all to do with women's actual desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 02:37 PM
1

Porn is largely for the male gaze - ie, to get men hard and not to appeal to what women want. Honestly mind boggling you've convinced yourself that media made for men is a satisfactory source to know anything about "female nature."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 08:30 AM
–

Just don't try to trick a woman into a relationship then and admit you're only for the streets/casual.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 08:22 AM
1

Maybe if you argued against what I'm actually saying rather than a strawman, you would have a point. I'm not saying if a man is misogynistic, he will be lonely. I'm also not saying that lonely men are necessarily misogynists, although some certainly are. I'm saying misogyny is a factor that can negatively impact a man's dating. Your study doesn't show shit about Elliot Rodgers. He was extremely misogynistic as demonstrated by his manifesto, and that misogyny contributed to an act of extreme viol…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 07:29 PM
2

Are women as likely to have the double standards with N counts though? Particularly the I can be a slut but my long-term partner cannot be double standard? I think that's the main thing that men get flak for when it comes to N count preferences. You also forgot to mention that some men also won't date virgins, but I don't really see them getting flak for that, either. Women also do get flak for distaste of men who have had same sex sexual partners, from some men and women alike.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:38 PM
1

For what?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:23 PM
1

No, your study doesn't support what you claim. It does undermine your argument that loneliness leads to hostility towards women, though. Not to mention, the men with the most sexual partners had low levels of hostility towards women. But let me illustrate my point using a specific example where misogyny fucked over a man's chances with women. Elliot Rodgers. In my opinion, easily an 8/10 appearance wise. While not all women share my tastes, I'm very confident in saying that but for his hatred of…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:19 PM
9

where a clear and narrow topic somehow becomes several unrelated issues that I never raised. Literally the story of my life with most interactions I have with men on this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 02:31 AM
2

What am I allegedly making excuses for?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 11:48 PM
-2

We are talking about the hating arm of misogyny. You said: misogyny wont make or keep you lonely But if a man is lonely and becomes a hateful misogynistic troll who becomes hostile to women because he hates them - again, is he hurting his chances? Is he assuring he stays lonely by being hostile to women and avoiding them? I realize incels want to maintain their victim persona and never examine how their own actions affect or reinforce their state, but that's just not reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 08:54 PM
-3

Such black and white thinking. You really think the lonely awkward man becoming hostile towards women he interacts with isn't hurting his chances further? Or avoiding women because he has built them up as this evil monster in his mind?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 08:26 PM
2

Can we kill the idea that multiple factors don't interact? Trump is a billionaire that has been able to build a cult-like base of male and female sycophants who will all turn a blind eye to what he has done. Do you really think that his situation is remotely comparable to say a socially awkward incel who convinces himself it's hopeless so self isolates and acts resentful and hostile towards women?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 07:58 PM
1

Personally, I don't wear makeup. But men don't gain status or reputation by makeup, so trying to use makeup as evidence that women care more about what other people think is not a very compelling argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 06:15 AM
1

I dont wanna continue engaging with you. Then don't. I'm not forcing you to.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 04:55 AM
1

Even accepting your version of the events, unfairness in suspending one person for insulting and not the does not show that people are disciplined for misogyny but not for misandry. I also suspect that if someone told me "well that' why you're a femcel" - although I view that as an inaccurate statement - and I responded by calling them a prick, I'd be the one getting suspended and they wouldn't. Because femcel and incel are also descriptive terms in a way that prick is not.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 04:07 AM
0

So even if you think the rules are applied unfairly, you're getting suspended for insulting someone. Not misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:55 PM
1

Looks to me that data more shows that men pull ahead in their 30s. Infidelity rates rise from young adulthood through middle-age and peak later in life for both sexes, but overall the highest rate is observed in older men. Seems staying faithful long term may be challenging for many people, particularly men. Possibly because they remain most attracted to very young women. Based upon that, while I agree OC's statement is not entirely accurate, data indicates men may be significantly more likely t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 07:49 PM
0

Misogyny gets a pass here on a daily basis bro. If you start making things personal yeah, that can get action. But misogyny on this sub is constant.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 06:25 PM
2

This sub couldn't exist if people were prohibited from spreading misogyny and/or misandry. Neither are against the rules.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 05:22 PM
1

Some people only enjoy sex in a relationship or with someone who cares about them as an act of intimacy. It doesn't mean they don't enjoy sex, they just enjoy it in certain contexts and not just with any yahoo who is horny.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:38 PM
2

I mean the reason *some people - myself included - are unimpressed with this line of reasoning is because, even if granted, it's ultimately irrelevant to the reasons body count even matters to people. For example: For a virgin waiting until marriage and wanting another virgin, all it means is this dude put in more effort to fuck up. For the person who has a restricted sociosexuality and wants someone who views sex similarly as something intimate to be shared with someone you love, the fact that …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 10:00 PM
4

A man can meet people and even date without fucking everything that moves. People who abstain until marriage, for example, men and women, do this all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:46 PM
5

Same as the virgin woman? Abstaining while he looks for one?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:35 PM
0

And yet, a number of women have been deceived into having sex they otherwise wouldn't have had. Just because a man is controlled by his libido, making his desires hard to miss, doesn't mean they're being straight forward.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 06:01 PM
1

You do indeed still have to interact with women to get casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:59 PM
2

Doubt it, honestly. Not saying women won't lie to save face, but I think you're underestimating how often men will lie to get sex....or to save face lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:46 PM
3

men have always told you, if they do not want relationship with you But they don't. As you have admitted in a prior comment. If a man is horny, many will say whatever shit he wants to get his dick wet, including lying about relationship intent.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:53 AM
3

Sure so, regardless of whether I agree with all of your statements, you're ultimately supporting my argument that men aren't as upfront as OC indicated.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:33 AM
5

I'm not sure why you went on this long tangent; how is it relevant to whether men are upfront or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:25 AM
3

I guarantee you that many a horny man would absolutely lie to hit.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 02:14 AM
2

I'm saying if women have to try to read into a man's actions to figure out why he's doing what he's doing, he isn't being up front about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 01:07 AM
1

No thanks. You haven't really engaged with my argument at all and are just saying " nuh uh" and going on tangents about how you think I feel or my motivations - which are ad hominems, despite your protestations. You wouldn't, for example, respond to my parallel case with a man. So I'm not interested in going and watching someone else talk about shit. Here, I'll try again. Let's say a group of women create an ideology that states AMALT, which means all men are untrustworthy, incapable of loving w…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 01:05 AM
5

If you have to read into their actions or their motivations for arguing why sex is need, they are not being upfront. Edit: edited for clarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 09:54 PM
6

Men are generally upfront that a relationship is nice but sex is the priority I mean, are they, though? I mean sure many will admit as much on an anonymous online forum. But not to women they're dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 09:43 PM
1

This tangent is irrelevant as I am not arguing that red pill men must dislike women. The definition of misogyny does not require prejudice and dislike. So do you concede it's a misogynistic ideology?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 03:10 PM
1

Well isn't this predictable. You're evading the core argument, and then turn to an ad hominem (attacking my argument by attacking my alleged motivation as opposed to actually dealing with my argument). You also argue well prejudice isn't that bad really. Or, in other words, sanitizing prejudice. So, are you conceding that TRP is based on prejudice and thus misogynistic?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 07:08 AM
-4

Whatever it is, it's a false equivalence, as you're trying to equate an individual decision to an entire ideological framework based on prejudice. I don't criticize a man being cautious and aware that women can be manipulative as misogynistic just for being cautious. So let's talk about a much more analogous situation where a group of women create an ideological framework preemptively judging all men (AMALT) as rapists and sexual predators. Misandry or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:51 AM
-3

I am well acquainted with TRP. Its entire framework is built on the prejudice of AWALT—that women are universally hypergamous, manipulative, and only able to love opportunistically, etc. ​You claim this is "just observation," but are you unaware that virtually every historic prejudice has been rationalized using claims of 'scientific,' 'biological,' or 'observable facts' to prove inferiority and justify inhuman treatment/viewing said group as inferior or bad?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 06:01 AM
-5

Red Pill is not based in hatred, and is therefore not misogynistic. This is not a sufficient argument, as misogyny has contained dislike/prejudice/ingrained prejudice for ~20 years in its definition. Keep up with the times and stop trying to define a word's current meaning by its roots.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 05:44 AM
5

Yup watch what they do and not what they say.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 12:50 AM
1

I personally would suggest not letting someone who labels you (or anyone) as low value on minimal information live rent free in your head.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 12:48 AM
1

Personal experience is not the only thing that's relevant, what kind of bullshit is that? You out here advocating for anecdote city? But my personal experience includes knowing, being around, and talking to many women, which I draw on when answering such questions. I don't need to have personally some x to know how many women who do x will approach x.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:15 PM
3

Bro I'm a prude that has been celibate 12 years. I have never had casual sex and don't want to. I have said this multiple times on this forum. All of my questions have been answered in this conversation as generalities - specifically about women who will have sex quickly. My personal experience is irrelevant. It's funny how I see men whine on this forum about women using their personal experiences rather than talking about general trends. But then I'll have men like you become pissy when I keep …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:06 PM
1

Why are you trying to make the discussion personal?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:04 PM
3

Why would a woman have sex with someone where there's no potential for investment? I mean, why would a man? Because horny, for fun, to test drive, etc. Also, potential for investment = \ = having invested.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 07:26 AM
1

Gross. No thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:46 AM
1

Many non chads are constantly lamenting over the fact they cannot go around being sluts. Men tend towards being higher sociosexuality than women. I'm judging all types of men by their words, actions, and expressed desires. So do you really think that most unsuccessful men wouldn't be sluts if they could be?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:22 AM
1

I'm not projecting; I'm the forum "prude" that wouldn't date a high N man. Are you denying that most men wouldn't jump at the chance to be sluts? Are unsuccessful men not often lamenting their lack of ability to be sluts? Why can't I judge men for their expressed desires?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:20 AM
1

The smooth, toxic manipulator may have success with women while at the same time, the reactive angry troll raging about thots in his basement may end up hurting his already dismal chances if he comes across as having a massive chip on his shoulder with women he interacts with women, etc. You need to be the right kind of toxic and be ok with pulling women who are about that life. If you are, then you're probably fine. But not all "toxicity" is equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:15 AM
0

I'd be male because, for example: 1) I dislike being on the smaller and weaker side of sexual dimorphism and it is something I've struggled feeling quite resentful about. I want to be strong and fast and, while I can improve my strength etc., and am quite active, I'm playing at a fairly massive disadvantage compared to 50% of the population. 2) I don't like how female bodies are viewed compared to male bodies (more sexualized, viewed broken down into different "parts" rather than as a whole pers…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 01:57 AM
5

Why would she? Do you really think that a man having sex with a woman quickly is an investment-worthy event?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 07:03 PM
1

I've explained in other comments why I disagree that this logic necessarily holds true. I'm assuming you're responding based upon emotions because you're not really addressing any of my disagreement with the logic and instead just repeating the same argument and trying to project some sort of emotion onto me - e.g. that I find the thought of this hurtful or w/e.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 10:25 PM
0

cold, solid logic Not really, though logic is often used ad hoc to attempt to justify positions that someone reaches based upon emotion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 10:21 PM
0

I don't know; I wasn't responding to you with that comment. I think it's a motivation for some dudes who do. I think all of you all's logic is faulty.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 10:20 PM
-1

Sure, a new position might open up that is better and, if you believe men to be such hypergamous monkey branchers, the guy with options may go ahead and apply. However, he won't jump at any other option like the low option guys does. If men are only as loyal as their options, that doesn't make low option men enticing, as his loyalty would only be out of necessity, and again may entail shitty treatment out of desperation to keep the woman he manages to snag. No, if men are as loyal as their optio…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 09:51 PM
-3

OC was talking about deception, not getting dumped, no? And no, no "truth" here hurts, indeed no one is owed sex or affection. I just disagree with your all's reasoning. But thank you for giving evidence that your motive for making these types of arguments is an emotional one, to "strike back" at women and hurt them. Very sound reason lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 09:46 PM
-1

I don't agree that just because women might be attracted to a small percentage of men, they're all attracted to the exact same small percentage (I mean, unless you're willing to concede that the ~5"7 east asian men I tend to be attracted to are hot commodities. Nor am I a complete unicorn while all other women are attracted to the exact same guys and no others). But also keep in mind that someone who has multiple options when job hunting probably actually wants the job he takes and is less likel…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 08:43 PM
0

My God, chill woman, why so triggered? People often just respond to comments of others on forums. It's how forums work. Don't respond of you're not interested in responding. But many men in these spaces will always assume that if a woman is mistreated, it's because she chose Chad. Hence the joke that you're all up in arms about.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 08:28 PM
3

Most men are sluts or at least would be if they could be. They'll fuck attractive women if given the chance. You're (the general you) not more virtuous simply due to lack of opportunity to be a slut.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 08:18 PM
-5

If she's attracted to him. Duh. She obviously needs to date men she isn't attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 07:13 PM
13

Look at those goal posts move.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 07:00 PM
12

Bro out here actually imagining that a woman who will have sex with him quickly is going to become invested after having sex once lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 06:51 PM
4

And no, the better analogy isn’t “woman jealous her bf was more sexual with an ex.” Because that actually happens both ways and nobody pretends it’s fine. So, the better analogy to men feeling hurt about his partner's past sexual behavior isn't when women is hurt about her partner's past sexual behavior? Oh really? The real mirror is a woman finds out boyfriend used to drop 10k on vacations and jewelry for exes. She feels worthless. Man finds out girlfriend used to do every depraved act under th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 03:33 AM
4

You’re mental gymnastics are pretending the downgrade It's a problem to view a change in someone's behavior so personally. Maybe she tried anal and just doesn't like it so that's why she doesn't want to do it. It doesn't mean her committed man is a "downgrade." Similarly, a man can throw around his money when he first starts earning a lot but then becomes more frugal, and so spending less money on a future woman isn't a downgrade. It's one thing if a girl is too prude for you, or a guy isn't gen…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 03:12 AM
4

I'm not the one writing manifestos. Nor am I trying to make it personal. I was taking issue with your reasoning. That is, comparing sex to a reward or compensation that you're entitled to. If you want to point out where my reasoning is flawed on that point, please do. Otherwise, I fail to see how I'm doing any sort of Olympic level gymnastics by arguing that sex is not a reward or compensation that anyone is entitled to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:48 AM
3

I've actually been voluntarily single for 12 years, am child free, pay for my and a significant portion of my parent's bills, do not lean on men for anything in my personal life, would only want a man's commitment or sex if it's something he also wanted and wasn't viewing either as a reward, would not want to have him take over my expenses, and have never performed a sex act in the past that I wouldn't do with a future partner. I'm literally just taking issue with your reasoning and you want to …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:21 AM
3

Cool, then commitment isn’t a reward for sex Correct. Glad we agree relationships are transactional You're arguing that viewing sex as not a reward necessitates this conclusion? Congrats, you’re the unicorn 0.1% Lying, unicorn. Knew it would be something. until you remember you’re also not entitled to his money, time, protection. Correct. I also don't want his money or protection. Yet here you are expecting all of the above while offering the budget bedroom experience. Nope, now you're just pull…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 12:06 AM
4

Sex is a mutually enjoyable activity that is part of a relationship. It's not something the woman "gives" her man as a reward for commitment. And what she finds enjoyable or unenjoyable may be informed by prior experience. You can't with a straight face tell me that you wouldn’t be upset. In other words, you're not looking for discussion. You're looking for people to agree with you, or they're lying. But frankly, gifts are overrated and I don't like men doting on me, personally. Sounds like he f…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 09:17 PM
2

My dad had significant mood swings daily, threw hissy fits if my mom did not read his mind and make the kind of food he felt like, and would scream when he didn't get his way. You're either delusional or disingenuous to suggest that plenty of men don't act extremely emotional.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:39 PM
1

I'm the opposite. I love cats. I actively dislike dogs.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 05:20 PM
5

Well, maybe once men stop fucking any attractive woman that they can, they can have these sorts of expectations. But it's wild to expect other people to deny themselves experiences and fun when ya'll will be as slutty as you are able.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 05:08 PM
3

Seems likely to be more of a problem for someone chasing low N women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:50 PM
3

Good thing social realities can be changed over time.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:11 AM
4

I agree no one should be shamed or made to feel less than based upon their n count. I disagree that someone cannot be rejected based upon their n count (0, high, whatever). People can have very different views of sex and be looking for very different things in relationships. Some people may want a partner with experience. Others (like me) may not want someone who has slept around, as that shows they have a very different view of sex than I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:05 AM
0

And because humans evolved through rape it means the only women that got to reproduce are the absolute weakest and shittiest ones. Given that research indicates that some of our human ancestors were significantly more sexually dimorphic than humans (for example), I'm not sure your theory is quite tracking with reality. Comparing humans to the other great apes, we are significantly less sexually dimorphic than most great apes. Dimorphism wise, humans are more similar to bonobos - which are matria…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 10:44 PM
1

Are you saying that viewing women as bodies is the natural outcome of these urges? Are you arguing that natural urges cannot be channeled in a way that is compatible with viewing women as more than bodies?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:41 PM
2

The privileged? Please. Yes, I'm well aware of growing fascism here in the United States, and I wouldn't be surprised if I end up having to unalive myself in the end to spare myself from living in a truly fascist state. As I have noted in other comments, I am capable of having empathy. Hell, irl, I defended men when men were demonized and tried to argue for the legitimacy of many male issues for years. I was also the liberal for years who would argue for liberals to cross the aisle and work with…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 05:03 PM
3

And who and is guaranteeing that freedom? And how are they guaranteeing it? If it's conditional on saying what others want me to say, it's not actually free, now is it? So I'll treat it as true free speech and not obey in advance to tyranny which gives such a perversion of individual freedom the veneer of legitimacy. Then you've been warned. This threat has been levied thousands times or more in these spaces. And you've been warned that your rhetoric is actually serving to kill actual empathy an…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:19 AM
1

In general, most people are self absorbed and primarily concerned with the things that affect them. But as an evil Western woman, if a man expresses that he is sad and lonely from not having success in his dating life, my natural response is empathy. This natural response in me has been dimmed over time by repeated threats of force or violence and dehumanization of women that is so prevalent in manosphere/MRA adjacent spaces.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:42 AM
2

No, that's not all governments. That's tyranny. That's the sort of shit that free speech is supposed to offer a buffer against. Evidently, not fool proof, but what you're advocating for is preemptive compliance or obeying in advance to a form of tyranny. Have empathy or I'll fuck you up is never going to produce true empathy. It kills true empathy and kills truly mutual relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:17 AM
1

I'm perfectly capable of empathy. But always kowtowing in fear to men threatening violence (or subjugation) isn't going to make women like men more, it sure as shit isn't a way to actually form any mutually beneficial relationships, and it's frankly not something I'm willing to do as that's no way to live out already short lives. They might as well stop threatening and burn it the fuck down already.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:05 AM
1

I'm apparently one of the few who thinks option number two sounds somewhat insufferable.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:04 AM
1

Well, I certainly could never even hope to match the brilliance of your initial comment in which you made the stunning revelation that not all men are happy in relationships. But, I do my best, what can I say?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 11:32 PM
2

There are a lot of things many men don't understand, but I can't say that I desire for them to understand. I do not desire or expect empathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:05 PM
5

Men will generally use some porn (which can include OF) regardless of the quality of their relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:54 PM
1

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 05:52 PM
1

Not interested in continuing this conversation, but an ad hominem is a logical fallacy where you attack the person and not their argument. An ad hominem is factually an ad hominem no matter how you feel about the person you're doing it to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:50 PM
2

I responded mildly in kind once after you directly insulted me. I said all of you men who are impressed by toxic men who get women are welcome to emulate them if they think that'll bring success. I did not accuse you of anything in that comment. Again, I'm not mad that people aren't nice to me. I'm just pointing out that even though I try to be toxic, you've acted more toxic than me in this interaction. So don't be surprised when people think that many men on this sub are toxic. Pointing out a l…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:43 AM
2

I, and many others, just don’t see toxicity as a defining factor in whether a guy will be successful or not in dating. Evidently OC does, as he repeatedly tries to argue that reaching certain levels of toxicity results in success in dating and/or sex. There’s no utility to the statement “lots of lonely men are toxic”. It’s a non statement, it doesn’t say or imply anything. I guess you say it because it feels nice to say? It was a statement disagreeing with OC who tried to paint lonely unsuccessf…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:14 AM
2

I'm not saying if a man is lonely, he is toxic. So this statement does not negate anything I've said.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:11 AM
2

I didn't say you were lonely because you're toxic. If I was wrong about you being lonely, I wasn't wrong about you being toxic in that comment. You weren't just disagreeing with me. Again, you were insulting me and trying to turn the argument personal, so I responded in kind. And how is it just world nonsense to point out that many lonely men are toxic? Even assuming I'm wrong on the facts, for the upteenth time I was not arguing that toxic men will be lonely or that non toxic men won't be. no m…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 10:06 AM
1

First of all, I wasn't making a causal argument, if you'll go back and look at my comments. I was just arguing against the idea that lonely men are just perfect mistreated angels. Also, this comment assumes that all types of toxicity is equal and that traits associated with toxicity but aren't toxic themselves don't play a factor in certain toxic men being successful. It also assumes that being able to wrack up more sexual partners means someone isn't lonely, which may not be the case if the sam…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:46 AM
1

Are you lonely? If you aren't, then your entire argument falls apart. It's not a random insult, I'm trying to get you to see things clearly. Again, no it doesn't. Let's say I'm toxic and not lonely. That does not show anything about what percentage of lonely women are toxic (e.g., whether a lot of them are or aren't) and has absolutely nothing to do whether a lot of lonely men are toxic or not. As I've noted many times, I was not arguing that being toxic = being lonely. I was arguing that a lot …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:25 AM
1

I'm not mad, I am somewhat toxic. But you're jumping to insults because you're upset, and seeing we aren't here to debate my toxicity...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:17 AM
2

I'm very skeptical that many of the lonely men would be any better if they could get into relationships. But, regardless, again, my argument was only that a lot of toxic men are lonely and that a lot of lonely men are toxic. I'm not making claims that there aren't types of toxic men who get attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:16 AM
1

Ahh another irrelevant ad hominem.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:12 AM
1

Now you're jumping straight into the ad hominems I see, so this conversation is over. Not in the mood to deal with another lonely toxic man atm.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:11 AM
1

Source: a lot of lonely men wearing their toxicity on their sleeve.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 08:03 AM
1

Admissions of attempting to coerce women into sex have happened on this forum, yes. The celebrating of women being killed has not happened on this forum, but does happen on true black pill forums, as I noted in my OC. Overall, a lot of guys here (on this sub) are very bitter, bigoted, and hateful, which I would define as toxic. I'd say most people would.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 07:59 AM
1

Studies show there are certain types of toxic guys who have higher sexual partner counts. Again, does that negate my assertion that a lot of toxic men are lonely or that a lot of lonely men are toxic? Not really. If ya'll are impressed by them, you're welcome to emulate them and get women who will be drawn to that sort of toxicity. Sounds like the toxic guys are the ones who succeeded while the ones who weren't quite toxic enough failed. There is not a certain level of toxicity that guarantees t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 07:55 AM
5

In my OC I literally gave examples. E.g., admitting they tried coercing women into sex and celebrating women being killed.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 07:40 AM
2

Either a lot of toxic men get attention or they don't. Choose one No, I don't need to pick between two arguments I did not make. I said a lot of lonely men are toxic and a lot of toxic men are lonely. To illustrate why this does not necessitate me "choosing" between whether a lot of toxic men get attention or they don't, consider the following: If, hypothetically, 50% of toxic men got attention and 50% did not, it would be correct to say both that a lot of toxic men are lonely and a lot of toxic…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 06:59 AM
1

Of course they're toxic. Arguing that there are a lot of lonely toxic men = / = arguing toxic men never get attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 06:04 AM
0

Note I said "trying." Not succeeding in coercing women into sex. Some probably succeed, others dont. And nor am I arguing that if someone is toxic, they won't get a relationship. I'm just pointing out the fact that a lot of lonely men are indeed toxic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 06:02 AM
2

A lot of men here (this sub) are incredibly toxic. And lonely. And even some admit to doing very toxic things, like trying to coerce women into sex. Lacking confidence does not automatically make someone not toxic. Edit: also, on true black pill forums, you'll even have black pillers celebrating when women are tortured and killed. So yes, a lot of toxic men are lonely.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 05:46 AM
2

Why do you think they have a greater range of choice? Men on average still report a higher N count than women. Not to mention, insofar as N count is being used by some women as a sort of proxy to find a man who has a more restricted sociosexuality, it is indeed imperfect, as a lot of low N men would absolutely be sluts if they could, they just can't. Also, in general, I think a lot of women want a man to choose to be with her because of who she is, etc. Not because he cannot get anyone else. I t…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 04:44 PM
1

Your conclusion requires assuming that, except for this one issue, men and women's psychological response to promiscuity of their partners is the same. I'd argue this is erroneous thinking. For example, maybe a man who cares about N counts is more likely to get hung up on his GF having sex quicker with a ONS than him. However, women tend to have a more restricted sociosexuality, so maybe women who care about N counts are more likely to get hung up on feeling like sex isn't special between her an…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 07:40 AM
1

Furthermore, I thought the clarification that this was not about "getting laid" would also make it clear that I did not have sexual violence in mind as a consequence of the continuing vilification of men. Rape is definitely not just about getting laid or sexual gratification. I would say even primarily it's about dominance and/or humiliation. For example, I've been treated like a monster in this subreddit for saying that, even though I am morally 100% in favor of abortion rights and think that T…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 08:00 PM
1

I think this comment is a bit 2015. Misogyny is back "in" and on the rise in political discourse and polite society. Also, I'm also not sure where ya'll live if you think women could just go out and spew misandry everywhere without consequences, as I'd say it has been becoming progressively more taboo.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 07:48 PM
1

Of course you're going to notice the misandrist comments more than misogynistic comments. Because you're going to be more upset about the misandrist comments. But surveys of this sub repeatedly show this sub is male dominated. It also consistently has a black pill problem. That alone indicates that misogynistic comments are going to be more common. While some women may need to reevaluate why they view benevolent sexism as more positive, I would say your perspective is extremely skewed by spendin…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 06:25 PM
1

Because men being cold and not providing special favors would not be acting "like the monsters they are seen as." When men are vilified as monsters, they're vilified as violent rapists. Women weren't choosing the bear because they were afraid the random man in the woods would be cold or withhold special favors. Come on, man. Don't act dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 06:00 PM
–

Just because you (the general you) choose to allow someone to treat you poorly doesn't mean I have to, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 05:57 PM
–

Are women adding stress into their partners lives? Are they prepared to be judged the same way they judge others? This implies that if men are willing to tolerate something, then women are obliged to tolerate the same things. But this isn't how it works. Men have the autonomy to decide what they will and will not tolerate, and women have the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 05:47 PM
1

I'll use you as an example. You responded to someone essentially saying " If women continue attacking men, men might defend themselves" and what you took from that was that men were bad and trying to subjugate women What dishonest framing. Obviously it's their prerogative, but I think women should maybe be a little bit concerned about what men collectively might become if they conclude that there's no proportionality between how well they treat women and how much women respect men as human being…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 04:35 AM
1

I don't. But again, if getting "fucked by dominant men" was the criteria for who is "owned" by whom--which is in itself incredibly fucked up definition as a person choosing to follow another person is not "owned" by that person any any reasonable sense of the word--then gay bottoms who want to get fucked by dominant men would also be "owned" by said men. No, you're defining being owned as synonymous with being female. Which, again, is incredibly fucked up thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 03:37 AM
1

And that's still fucked thinking. By admitting that submissive men are not "owned," you're not even defining being owned as being submissive, which would be fucked enough. You're defining being owned as feminine or even female.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 03:26 AM
1

Seeing how men have spent the last hundred years or so trying to make women happy and to give them and be everything they want, women really have no business hating on men the way the average PPD poster seems to. PPD is a weird sub to point to to argue about how amazing men have become and how poorly they're treated by women, as misogynistic comments easily outnumber the misandrist comments here. Women today have the benefit of coexisting with the most egalitarian and least sexist men who've eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 02:40 AM
1

If any man views men as "owning" women, they're fucked in the head. Full stop.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 01:33 AM
1

Tldr: yes, too many straight men are fucked in the head, as illustrated by this comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 01:29 AM
2

In other words, too many straight men are fucked in the head? It's disgusting to feel like you own any other human being.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 03:35 PM
12

Even someone from gen z who hasn't used dating apps shouldn't be talking in your view? Also, this sub is technically for gender and sex issues more broadly.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 07:27 AM
3

OP out here trying hard to win the oppression Olympics.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 06:52 PM
1

A lot of self identified nice guys are not nice. If a guy is a misogynistic, bigoted shithead, he's not nice just because he claims to be. And that describes a shitload of men on this sub who maintain they're morally superior to better looking men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:53 PM
1

What happened to innocent until proven guilty? It's just funny how most men here will screech that an allegation doesn't count and that a man accused of sexual assault should be innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt... But I guess that's only for people ya'll like.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:43 AM
1

No, coming in and adding to the conversation in a debate sub isn't a strawman lmao. You really don't have any idea what that is, do you? I'm not surprised that people jump to conclusions, but you're the only one that I can see who decided I was arguing against this particular point, even though nothing in my comment says this, as my OC agrees that you have to consider exposure and as such those statistics on their own don't tell you much.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 06:38 PM
1

I never said they did. He was the one that decided to then argue against it nonetheless. I was adding to the conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:56 AM
1

No. Do you know what a strawman is? This isn't it. This is just a simplified version of the arguments to illustrate how you and others continually try to demand I answer for shit I didn't say. OC said the data doesn't show x (x meaning men are more dangerous than bears). I said the data also doesn't show y (y meaning a bear would be more dangerous than a man in the bear vs man hypothetical).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:52 AM
1

So you admit you're strawmanning me in bad faith. Again, I'm arguing that we don't have the data to show for certain whether, particularly a black bear, would pose more of a risk than a random man the bear vs man hypothetical. In that particular context. OC was saying this data doesn't show x and I responded that it also doesn't show y. That is all. Nothing more.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:45 AM
1

Then stop strawmanning me and asking me to answer for claims I didn't make.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:38 AM
1

I made no statements of what is right or wrong. And obviously you cannot use statistics to claim that men are more dangerous, as they don't show that, either. Like the other dudes before, you seem intent to get upset about this and think emotions should dictate that I answer for claims I didn't make.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 07:07 AM
1

I mean, I'm not the one offended by the answer one way or the other. So, one that isn't based upon poor logic, logical fallacies, or an inaccurate/poor representation of data? Sometimes we cannot say for sure on things. That's also ok.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 02:03 AM
1

An argument of incredulity isn't a credible argument, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:03 AM
–

Top 10 smartest countries as measured by IQ. E.g. https://www.worlddata.info/iq-by-country.php https://www.thecaliforniacourier.com/average-iq-by-country-2025-update/
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:40 AM
–

Yet, USA can't crack the top 10 despite being the richest country. So relative to its* wealth, USA = dumb as fuck?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:35 AM
–

Generally*. Rarely in the top 10. Edit; changed sometimes to generally because this is a more accurate statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:31 AM
–

I mean perhaps some people are disproportionately rich in the USA because others are disproportionately dumb. In isolation, I don't know what conclusions you can realistically draw from your data.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:30 AM
–

I mean, this assumes to some degree that the USA isn't low IQ...
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:04 AM
1

she's legit just picking men that show cheating traits Based upon this logic, odds are, if she picks you...
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:02 AM
1

You are welcome to go see my response to him as to why I don't find it a compelling answer to the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:45 AM
1

That's a long comment to throw out a bunch of data that does not answer the question. With the glaring flaw of comparing injuries from bears to fatalities from humans when assessing the relative risk. At least include human on human injuries or only include fatalities from bears for the same time period you used for the homicides...but that would be zero or close to zero kills from black bears in national parks*, wouldn't it (2007-2023)? But another glaring flaw in this data is that it assessed …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:42 AM
1

No, I'm refusing to engage with a red herring that is logically irrelevant. That is a great way to just argue about shit that has nothing to do with the original argument. And you're trying to manipulate me into going off on a tangent. No thanks. I already granted it for the sake of argument and explained why it is irrelevant in my second comment by noting: It's both potentially possible for a random black bear to pose less of a threat to a woman than a random man when encountered alone in the w…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:35 PM
1

Yeah you won't answer because you know the answer. We both do Because it's entirely motherfucking irrelevant. As I noted in my first response to you. You're acting like I'm attacking men in general as being more dangerous than bears. I'm not. I'm not even saying I'd pick the bear. I'm just saying, particularly with black bears who very rarely hurt people, we would need more data to accurately answer the hypothetical question. Do you disagree with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:09 PM
1

No thanks, that doesn't increase my confidence in your reasoning abilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:03 PM
2

Not until you show understanding of basic logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:58 PM
1

Bro you're the one arguing on feels and showing no understanding of basic logic. It'd be like me trying to argue that the man is clearly more dangerous by screeching "YEAH WELL TRY THROWING A WOMAN IN A MALE MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON WHERE THE PRISONERS ARE ALL RELEASED AND WILL FACE NO CONSEQUENCES AND TELL ME WHO IS MORE DANGEROUS HUH?!" It's just so cringe bro. Ya'll make me lose respect for men by acting this dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:57 PM
1

Again, it's completely irrelevant to the argument I'm making, which is that to know whether it's riskier to choose the bear vs the man in the man vs bear hypothetical we would need data on exposure to a single man in an isolated area vs a single bear in an isolated area. What you're doing is building a strawman and attacking that. I never said it's always riskier to choose the man over the bear, or the bear over the man. I've in fact stated no conclusions about who is riskier at all. Please. Ya'…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:33 PM
2

That's not remotely equivalent, no, and a very illogical comparison. This is the sort of emotional reaction you frequently get from men when discussing this, though. Humans are constrained by the presence of other humans. Bears, on the other hand, would be frightened and probably upset to find themselves surrounded by other bears in a strange location. It's both potentially possible for a random black bear to pose less of a threat to a woman than a random man when encountered alone in the woods,…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 07:24 PM
5

Yes, but to accurately compare the relative danger in the hypothetical, we would need data on exposure to a single man in an isolated area vs a single bear in an isolated area. Human actions are constrained in the presence of other humans, so comparing the risk of from encountering a man when surrounded by other people is not equivalent to the risk of running into a man alone in an isolated area.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:17 PM
2

This is the sort of response to to the man vs bear question that made me lose respect for a lot of men. It's fine to be offended by women choosing the bear. But you're bringing down the net IQ of humanity to argue that this is a logical response when it's not even remotely equivalent to the man vs bear question, even if you want to argue that picking the man in the hypothetical is the logical choice. Don't conflate your feelings with facts or logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:47 PM
1

I think guys overestimate what a man's looks play in many hookups. I think it often has a lot to do with him happening to be in the right circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:15 AM
1

What do you mean by higher? I think they're different, often. Like how men often have different criteria for casual sex vs relationships. I don't think that, as it's often framed around here, a woman not wanting to have sex with a man she's dating as fast as she hooked up with another man means hookup guy was a chad and date guy is a beta she wants to use.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:08 AM
1

I mean some of my examples are applicable to this context. E.g., she could have gotten burnt by a man lying to her to get sex in the past several months so now she's much more gun shy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:48 AM
1

This is very black and white thinking, but I suppose I shouldn't be surprised given the sub I am on. Peoples feelings and boundaries shift, sometimes upon reflection of past experiences. She could have... Felt pressured to have sex in the past but became more firm with her boundaries as she got older and more sure of herself. Had a bad experience feeling used when she had sex quickly in the past so now feels much more comfortable waiting longer. Tried hooking up and found she actually really dis…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:41 AM
3

I said men don't need women. I also will say women don't need men. Both answers seem to upset people. But I think they're coldly but technically correct, particularly for relationships, which I perceived was what this question was answering. I also think both statements are technically correct more generally. That's not to say that if 50% of either side of population suddenly vanished, there wouldn't be catastrophic consequences. I think both instances would lead to additional male or female dea…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 11:16 PM
3

They don't. They desire access to many female bodies to some degree and many also desire to have one woman they can claim as their woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 10:28 PM
2

I mean seeing men hold themselves out as potential romantic partners at times, they evidently think there must be marketable benefit to being in a romantic relationship with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 08:27 PM
2

Can you then explain the appeal to me to being in a romantic relationship with a man? Why would a woman want to pair up romantically with a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 07:28 PM
5

Women's body's are theirs and not for the "needs" of men. False equivalence. You don't need sex to survive like you need food and water.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:32 PM
6

Accepting your premises requires accepting men will lie and deceive unless they can get what they want otherwise. People who lie and deceive if they don't get what they want are shit. Therefore, your premises require accepting that men are shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:27 PM
1

How am I advocating for that? I said if I accept OP's arguments, this is the conclusion I get.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 05:07 PM
–

Sounds like they're overrating themselves and don't want their looks match.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:58 PM
1

This post isn't about to make society better or increase marriages. As I noted above: Even accepting all of your arguments, this sounds like a good reason for men to remain single if this is how it feels to date women. But this doesn't provide a compelling reason for women to overlook the downsides of getting into a relationship with a man if the pros still fail to outweigh the cons.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:57 PM
–

In India most men wouldn't want her. Because they think she's too ugly? No wonder so many are struggling. She's definitely above average and much better looking than the dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 07:28 AM
6

Ah yes, because men are totally honest to women who don't do casual sex and thus necessarily don't have different sets of standards
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 05:27 AM
3

Why can't that be accomplished without engaging in the oppression Olympics?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:41 AM
9

Another stunning advertisement for the quality and upstanding character of the average man, and the benefits of dating and/or having sex with the average man, brought to you by the men of PPD! With all of these stunning reviews, how could you possibly even resist trusting the average man? Why on earth would you even consider picking the bear? On a serious note, I honestly don't understand why more of you single ladies don't join me in catland.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 04:30 AM
5

I'm asking if both groups do this, which reality wins out? Do we get rid of the "unworthy" men or the "unworthy" women?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 01:20 AM
8

Couldn't I make the same argument? Can't force men to change. Let them all die lonely and nature select in favor of the few better men out there. Which scenario is going to become reality?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 01:11 AM
9

To what end? To force women to change? What if they don't? I agree men need to decenter women same as women should decenter men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 01:06 AM
13

Even accepting all of your arguments, this sounds like a good reason for men to remain single if this is how it feels to date women. But this doesn't provide a compelling reason for women to overlook the downsides of getting into a relationship with a man if the pros still fail to outweigh the cons. Ultimately, if romantic relationships are no longer serving either men or women, best to move onto another model. Or, for individuals who feel they are not worth the effort, to move onto other pursui…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 12:56 AM
1

I mean I don't think I'm the one having trouble getting things, as I haven't been the one who was apparently oblivious to obvious trolling lmao but have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:55 PM
1

I mean I disagree because your logic doesn't work, but if you're willing to concede, have a good day!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:51 PM
–

Exactly! I also regularly watch porn but I'm icked out by a man who has ever watched porn. But as I don't judge them for it it's just a visceral ick, I see no issue with what I do or my expectations.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:47 PM
1

I mean, doesn't seem to be very nice to accuse someone of hypocrisy and then be unwilling to back it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:44 PM
1

Your logic isn't logicing, or perhaps I'm not understanding. If the internal icks are subject to questioning --> but you over come the alleged hypocrisy by admitting that reddit use is problematic-->then again, why don't I overcome the hypocrisy charge by acknowledging manosphere reasoning is problematic?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:40 PM
1

Then why were you arguing with me on the internal ick being sufficient to justify the double standard?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:35 PM
1

I mean your reasoning as to why wanting a partner who doesn't use reddit isn't hypocritical was based on admitting that using reddit is problematic. So I admit the manosphere reasoning is problematic. So what exactly is the problem?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:30 PM
1

Is it now? If using reddit while you think it is bad isn't hypocritical, why is using manosphere reasoning that I think is bad hypocritical?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 07:24 PM
–

I'm just using manosphere reasoning. If it's good for the goose it is good for the gander.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:59 PM
–

Icks are an unquestionable fortress, my friend, and can never be challenged.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:53 PM
–

You can judge redditors, I'm just saying that because my ick is unexplainable and not based on a judgment regarding people who use reddit, I'm not a hypocrite for continuing to use reddit, and not seeing any problem with it, while screening men who use reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:50 PM
–

I would say it's not hypocritical if you admit using reddit regularly isn't healthy or indicative of a normal person. I see no such admission is necessary, as my ick towards men who use reddit is unexplainable and reasonably based in biology. I make no judgment on their behavior, I'm just icked out by it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:45 PM
–

Of course not, as I'm icked out by men that engage in the same behavior I do. But as it's just a preference, and, not a judgment on them, I'm absolutely not a hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 06:20 PM
1

I’m genuinely glad that men on PPD are apparently so modern and progressive that the idea sounds absurd - enough to downvote you to hell. Speculative, but I suspect many PPD men who whine about how women don't want a more progressive relationship dynamic themselves don't want a more progressive relationship dynamic and would like to have a more traditional one. Reason being: As a woman that is not fond of male or female gender roles, I often find male and female opinions enforcing said gender ro…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 01:14 AM
3

I honestly have no idea how common it is. I don't think all women do it. Some will. But a shit ton of men will do similar things, so why should I give a shit even if many women will? Why are you projecting so hard lmao?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 01:01 AM
1

I have literally given no indication of how I feel about her behavior. I'm certainly not going to judge her any harsher than men who do similar things, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 12:58 AM
2

I mean you can judge her for it if you want. But it just illustrates an example of when a woman may decide to sleep with someone quickly when she isn't that attracted to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 12:54 AM
20

"Men don't like the options they have so they'll blame women for the choice they make."
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 10:19 PM
34

"Why is a man at fault for his own choices?"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 10:15 PM
4

It's not a reliable indicator. For example, one woman may have slept quickly with her first boyfriend because she felt she was supposed to, even though she wasn't that attracted to him. However, because she is more firm on her personal boundaries when dating when she meets her next (future) boyfriend, she doesn't sleep with him as quickly even though she is much more attracted to him. In contrast, a woman who rarely engages in casual sex may sleep with a mid man the night they meet because she h…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 08:32 PM
1

More like fetishized by some men and considered/criticized as prude by a number of men and women. Any "praise" given is often being weaponized to club other women over the head.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:24 PM
2

So you're arguing that men are incapable of controlling their urge to fuck women? They don't have to engage with female promiscuity. They choose to. So they should be slut shamed to not engage with promiscuous women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:10 AM
2

Application of this principle is a gross oversimplification of human behavior and a continued infantilization of men. Men have agency. Quit acting like useless babies.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:34 AM
2

they are literally the enforcers of sexual norms No, men just refuse to take accountability. I'm not interested in blaming women because men want to be babies incapable of controlling their actions. If women deserve to be shamed for being sluts, men do as well. Maybe they could have some agency for once.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:14 AM
2

And yet another goal post shift. You're the one arguing that said double standard is justifiable, whether you want to frame it as men being "praised," that promiscuity in men is evidence of a man being "good," or evidence that he's doing things "right" is a red herring. I never set out to argue anything about the prevalence of said double standard, only whether it is justifiable. If a promiscuous woman should be shamed because she is "used," more likely to cheat on you, and less likely to be hap…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 02:48 AM
2

So, first you move the goalpost from: But, this is somewhat to ignore to the reason why said double standard exists. People often see sex as some kind of reward that women give to men for having enough positive male attributes. Thus, it's "evidence" of being a "good man"; rather than being a sleezeball. To arguing that it's bad for society for women to be promiscuous... To now saying "wait, who is praising promiscuous men?" Um, the double standard we were talking about? The one that you previous…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 02:21 AM
2

For all she knows he could have simply changed his mind, which would completely break apart her rape argument. Does not change the facts of what happened. Unless you know for a fact that the guy you were with lied and didn't just change their mind, you can't just randomly assume it and go around claiming rape. Confessions of random guys on the internet doesn't count as evidence that a guy you were with specifically did that. Am I accusing anyone? No? Good. Just making sure men who have lied to g…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:58 AM
3

Literally nothing in your comment justifies praising men for being sluts while denigrating women for being sluts. It is "promiscuous = bad, and we are going to hold women responsible for all of the actual and/or perceived downsides of promiscuity because we never require men to have accountability." Women aren't out there spreading STDs on their own. Male sluts also increase the risk of infidelity. Men are the ones raping most rape victims. And yet you're arguing that this justifies the shitty t…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:48 AM
4

The man knows whether or not he lied. Plenty admit to lying to get sex. You're still clinging to if you cannot prove it did not happen. But the truth is, he either lied or he didn't, being able to prove it or not has no bearing on the facts of what happened.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:28 AM
3

You really think force is the only thing that can negate consent? If a man murders a gynecologist and then pretends to be the gynecologist that he murdered to touch and look at women--can he claim that none of them were violated because he got their consent and did not force them to do anything? Even entertaining this logic, can she prove it was a lie vs him changing his mind? Probably not. Doesn't change the truth of what happened. If I murder someone and I'm never caught, I'm still a murderer.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 01:15 AM
3

My comment doesn't ignore the purported reason for the double standard. I acknowledge that it's harder for men to be sluts, but that in and of itself is irrelevant. The reason I pointed out that the criticisms that apply to promiscuous women also apply to promiscuous men was to raise serious doubt that as to the basis of this double standard that promiscuity for a man shows he is "good" or "high value" compare to his female counterparts. While I'm not compatible with high sociosexuality folk, I …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 10:53 PM
5

This assumes there is a justifiable double standard so that rules that apply to women shouldn't apply to them. But the fact of the matter is - essentially all of the criticisms they lob at promiscuous women apply to them. Promiscuous men are more likely to cheat. Promiscuous men are "used" (and indeed, you can find a number of low N women who talk this way about them, they are just not as loud as men about it). It may be harder for some men to be promiscuous, but it's also harder for me as a wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 10:21 PM
2

Something I couldn't care less about. Again, if ever in that situation, just break up with the poor woman and move on.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:45 AM
2

Different people have different comfort levels. You partner can feel however they want to about it, and if they have made it clear to you in the past that this shit won't fly with the, expect it not to go well.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:40 AM
2

Realistically, the choice is between honoring the relationship you chose to enter or breaking up. In this instance, you knew what you were getting into. She already has told you she isn't going to open to threesomes. So suck it up, or break up. Let me ask you this; is how could I respectfully ask my monogamous husband for a boyfriend/fwb to fuck on the side although I clearly know he views this as cheating? The obvious answer is I can't. If someone views threesomes as cheating, it is no differen…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:30 AM
2

You can talk to her about it; but expect the relationship is likely to end. It's your choice as to what you prioritize.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 05:57 AM
1

I've been called both a low-key misandrist and a pick me on this forum. From my perspective, while I'm not afraid of disagreeing with men or women, I'm more likely to agree with women on this sub. This is because: 1) I feel more strongly about issues that affect me because, like most people, I'm somewhat selfish, and thus I'm more likely to feel like taking the time to disagree with posts that are anti-woman; and 2) a lot of times men on this sub are using male issues as a vehicle to shit on wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 01:29 AM
1

Fair. As I am a disciplined and pragmatic individual who values such traits, we are unlikely to see eye-to-eye on such matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:45 AM
2

If you enter into a relationship with someone who views threesomes as cheating/outside of the bounds of a monogamous relationship, you wanting to subsequently change the boundaries is essentially you coming up to her, no matter how you frame it, and saying "Yeah, by the way, you're no longer enough for me. I want to fuck another woman." I mean, do you really think that's ever going to be actually respectful to do to your partner? Note in my original comment - who was not from the commenter you j…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:44 AM
1

This is what you're not getting. For me and for a lot of men like me it doesn't matter if it's unrealistic. We crave it regardless. That's why I said rationality doesn't matter. The heart craves what it craves. I mean I get wanting to be the best at something. Perhaps instead what I'm trying to say is that if you go in with the expectation that it will happen, you're setting yourself up for disappointment. It's not pragmatic in any sense. Been there, done that, did not help. Here's the issue - I…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:39 AM
1

Rationality doesn't apply here. Certainly not. But while I enjoy competing, I don't go into anything I'm competing in craving to best that'll ever be because that is again...unrealistic. Maybe. Still worth trying. For me personally, if I ever feel like I genuinely can't, I'll give up on life and off self. Bro, respectfully, consider therapy. I don't think it's healthy to crave it to the level of obsession that you don't view anything else as worthwhile. Edit: added to sentence/fixed quote.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:31 AM
2

I agree that raising kids is a questionable use of time. But just because some women have some guy that stood out to them...doesn't mean he won't be replaced later, or that any average man is likely to ever be that guy to some woman who is now in a relationship with another man.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:25 AM
2

If you believe that women become progressively less valuable as a partner the more dicks she has had and you try to go around shoving your dick into women to become THAT GUY, by your own beliefs, you are harming them. become the best a woman has ever had or will ever have. This might be a nice fantasy, but that's exactly what it is. All of us are replaceable, most of us will never be the best another human being could possibly have. So getting hung up on a fantasy...is a questionable use of time…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:12 AM
1

Viscerally gross? Viewing and treating women as objects of conquest, not humans, and not caring if you're harming them?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 12:06 AM
1

This is what's truly ridiculous about this: As a low N count woman, I have no use sexually for a man who doesn't primarily value love I have to offer. So according to your analysis, I don't really have anything of value to offer men. Not all low N count women are like me, certainly, but you know what kind of women will definitely value men purely sexually? The promiscuous women so many men constantly shit on. So if what men want is to be valued sexually primarily, then stop being such dickheads …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 11:10 PM
2

Well, non-monogamous tendencies common particularly to men are a big--and sufficient-- reason that I'm very doubtful I will ever marry. Such tendencies include, for example, interest in threesomes. I've had my feelings of affection towards a man chilled for less offensive things than you have proposed. Due to male tendencies towards non monogamy, I'm doubtful that I am capable any longer of loving a man as more than a friend. However, should I change my mind enough to marry a man, he would be we…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 09:42 PM
2

Again, the vast majority of men not being criminals does not mean that the vast majority aren't manipulative assholes. Moreover, if you want to get hung up on the semantics of the word I used - "rare" - let me just repeat your own phrase and say these men are not hard to find or run into, contrary to your assertion they aren't easy to find.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 06:26 PM
3

Yes they're finding me but they aren't rare. And if they're not hard to run into for me while not dating, I don't know why you'd imagine they are hard to find while dating. Perhaps my experience isn't representative; but also perhaps yours isn't. Perhaps you're less able to tell shitty men (those shitty to women) than you think. Also crime statistics don't capture all of the crimes committed, nor are many, shitty, manipulative men criminals. So I'd say your argument has questionable support.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 06:08 PM
3

This is moving the goalposts. You said... They aren’t easy to find, women just select them over all their other options because what they find hot correlates strongly with poor behavior But from my experience, having not dated in 12 years and having never hooked up, these fuckers remain very easy to find while I'm just minding my own business and not selecting anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:45 PM
6

Do you think that men who are shitty to women are actually going to be shitty to you? E.g. the random ass neighbor I had who tried to corner and grope me in the mailroom prob wouldn't do the same to you. Do you think you have to be a criminal to be shitty?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:01 PM
3

They aren’t easy to find And you base that upon....?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:38 PM
–

No. I don't mind flowers, but I don't really care about them either. If someone gives me some, they're just a hassle to deal with. And said person would probably be offended if I just tossed them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 08:44 AM
3

Personally, this sort of thing would kill my love for him. It may not happen immediately, but I'd begin to resent and dislike him. And if he somehow had gotten to the point of marrying me, although there's a snowball's chance in hell that'd happen lol, this is something he would know, so it would be a sort of betrayal.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 08:36 AM
–

I'm not really sure what the point of these askwomen threads are. The men here by and large aren't here to listen to other perspectives. They're here to argue and take out their frustration on random women online who they view as interchangable.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 08:31 AM
10

But, as it goes, it just ended up being a subreddit with suicide fuel for myself Respectfully, if this sub is causing you to struggle with dark thoughts, I'd encourage you to take a break from it or look for less negative spaces.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:41 AM
1

finding behavior or qualities icky and the person itself as disgusting, Regardless if you want to find them disgusting or argue that you can find their behavior so disgusting that you won't date them, either way it doesn't really change anything about my argument. This is a distinction without a difference. A person engaging in behaviors they find gross and icky....is still a hypocrite. Behaviors vs person means jack shit. And that’s exactly why the height and behavior analogy was spot on — wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:31 AM
3

If a man holds the view that cats should be raised as meat, I'm going to find the thought of sex with him vile. It doesn't have to have anything to do with her views on sex being dependent on his views on sex. His views on anything can be enough to make the thought of sex with him disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:46 PM
1

No, because I'm not OP. But even OP noted: They resort to things like jacking off to your friends or sisters to fulfill their need for variety, or thinking about other women while you fuck And I was just pointing out another way that OC is likely getting his desire for variety met. Factually, he hasn't been sexually satisfied by one woman but by many.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:09 PM
1

Nice shadow edit. Imagine trying to gaslight me that I'm imagining high N men viewing their female N count matches as disgusting when you started this whole discussion out arguing it was merely an unidentifiable ick or feeling of disgust. So in other words, people can successfully evade allegations of hypocrisy by stating oh yeah I just, don't know why I feel this way! I'm just icked out by people who do the same shit as me. And in doing this, you have rendered the definition of hypocrisy entire…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 10:45 PM
8

If a man believes that a woman becomes progressively less valuable/more disgusting the more men she has sex with, yet he goes around trying to stick his dick into as many women as possible, what he's showing by his behavior is that he is perfectly fine harming women (according to his beliefs) for self-gratification and pleasure. That alone would make him a shitty partner for any woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 07:48 PM
1

Yes, and? It's just bullshit to justify rules for thee and not for me. You want to frame women having sex as men "using" their body rather than viewing it as an activity both are mutually engaging in. Even if it based upon trauma, she's getting gratification out of it if she wants to do it, just like the man. You don't get it. Woman have to do nothing to get sex. Nothing. And unless you get off on dominating a man, you are in the submissive position when having sex. So you are engaging in someth…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 07:45 PM
1

I mean, under this definition, you've essentially just automatically defined men out of being "used" for sex because they will almost never be at the physical mercy of women they're with. Do you not see how that's a fucked up double standard? Men certainly do often at least try to have sex to fill holes/securities. But you can conveniently wave that away by saying they aren't at the mercy of the women they sleep with. Very convenient.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 06:08 PM
1

Why can you say you're not letting people use your body but they are? I mean dick inside vagina feels good to a lot of women. So why are you framing it as letting their body be used by having sex? When you're adamant that you're not letting people use your body despite having sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:57 PM
1

I mean, I wasn't actually making a judgment about those women per se. Though if they mislead you to get access to your body yes they're pretty shitty. But in my earlier comment I was just asking if you'd create allowances for yourself that you wouldn't for women (if you would "let" awful women use your body the same way you've seen women "let" awful men inside of them).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:53 PM
1

Qualities cause certain behaviors. But of course, by using a vague word such as qualities, you can move the goal posts wherever you want to on this one. But I've yet to see a woman be disgusted by a confident man because he used to not be confident. I'm not projecting. I'm basing this off of what men say about high N women. You yourself called it an ick which is a feeling of disgust, no? So if the woman has an ick for people who have owned cats and refuses to date them but has owned cats herself…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:25 PM
1

Sexual behavior is not a quality. And someone's past sexual behavior is not necessarily reflective of their current qualities. So, I'm assuming these men would be totally fine with a high N woman whose qualities have changed, right? Does that mean women are “judging” men who lack those things by passing on them (especially if they lack those qualities themselves)? Obviously not, and it’s equally as silly here If a shy woman avoids shy men because she thinks shyness is disgusting. Yes, she is jud…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:10 PM
1

I can tell you my aversion for it. I have many female friends and the men that they let inside of them...hideous. And not only that, many of these men are outright asshole douchebags. But are you willing to let awful women use your body when you're horny? If so, what makes you better than the women you're criticizing? On top of that, based on the experiences of me and my friends, the number of women absolutely okay with you having sex with them with no protection after they just met you is very …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:01 PM
1

You’re really trying to force this narrative that the person not dating high N people believe they’re morally inferior or what the other person doing is wrong. It’s true for some people, but that’s explicitly not who I’m talking about. Not exactly. That's an exaggeration. But if if it's not rooted in a belief or judgment that the high N person's behavior is undesirable, what's causing the ick, then? You dodged that question the first time. So just to be clear, if a former high N man stops sleepi…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:51 PM
1

What you’re saying is no different from the classic ‘short women avoiding short guys is hypocritical’ claim lol Hypocrisy has a definition that I'm following and has to do with behavior inconsistent with one's beliefs. So no, this situation isn't even close to being analogous. If a coke snorting woman avoids dating a coke snorting man because she finds his behavior nasty, she is also a hypocrite. No, she can't make herself be attracted to a coke snorting man. But she sure as shit can change her …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:31 PM
–

Studies consistently show both men and women are averse to partners with high body counts. I also would not want to date a high body count man. Stop trying to frame this as just differences between sexes. It's not.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:19 PM
–

But icks do have explanations. Preferences are not above criticism. And if it originates from a judgment or belief that the man's own behavior is contrary to - eg., the high N man thinking high N makes someone gross and undesirable - that's pretty much the definition of hypocrisy my guy. It's a factual question that has a true or false answer, and being quiet about it may make the man less of an asshole, but it doesn't make him less of a hypocrite. A bi woman avoiding bi guys is likely a hypocri…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:09 PM
–

But why do they have the visceral ick? Most of the time, these men will start raging about high N women being used up whores that are for the streets if you catch them at the right moment. That is a moral judgment. It is not analogous to feeling drawn to certain features. Which makes the high N man also a used up whore for the streets, and thus a hypocrite. To try to get around this, they try to argue it's different because he has penis and high N count for penis-havers is harder. So in other wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:55 PM
2

You are once again deflecting with boundaries in a relationship when we are talking about preferences on what type of people to choose in the first place. Trying to earn that mental gymnastics medal? I mean given you deflected from my original criticism: But if you still look down on and shame women for doing what you either do or wish you could do - ie, sleeping with a lot of people - I'm still going to think you're a gross hypocrite. to preferences for a relationship, which indeed are separate…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:22 AM
1

Unless you're one of the unicorns that does not at the very least watch porn, you may have only been actively having sex with one woman, but your* sexual satisfaction has involved multiple women. Edit: this appears to be a controversial opinion with people either strongly disagreeing or agreeing. For the disagreers; how is what I've said factually incorrect? If someone needs, or is alternatively unwilling to go without some form of porn, strip clubs etc., isn't it true that they are not sexually…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:24 AM
–

Gemini's conclusion from copying and pasting your comment: The choice must fall on the parent whose continued life offers the highest probability of consistent, stable care for the child and continued, reliable societal contribution. The father's situation currently presents as the more stable and lower-risk option for the child's primary caregiver. His profession directly benefits the community's emotional health, his schedule is flexible, and his health issue is actively being treated. While t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 02:42 AM
2

Well you certainly know how to avoid the point. Or maybe you need me to spell it out for you more slowly. A preference for physical or other traits is not comparable to creating double standards to excuse yourself engaging in behaviors natural to both sexes and associated with moral judgment that you feel entitled to restrict your partner from. More analogous situations would be, for example: Am I a hypocrite if I find a man undesirable for having a misdemeanor on his record if I myself have sev…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 08:32 PM
5

Men and women want completely different things in a mate, qualities, attitudes and behaviors that they themselves to not posses. Despite you guys trying to cling to sexual dimorphism to deny the obvious hypocrisy in the double standards regarding sexual behavior, not physical or other traits, this is definitely not a male-only preference. I'm a woman who would not want to date a promiscuous man. And studies certainly indicate I'm not alone. But unlike a lot of men, I'm not a fucking hypocrite th…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 07:48 PM
5

You can do whatever you want to. But if you still look down on and shame women for doing what you either do or wish you could do - ie, sleeping with a lot of people - I'm still going to think you're a gross hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 07:20 PM
3

Did I ever say any love was unconditional like OC did?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 02:05 PM
11

Oh please. Yeah sure, the parents who beat the shit out of their kids "love" them unconditionally. A man who leaves his sick wife for a young trophy wife "loved" his wife unconditionally. What do ya'll smoke, anyway? I want some.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 06:39 AM
4

I think, particularly with high N count/promiscuous men wanting virgin or low N count women, this underestimates how much objectification of women and a desire to possess said woman is influencing these feelings. It's kind of like how a brand new shiny car gives you more bragging rights than one with 100,000 miles on it. These men often care about N count because they are viewing women not foremost as people, but as objects that they want to possess.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 02:03 AM
2

Delulu, a champion only in your own mind lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:56 AM
1

A couple of notes: First of all, you're moving the goal posts in your edit to goal that is easier to defend, whereas in your first comments you were clearly saying it was because of the OC's height. Second, if people recognize your name or don't recognize it at all, that may or may not skew the result. OC frequently makes similar comments - even past ones where he has talked about his height - but I've never seen one garner this much attention. Third, if you're wanting to truly come across as vu…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:49 AM
2

You truly live in a dream world. Bravo at the level of delusion you believe in while also believing in your non existence magnificence.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:43 AM
2

1) I don't brag about intuition; 2) I wasn't one of the women swooning. But keep making up imaginary scenarios in your head to gloat about
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:39 AM
2

Well will defer to you on the vain narcissist observation as this is something you clearly have experience in.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:33 AM
2

Nah I'm not defensive at all. I just find it funny and predictable how controlled by confirmation bias ya'll are. Again, women being drawn to tall men does not mean that this was the for sure cause of the positive comments. That's poor reasoning and the reason you're making these arguments is based off of emotion.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:23 AM
1

Bro I ain't the one making a feeling over facts argument lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:19 AM
-1

Height being an important factor in mate selection does not even imply that but for his height, he wouldn't have gotten all the comments that he did. Which is the argument you're making. *Maybe it resulted in more positive comments, maybe it didn't. I mean you noted that kindness was also at the top of the list, so how do you know which factor or factors actually led to the positive comments? You don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 11:26 PM
0

I mean if he wasn't tall or hadn't mentioned his height, ya'll would just pivot to the other two explanations to explain it away--like some of the other commenters already have. You guys consistently dismiss any evidence contrary to your worldviews in such ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 11:12 PM
-1

Ahh, checks almost complete PPD bingo card--so according to the comments underneath the OC, comments from women expressing that a man with feminine supportive qualities is desirable don't count because: 1) they're outliers; 2) they're probably lying; or 3) it's his height, man.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 10:51 PM
–

What he wants is irrelevant if she doesn't want him. Same the other way around.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 07:35 PM
1

A member of the tone police criticizing other people for down voting is pretty funny.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 03:05 AM
14

Well I'm not interested in committing to any man in part due to male tendency towards non monogamy (porn, desire for variety, etc.). So it's certainly possible for both to be true at the same time and even feed into each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 06:30 PM
1

Oh please. I'm very active. I've never in my adult life depended on a man for money or figuring shit out. You're not living in reality if you think that any of this means the average man couldn't physically over power me if he wanted. *Due to an accident of birth, mind you, and through no merit of his own. Men live life on easy mode when it comes to physical strength.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 05:32 PM
5

I mean, again, it's my honest subjective experience. As I do not want to be reliant, I hate being in this situation. It's like a horror movie I cannot escape from. I'm not pivoting talking about being valued for sex, it's one of the reasons I dislike being reliant on said group, as I don't perceive many of them as viewing me as fully human. How you feel about your situation does not change how I feel about mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 05:48 AM
11

If I were a man I'd probably feel the same as you. But as you haven't had the experience of being denigrated as inherently useless except for sex since you were a child by a substantial number of said group who can physically overpower you if they so desire, it seems you're unlikely to be able to understand or empathize with such an experience. It's not a matter of what makes me feel better. It's an honest reflection of how I feel trapped in such a situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 04:53 AM
10

Yes. Being dependent on other people - many of whom are hateful, manipulative assholes - and stuck in a weaker body is miserable.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 04:25 AM
6

Nah it's kind of a miserable existence tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 02:45 AM
8

I mean there are plenty of women who don't really like men on this sub, but I haven't seen them paint men in as bad of a light as I have seen many men here do. You're going to have to try harder lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 01:20 AM
19

So true tho. The people on this sub saying the most misandrist things and painting men in the worst light are routinely men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 01:12 AM
1

Regardless men that are able to be desirable, can usually still get these women. So like that old saying goes watch what women do not what they say. Nah, not necessarily. Also can't say I see promiscuous women having any trouble getting partners, despite many men beating their chests about it. Because If getting men that have low counts or none were so desired like that, then we would've have a loneliness epidemic. Because there are plenty of men that cant get access that have low counts. If it …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 10:11 PM
–

Yes there are cases with women not being ok with it, on average most women are fine with it. Many studies over a number of years consistently show that both men and women dislike high body counts for long-term partners. Women who dislike promiscuous men tend to just avoid them, and not be assholes to them online like men who dislike promiscuous women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:49 PM
–

I mean, all this comment does is reiterate how being able to sleep around is meaningful for a dude but not for women, which means that is entirely fair for me to view his promiscuity as less acceptable because it is something he attaches meaning to. But I assure you, plenty of promiscuous women do enjoy more casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:41 PM
–

otherhand generally have to use skill. I mean, for me, this argument means about as much as tits on a turtle because it's entirely irrelevant to why I am not interested in dating promiscuous men. Oh, they think they're hot stuff? I couldn't care less lmao. On the other hand, I could argue that, while it's fair for me to expect a man to restrain his impulses because it's clearly something he views as valuable - sex with men is so easy it would be truly meaningless for me to sleep around. So I can…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:20 PM
–

hard pass, but you could make the same argument with a promiscuous woman - the other guys were just for fun and she's providing emotional/domestic labor and committing to this guy because it's "for real."
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:12 PM
–

Yet, men pretend that their commitment is special after going around and sticking their dick into as many women as they could.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 07:57 PM
3

Maybe they have been spending too much time listening to manosphere rhetoric. No better libido killer tbh. Tends to make peeling off your own fingernails seem a preferable alterative to spending time around men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 06:31 AM
1

I don't know why you're assuming that all women are apparently holding the same opinion here. Some may complain, others are relieved.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:01 AM
7

A lot of preteen girls are preyed on by adult men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 10:31 PM
4

Given many bad experiences with men started when a woman was a preteen ... Good luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 09:59 PM
2

By locking him in the basement with the rest of my harem, of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 09:22 PM
1

Blah blah blah snore. Feel free to keep hating on someone you don't know for imagined crimes that you hallucinate based upon prejudice, but I won't responding to a clearly bad faith actor further.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:36 AM
1

I mean of course, in your little hate orgy ya'll have going on this sub, any woman who says anything that doesn't fuel your biases is automatically deemed as lying. Snore. Seriously, get another hobby.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:26 AM
0

Celibate for 12 years and have iced out misogynistic men from my life when necessary, but keep on hallucinating. And no, I don't treat people or advocate for treating people poorly based upon immutable characteristics. True, I will decline to fuck people based upon immutable characteristics. For example, I won't fuck other women. But indeed I will disdain people who choose to be bigoted asshats.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:21 AM
0

Nah, arguing that someone deserves to be treated poorly because of an immutable characteristic like sex is fucked up. But it is more than misogynistic men deserve.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 08:14 AM
2

If it's fulfilling with the compromises, offers more pros than cons, etc. It's a very personal and subjective call.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 07:32 AM
3

Either both sexes can have their preferences or neither sex can, and I pick the former option. I think everyone can have preferences, but no preferences are immune to criticism or questioning. That doesn't mean I think people should have to fuck people they aren't attracted to. That would be unconscionable even if I think their preferences are utter bullshit. It just means that preferences in dating are not in some untouchable, ivory tower.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 03:41 AM
7

Nope, I’m (maybe unfortunately🤷‍♀️ absolutely straight). I've seen this line of reasoning before and I don't understand it. Being a straight woman is being attracted to men. Bi men are men. Men who have experimented with men are men. Men who have been with a trans woman are men. Seems to me being attracted to a bi man is a very straight way to view bi men. Romantic relationships are hard enough without mixing in vastly different experiences or lifestyles. I mean, in some ways, bi men have more o…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:37 AM
1

Can't say I have any romantic wounds, but you're welcome to keep assuming things if that's your thing. As per usual, rather than addressing the actual arguments I made you got pissy about my tone and turned to ad hominems. Yawn.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:17 AM
3

Yes to all three. However, data suggests I'm in the minority for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 02:09 AM
4

Faking holding the same opinions, values, passions, or views on relationships, for example. Given many dudes propensity at the beginning to try and mold themselves into what he thinks the woman wants, being forthcoming about your own views and wants is unfortunately risky.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 01:49 AM
3

You compromise if you find the relationship worth it. If you don't, why would you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/25 01:30 AM
2

What's also funny is how you routinely have tried to make this conversation personal and insulting. You just keep reacting emotionally. All well, again, thanks for demonstrating why so many think the bar is in hell. If I were to believe everything you said about men, indeed the bar would be in the deepest, darkest parts of hell.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 11:18 PM
1

You disbelieve them because it isn’t true. But that doesn’t stop you from acting like you are those things? Make it make sense. You have literally zero fucking clue how I act. Choosing to avoid pairing up with men is done for my own happiness and has no bearing on how I view myself. Don’t blame men for doing what works. If women liked the truth, liked their true self we wouldn’t need to lie to your face. Ahh here we go. The manospherian "men aren't ever accountable for their own shitty actions, …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 11:08 PM
1

Why would a guy tell you the truth? You think you can handle it? lol you think guys tell you sweet nothings and blow smoke up your ass for no reason? I mean I already automatically disbelieve positive things a man tells me and assume he wants something. But, thanks for the affirmation that this is the correct course of action. “ You’re the most amazing blah blah blah” lol only a woman’s ego can let someone tell them so much nonsense and still believe it. I never wanted a man to tell me I was ama…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 11:00 PM
3

My view of love is the only thing worth pairing up with someone. If how he views me is so far removed from anything close to what I consider love, I don't care how he labels it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 10:44 PM
3

You think men are with women because of their personalities? You’re really funny. In fact most men say they want peace, you know what that means? Give him some sex and leave. This is not love. Not even close.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 10:35 PM
7

Honey bun, if a man would use a woman he despised as a fuckhole, I wouldn't want to be with him even if he thought I was the most interesting woman on earth. So again this rhetoric contributes to devaluation of male attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 10:00 PM
7

I don't know why you think this is a flex. This sort of thing is exactly what makes male attention undesirable. Yes, you view women as unpleasant fuck holes. And then shocked Pikachu when fewer women want to be with men?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 09:40 PM
2

While I think it's pathetic if a woman will only date men they view as "superior" to them, and agree that is is thus questionable whether they love said men, this remains entirely irrelevant to whether women are loved for who they are as many manospherians like to argue. Arguing that this is bullshit also does not imply that the women expect to be loved for who they are, only that the argument that they are in fact loved for who they are is utter bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 05:25 PM
2

Only some people will love me for who I am. A lot of men will try to figure out how to get past me or tolerate me to get to my body for sex, but conflating that with love is fucked up.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 04:22 PM
–

Nah I just disdain sexist men. Your faux intellectualism isn't impressive.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 04:07 AM
–

Whatever you want to tell yourself to rationalize dismissing someone's opinion based upon sex - a lot of opinions from random ass dudes online are taken seriously by other men even though said man has the game of a wilted turnip. But I mean, like I said, it's obviously a winning strategy given how well gen z men are doing with dating lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 02:59 AM
–

Yes, because they value male opinions more than female opinions. Just the same old chauvinism old as time. And they're clearly doing so well in the dating market with this strategy lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 04:59 PM
1

I mean if they were fucking casually, it's likely she is a woman with higher sociosexuality and he was a convenient body to fuck when she was horny. Prob didn't mean anything more than that. Unless you're saying that fucking casually means someone can't want something long term. Which, I'd argue is clearly contrary to human behavior. With this attitude, you'd turn down a girl to fuck casually when you're horny....right?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 04:41 PM
1

Seems hypocritical. Maybe people don't want to date those with vastly different personal values and life experiences I'm not promiscuous, and I wouldn't want to date promiscuous men. That's that opposite of hypocritical, and is not in contradiction with your second sentence, so I'm not sure what you're on about here. But looking for someone whose personal values you share is certainly not always the driving factor behind someone being averse to promiscuous behavior. No, some other person's opini…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 06:44 AM
9

Nah. As a woman averse to dating promiscuous men, I'm pretty sure your all's aversion to promiscuous women is due either singly or in combination to possessiveness, insecurity, jealousy and/or having low sociosexuality. It's incredibly disrespectful and fucked up to compare this preference to women or men that have been traumatized through rape. And by the way, why do I never see the MRAs calling out this bullshit? If they really care about male issues such as the treatment of male rape victims,…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 08:34 PM
2

I mean, the two women you've responded clearly are into it. Yet, even if I'm open to a man who liked me about this preference, the opinions of other men would remain an obstacle to him actually presenting more feminine, unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 06:28 PM
1

True, but OP mentions things such as everyone wearing eyeliner in the first hypothetical option.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 05:31 PM
0

Tbh I love men in makeup and fancy nails, but dislike wearing makeup. So, I'd like to have my cake and eat it too pls. But, given that wasn't a hypothetical option, my laziness would probably win out so I'd have to go with option two.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 05:25 PM
–

Most women would not date/marry someone that makes less than them, right? What are you basing that on? Specifically the most part. *Pointing to stats on breadwinners doesn't really tell you what people would do in different circumstances (e.g., if OP is right and men are wanting to shirk their gender role without taking on another, that could lead to there being less female breadwinners than there would be if men were more willing to take on more aspects of a female gender role as well).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 03:28 PM
9

Single moms live rent free in your all's heads.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 05:06 AM
1

Men are being oppressed in a male dominated sub reddit. Ya'll really know how to victim complex.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 09:43 PM
–

Nothing gives me the ick more than "alpha male" podcast bros.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 09:37 PM
2

They're lying about the fact that they become less aroused by a man when he earns less money than them. In other words, you said not to put words in your mouth, but she was correct. You're looking for women to reaffirm what you already believe or they're lying. What a man earns has literally fuck all to do with how aroused I feel by him. And I'm honestly sick of ya'll trying to fit women into boxes that you feel are true.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 03:01 AM
2

Oh, I misread your OC as telling me I was being to mean to him, which I didn't have patience for. Sorry for the unnecessarily hostile response.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 12:21 AM
1

Your responses were very sharp No shit. He'll survive, I promise. he doesn't have an answer to your question Again, no shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 10:34 PM
1

What if he puts hard hours into something he's passionate about but it's just not lucrative (e.g., teaching)? Why wouldn't that make him worthy of respect?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 08:11 PM
3

WILL NOT END. This is bullshit because they do. My cousin married a conservative man who recently divorced her, even though their relationship was supposed to be forever. In practice, relationships with these men end all the fucking time. Not to mention, some of these fuckers are the ones demanding sex by the third date or they're out, and may in fact decide after having sex with her that she isn't the one. Plus, if it's an objective fact, as you argue in your first comment, that women are degra…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 04:36 PM
3

How exactly does it impact her lifetime? Sex partner count is a hidden stat. You can choose to reveal it or not to reveal it. Because a lot of people want authenticity in relationships which holding secrets chills. Withholding information or lying to get your partner is deceiving them into a relationship with you. Not to mention, if you lie or withhold information, your partner could nonetheless find out the truth at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 03:42 PM
4

You say their entire strategy is to find one woman - yet in practice, conservatives date and fuck around. Conservative men leave, cheat on, or divorce their wives. You're just again saying "men won't hate the woman they are having sex with" which again does not remove the stain from her from his dick after the relationship ends which most do. So basically you're repeating the same reason which is a shit reason for a woman to have sex with a man if it degrades her.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 10:45 AM
7

I mean, this comment just argues that women are degraded by sex with men and pontificates as to why you hold this viewpoint. It doesn't give any real reasons why women should be want to have sex with men if sex with men degrades their value over time. The fact that a man may not verbally degrade the woman he's currently having sex with means absolutely nothing, given that most relationships don't last and she will now carry the stain from his dick after the relationship. So why should women want…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 08:17 AM
–

Wasn't mocking loneliness or pain with that comment. Take your self righteous indignation elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 07:27 AM
–

And you're spamming this self-righteous indignation at numerous comments...why?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 07:19 AM
3

Then she doesn't have to tell you her true N count.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 06:34 AM
2

nope, that's a high n count.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 05:29 AM
6

Even if true, so...? Doesn't change the analysis at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 04:39 AM
4

If you are withholding information from a woman that would change whether or not she wants to be with you, that is not maintaining "a little bit of mystery." It's deceiving someone into being in a relationship with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 04:01 AM
6

Then she needs to know if he is commitment worthy. And for me, a high N count man isn't. Edit: and if you have to withhold material information from a woman to get what you want from her...there you go, that is what is wrong with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 01:19 AM
5

Gross. But, he also doesn't have to know what his partner's actual body count is either lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 12:59 AM
3

If he can find one that wants him, he can go for it. As a low N count woman, I wouldn't want him because of his high N count and will continue to view him as a gross hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 12:43 AM
1

Because you're trying to do a gotcha where you insinuate that I care about a man treating women like people, but not other men. Even if your observation on "women" is correct, I am not responsible for nor bound by trends of the collective.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:11 PM
1

Yes. Your observation on what women do, whether correct or incorrect, is irrelevant still.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 10:06 PM
1

What's weird is you making some nebulous statement about "women" when you were asking my specific viewpoints. Have I been appointed a spokesperson for the hivemind and no one told me?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:52 PM
2

Because other women are people, not sex toys. Viewing women as people is a requirement for any type of relationship I have with men. Romantic or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:48 PM
3

The main thing a man offers me in a relationship, that I cannot get from other relationship types, is sexual exclusivity. So, why shouldn't that be important?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:34 PM
1

Cringe rationalization to be a dirt bag.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:28 PM
2

If he falls in love with another woman and doesn't act on it - and by not acting on it, I mean that includes things such as not confessing his love to her - I'd prefer that over him having sex with someone he doesn't care about. Even viewing other women as sex toys even if he didn't act on it would make me not want to be with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 09:27 PM
1

Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 08:39 PM
3

Again with the plausible deniability and playing dumb. And now trying to darvo on top of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 12:56 PM
7

Let me demonstrate with a hypothetical. Let's say I live in a country with a two party system, where one party promises to castrate all men below 5"9. And let's say I'm asking a 5"7 man for help with something. He says no thank you. My response is "well, you don't have to help me. But I don't have to vote the way you want me to either." It's clear what I mean by that statement. But as I did not state it directly, I have plausible deniability and can play dumb. As you are now doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 12:51 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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