TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SpermJackalope Archive

View 7 posts and 626 comments by SpermJackalope on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

I love that he assumed I'm blonde. Where did that even come from?
/r/MensRights07/06/14 10:05 PM
2

Lol. Sorry, my bangs are black, and I'm listening to Sebastian Ingrosso.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 09:00 PM
3

No one is trying to dox you in any way. You were going through our post histories and mentioning things you found about us in a bad attempt at intimidation. We already posted the screenshots of the mod message thread. Don't try to lie.
/r/MensRights07/06/14 07:30 PM
4

I have no fucking idea why you just wrote an essay about whether drunk sex is automatically rape, because truedatness says his wife didn't want sex She tried to renege on the deal... I collected later when she was drunk. She no longer tries to make such bargains. [Aka, she avoids ever repeating the situation.] That sounds like she got drunk and agreed to anal to you? Cause it sure fucking doesn't to me.
/r/MensRights30/04/14 10:45 PM
9

It's not libel if it's based on what you say. [-] trudatness 9 Points 23:47:56, 3 March My wife tried to bargain with the ass... I accepted the deal as a reasonable quid pro quo... She tried to renege on the deal... I collected later when she was drunk. She no longer tries to make such bargains. It is in no way libel to call that rape, because rape is literally having sex with someone without their consent. And you yourself claimed that you had anal sex with your wife when she did not consent to…
/r/MensRights29/04/14 05:23 AM
8

Just to clarify, that one third of Kenyans now has access to a bitcoin wallet service doesn't mean that all of those people use bitcoins. We'll see how usage growth pans out after Kipochi is fully integrated
/r/MensRights05/03/14 07:05 PM
2

Do you know why medical drug trials have to be double-blind?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 10:01 PM
6

Most TRP field reports I read include such a level of detail that one of two things must be happening: The author is taking notes on his interaction as he is on a date/at a bar/whatever else. The fact that this odd behavior is never mentioned by those around them makes this doubtful, or brings to question what else the authors are leaving out. The author is making up a significant portion of the field report (dialogue, body language, etc) based on what feels accurate to them at the time of writi…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:59 PM
8

Plz explain how you know men and women are attracted to different things, when a significant portion of us aren't even straight. Which is to say, there exist a non-trivial number of men and women attracted to exactly the same things.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:51 PM
3

"Significant" there means "statistically significant". The statistically significant difference between male and female estimates of benevolent sexism is less than half a point on the study's 10-point scale. (MFEMALE = 3.12, SDFEMALE = .89, MMALE = 3.59, SDMALE = .97, F(1, 186) = 11.91, p < .001). I'd forgotten about that part, but I think it's obvious that a difference of only .47, less than the standard deviation for both genders, isn't really important. If you have a computer or graphing calc…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:44 PM
1

It just so happens that more often than not (I estimate 67%) when I meet a new women my predictions come true. According to your biased perspective. This is the same reason drug trials have to be double blind. Please understand it's hard for me to be civil with someone who admits to finding reality hard to believe. It's rather pathetic. I never once implied/said that men need to be in charge. Does your flair not say "Red Pill is Truth"?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:34 PM
2

Sorry, I didn't realize you had mountains of evidence on your side.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:28 PM
8

Look like insecure masculinity in action to me! (Get it? I'm also assuming a causal factor that's nowhere indicated by just this correlation!)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:27 PM
2

No they don't. The point of a draft is that anyone drafted could go to any role the military needs filled.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 09:25 PM
1

Well I wouldn't defend Heidegger, either, mostly cause it's largely too complicated for me to explain properly. It must be junk too!!!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 08:00 PM
1

Yes. I don't want to give a philosophy lesson, so the conclusion is it's junk. -_- Read a book about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:53 PM
3

No they don't. Maybe they say all your actions are manipulative?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:52 PM
3

He criticized women for being self-serving, when he advises other men to be nothing but. The hypocrisy is astounding.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:48 PM
2

I think you misunderstood me - I was simply trying to point out that the target profiles involved no interaction with other people, only survey answers about beliefs. people (women in particular) deemed this profile MORE sexist No, PEOPLE deemed it more sexist. The thesis gives no information about participant gender, other than that both men and women misinterpreted benevolent sexism. So saying "women in particular" is highly misleading, as all the thesis shows is "women as well". And yes, your…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 07:40 PM
3

Sorry, was my intent not clear? I'll rephrase: It seems rather hypocritical for a man who prides himself on being unemotional and independent, and disparages others for caring about what people think, to state that he avoids advice from an entire gender because they might tell him he's manipulative.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:26 PM
0

My point was simply to establish that the ethics of care is a legitimate philosophical view that has real value. I really don't feel like giving a lesson in meta-ethics right now, nor why you're supposed to consider the views of philosophers carefully and charitably.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:20 PM
2

They were still up for quite a while after I'd reported them, but they have been removed.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:11 PM
10

Plz demonstrate.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:06 PM
12

I disagree with just about everything in it, and haven't found any of it to be well-supported with any decent evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:04 PM
22

I particularly love how they extol how only men are capable of true love and honor one day, and the next advocate things like lying to women and preventing "oneitis". They claim they're superior to women for virtues they don't even display.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 06:02 PM
3

Deltas, mostly. Sometimes lambdas. Got on great with an epsilon, once. /a Basically folks who are self confident and happy, and have no need to act either obsequious or dominating toward the people around them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 05:57 PM
8

Not to mention all the BPers in the last thread who just said they're married.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 05:53 PM
6

Absolutr hogwash. To name just a few men off the top of my head who received lots of praise from feminist women and organizations (some of whom are macho, some of whom are what TRP would likely call "beta"): Tony Porter, Ryan Gosling, Patrick Stewart, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Jon Stewart, George R.R. Martin, many liberal/US Democrat politicians, George Tiller was a feminist hero until he was murdered, Kurt Cobain (REALLY)....
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 05:50 PM
6

The only contradiction here is when blue pillers show up all high and mighty pretending that these dual mating strategies don't exist. Sorry, you have absolutely no proof they do exist. Only your "interpretations" of what you've personally seen. Damn, how dare people want evidence for shit, amiright?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 05:34 PM
2

according to what makes sense. I just told you why it makes sense. Just because you wants to pretend to be an emotionless robot doesn't mean that is a viable ethical system. You're like someone arguing that eating lots of sugar and fat is good for you because it tastes good and people do it anyway. No, I'm arguing that if your diet plan is "ignore how good sugar and fat taste", it's going to be very ineffective.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 03:33 PM
2

You're pretty much proving my point that women are more emotionally immature/unstable than men on average. Woman gets frustrated with your lack of logic and objectivity in a debate: "See, it proves my point!!!!" Redpillschool flipped his shit and started going on a tear insulting me yesterday. Does that prove that men are lower EI than women? Not all women. Just the women I interact with regularly. And from these women I can make some generalizations (that end up being pretty accurate) to women …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 01:38 PM
6

TBP is us. God, STOP IT. There is no way to argue with you. You've decided actual collected data doesn't matter. You've decided you know all women better than we know ourselves, so your anecdotes matter and women's don't. If you want to wallow in your ridiculous claims that you've decided are unfalsifiable (and don't seem to be making you very happy anyway), fine, but why are you in a DEBATE SUB with that mentality?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 03:16 AM
3

Except you have a ton of people saying that's not true, and data backing us up.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:48 AM
3

It wasn't chivalrous or equal treatment participants looked at. It was benevolently sexist answers on a survey. Things such as mild agreement with the idea that women have some innate characteristic of purity that men don't have. I can only say that I personally, as a feminist, would have a very hard time believing someone who had even mild agreement with that kind of sentiment was actually egalitarian. I'd be like "Yeah, try harder". may suggest a lot more about the conditioning women receive; …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:46 AM
4

You don't see how this is a self-fulfilling prophecy? You expect men to be emotionally mature and treat them as such. You expect women not to be emotionally mature and treat them as such. You know people's behavior is highly situational, right? Treating someone as immature is more likely to make them behave thusly. And treating someone with respect is more likely to make them behave respectably. You're contaminating your own experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:41 AM
3

I'm arguing the more we strive to be perfect logic-creatures, the better we are. There's your unstated premise. I disagree. My point was simply to establish that the ethics of care is a legitimate philosophical view that has real value. Don't write it off as shit just because you have different values.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/14 02:30 AM
5

That most people would kill 2 or more other people's children to save their own doesn't change the fact that it's morally wrong. I think that's a stretch to claim about the majority. Morality is based on feelings, and tribalism. Like, moral disgust gives you an emotional reaction similar to the one you get to spoiled food. Moral sentiment developed to improve our survival in groups. We aren't perfect logic-creatures in any way, and a moral system that requires people to entirely disregard their …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 09:15 PM
6

If this is so very much work, why are you pursuing these specific women?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 08:54 PM
4

Sort of like some feminist philosopher came up with the "ethics of care" when women didn't do well on the moral tests of she noticed how unrealistic and impractical any ethical system that doesn't take into account our increased duties to those we know in the 60s. FTFY. The ethics of care is an important concept that first addressed rather fundamental questions that had been largely ignored until then. Why do we experience an obligation to feed our families before sad orphan children? The fact t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 08:45 PM
3

RPS is already blatantly insulting me. Comments aren't even removed. Such a tight ship with unbiased rules they run here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:47 PM
3

I messaged the mods telling alphabetmod to stop badly misinterpreting and bringing up things I say as examples when I'm banned, like I'm some kind of Blue Pill Boogeyman. He unbanned me so I could explain my remarks (which I didn't do, because he didn't quote anything, just made really vague accusations against me), and I guess I'm playing nice so he hasn't rebanned me.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:37 PM
3

The terpers are in fine logical form today. Redpillschool just tried to insult me for spending too much time on the Internet. (Totally unlike himself, who spends very little time in the Internet!)
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:27 PM
2

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:19 PM
4

TIL I was banned for being too much of a delicate flower.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:14 PM
3

Of course! Just like all his relationship problems with various women are logically due to a fault with all women, and not at all with him (or any other terper)!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 07:12 PM
5

How does this compare to men you interact with?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 06:44 PM
11

Boys roughhouse and engage in more risk-taking than girls, so they get hurt more often than girls do. Many girls are not allowed to roughhouse and engage in risky play with brothers and male friends. And they are expected to control their reaction and show no upset and being disallowed from play for no reason. For whatever reason, people hate to see girls and women cry, so they are more prone to having things sugar-coated for them, as we as having blame and responsibility lifted off of their sho…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 06:39 PM
6

That's a ridiculous assumption to make with no basis. Especially since younger women, as said in the source Vornash provided, are more likely to want to pay.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 03:00 PM
13

Calm down? Because I was so upset? What is wrong with you? And no, my thoughts aren't conflicting. There's nothing that conflicts. I claimed evolution wasn't intelligent and had no goal. That doesn't conflict with "consciousness as an experiential feeling exists and it doesn't matter if that's an illusion or not".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/14 12:36 AM
9

That's totally irrelevant? Although if you're defining consciousness as an ability to think about our own minds and analyze our behavior, then it's certainly real. I don't think it's in any way a productive question, though. That's like saying "Do you think happiness/love/anger/anyfuckingthing else is real or an illusion of our brains?" Any answer has no real application to how one lives. Unless you're looking for an excuse for moral nihilism, or want to wallow in existential angst. It doesn't m…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 11:26 PM
3

merely studying human cognitive failures And how are you studying them? Did you read the Wiki page on logical fallacies? Did you read a book? Those don't make you an expert.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 08:04 PM
4

You see this? You make a claim and then refuse to provide evidence. Of course no one will keep arguing with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 07:35 PM
3

So how exactly have you studied human cognitive failures? On what basis do you assume you understand human nature better than a large swath of the population?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 07:31 PM
3

If you see a prevalence of low EI-women, that has to be in comparison to men with higher EI.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 07:28 PM
5

Cause men with high EI are just prevalent in all of those places? Like in TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 06:29 PM
4

If the scientific studies are right, then why is it that most of the women I interact with/most mentioned on reddit/most mentioned on blogs posts don't show higher levels of EI? Confirmation bias? Like attracts like? People with low EI having a harder time recognizing it in others? Biased sources of information?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:59 PM
4

Have you ever considered it might be that y'all are impossible to argue with because of your lack of reason and failure to consider other views?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:51 PM
2

So untried in the Arabian peninsula have high rates of poverty, too. The wealth is concentrated in a small percentage of the population.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:49 PM
2

I would surmise that all human behavior has some root evolutionary basis that drives it. This is your major problem, right here. Women did not bind their feet in China because of evolution. Evolution would say that very thin people are unattractive, yet we currently find slimness an extremely desire able trait. Attending Comic Con and playing Pokemon are not evolutionary drives. All of our behavior does not have an evolutionary basis. We have some evolutionary drives - such as, say, for communit…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:32 PM
8

44% is hardly a minority No, it's literally a minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:15 PM
4

44% is a substantial number A minority. I thought TRP was concerned with what the majority of women are like.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:13 PM
3

Conservapedia. Really. And that was one strategy to oppose the ERA, but let's remember that took place in the 70s, when hatred of the draft as a whole was extremely high due to the Vietnam War. And also that it was a strategy to oppose an amendment to make legal equality between genders constitutional law. Soooooooooooo benevolent. Other strategies to assert that the ERA would give gay folks rights and that it would guarantee universal abortion rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 05:10 PM
8

Are you really comparing hernias to sexual maturity? No, I'm using hernias (which are largely a result of men's sexual differentiation from women, though) to demonstrate that everything about us does NOT have a purpose. Evolution is not intelligent. It does not have a master plan. It's not about being perfectly designed. Evolutionary success is just being good enough to be better than other individuals and, at large scale, populations at reproducing.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/14 04:56 PM
3

Vornash actually posted a study showing the majority of women either like or don't mind paying on dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 09:20 PM
1

In some backwards ass tribal communities, for instance, it's ok to kill a baby as long as it's only been alive for a few weeks/months. Should that matter to those who want to kill their children in America No. Infanticide is wrong. Plain and simple. The fact that, in some place, at some point in time, it was ok, doesn't mean it is now. To be fair, the tribal societies that allowed this were those with no means of birth control or abortion who lived in scare environments. (It was a practice among…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:31 PM
8

Why is male maturity delayed relative to females in adolescence? What is the biological purpose for this difference, what is nature doing? You realize nature isn't likely "doing" anything, right? Men get larger than women, it takes them longer to grow, their bodies could quite possibly need more time to store fat and protein and prepare before growth spurts, so maybe everything's delayed for that reason. Evolution doesn't have master plan. Or maybe the master plan is that men don't need mental m…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:23 PM
8

I don't see how not drafting women is benevolent sexism, when the most common arguments I here supporting that are arguments about how women are inherently inferior soldiers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 02:27 PM
9

Maybe expand your strategies for meeting people from only hitting on strangers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 02:20 PM
11

It's less than half of women. The majority of women will pay on dates. I thought TRP cared about majorities and generalities?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 02:19 PM
6

What you said: It's illogical that high BS would be favorably assessed as that widely diverts from the theoretical feminist ideal. So I pointed out that it wasn't just feminist women who participated in the study. (Because you decided to make a topic about a study that used both genders as participants as if it was gendered.)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 05:01 AM
8

You're also assuming, for some reason, that all the study participants are feminist women. A good number were probably conservative-leaning traditional types, like RPW, for whom these answers would clearly make sense. Lol why don't you read them?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:51 AM
7

It's not the low benevolent sexism that they reacted poorly to, it was high levels of benevolent sexism that they clearly preferred. They did not "prefer" this. They failed to recognize this as sexism, because they misinterpreted it. And again, we have no idea who prefered what because she doesn't give a breakdown of the results by participant demographics. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if there wasn't a sharp difference in answers among participants by age, education level, and/or politi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:49 AM
9

No. The paper is not about what women want. It is literally about how BOTH MEN AND WOMEN misinterpret benevolent sexism. AGAIN, the low BS target did not "express egalitarian values". He expressed a little bit of benevolent sexism. In the second study he also called himself egalitarian.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:41 AM
3

I always go dutch wth people I'm meeting or don't know well. My boyfriend does pay for the majority of our dates. Because he makes like 4x what I do. (He has a nice salaried job. I make $10 an hour when I'm not taking classes full time.)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:37 AM
5

women in general (most being feminists anyway) The majority of women do not identify as feminists. I wish. to react negatively to a female/male egalitarian social exchange and more positively to chivalry or benevolent sexism. Low benevolent sexism is not NO benevolent sexism. And it makes sense for feminists and/or women to react negatively to ANY sexism. Read the survey answers the study used to profile the low BS target, they were still a bit sexist. And again, the study did not show people di…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:31 AM
10

Also, NOT JUST WOMEN HAVE THIS PERCEPTION. People includes men, too. So your title and discussion of the study are misleading - if there are any differences in men and women's evaluations of benevolent sexism is not discussed.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:26 AM
6

You have no evidence to support that. The answer could also be that all the raging feminists in the population hated any amount of benevolent sexism. Or that some people are always going to assume some sexism. Or that people hate picking the extremes on the evaluation scale. Fuck, the answer could be Jesus. You don't get to claim studies support your belief simply because they don't explain everything. You sound like Christian creationists who try to insert God into every gap in scientific knowl…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 04:15 AM
7

So your study agrees that less than half of women don't want to pay for dates. Cool.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 03:59 AM
4

Low benevolent sexism isn't no benevolent sexism. True feminists and egalitarians would dislike that (you can see the answers the Low BS condition used in the appendix, I still wouldn't want to be buds with the Low BS person). Just for an opposing theory to the one you put up. And a partial explanation is certainly a reason not to assume the true/real/ultimate cause is that women only want the appearance of equality, while really recieving special privileges. Which has absolutely no backing.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 03:58 AM
9

But you have nothing to compare them to. You can't just assume whatever you read first is automatically true. That's ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 03:46 AM
6

Hon, have you ever read a history, anthropology, or biology book by an expert in those fields to check Norman's claims?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/14 03:22 AM
3

She just doesn't sound very trustworthy, based on what I've read you say about her. You can love someone without trusting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/14 10:34 PM
2

This is the same mother who started you on drugs at 12 and let your father and uncle abuse you, right? You really think she's a responsible person who makes good decisions? That she's someone to get advice and help from?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/14 10:14 PM
2

I'll just assume this "evidence" doesn't exist.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 02:18 PM
2

She had fucking severe postpartum depression with psychosis. She did not, in fact, have agency because her mental illness was so severe it impaired her judgment - and got more severe with every pregnancy she had. Hence why she ended up getting an insanity defense in her trial. She sincerely believed she was evil and going to destroy her family through her sinful corruption. But yeah, she really needs to take responsibility for her lack of clear judgment.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 01:20 PM
2

On so clearly I should look through multiple days of your shitty submissions?
/r/MensRights03/12/13 03:41 AM
2

So helpful.
/r/MensRights03/12/13 03:24 AM
-3

I'll take it that you have no real rebuttal and so must devolve to ad hominem attacks. I expect nothing better of a group so illogical they think others having social boundaries is oppression.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:48 PM
-3

Oh, sorry, I didn't think my chubby uncles would work as references since you've never heard of them. You do realize that more men than women in the US are overweight, right? And that they're usually judged less harshly than overweight women? But I thought you guys loved mocking feminists for defending fat people? Or is it fat women deserve to be shamed, but fat men all deserve hawt girlfriends?
/r/MensRights02/12/13 06:14 PM
-5

How many women do you know that find fat men or, gasp, short men attractive? Imagine dating as a short, average looking guy..... not even remotely comparable to a being an obese girl. TIL Seth Rogan and Jack Black's female fan bases don't actually exist and Kevin Smith isn't actually married.
/r/MensRights02/12/13 04:43 PM
-2

You seem to be speaking on behalf of all women in claiming it's usually not justified and denying the lived experience of women who would tell you otherwise. You're also going against what is turning into a growing body of scientific data which suggests otherwise. This data would be . . . ???? And against common sense and basic decency. It's common sense and basic decency to assume women are hyperbolic liars who accuse men of things for no reason? Asshole, jerk, creepy, and desperate are not slu…
/r/MensRights02/12/13 04:23 PM
1

Children are not adults. I didn't disagree with it, that is simply also not the demographic that typically undergoes FMG.
/r/MensRights16/11/13 02:24 AM
1

My comment that FMG usually isn't performed on infants is factually wrong? Do explain.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:54 PM
1

Umm, that's not what I've said at all. I have only said that FMG isn't usually performed on infants, so banned "infant genital mutilation" isn't helpful. It's also not performed on adults, so that's missing the point. It's performed on children, which is my entire point.
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:44 PM
1

Why are you replying to me and not the dude who suggested banning INFANT genital mutilation?
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:19 PM
1

Why are you replying to me and not the dude who suggested banning INFANT genital mutilation?
/r/MensRights15/11/13 04:04 PM
2

Because FGM isn't usually done to infant girls, so that would do nothing for Dawkins' campaign?
/r/MensRights14/11/13 06:47 PM
7

No, the part where you try to track down someone's IRL identity for talking about their rape on the Internet. Fucking creep.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 02:43 PM
6

That's really fucking creepy.
/r/MensRights05/11/13 12:35 PM
5

They don't conflict. 2 clearly overrides 1. There is no conflict. If you had a contract for consent to sex, as long as that contract is upheld (ie, both partners continue to consent), everything is fine. Once the contract is broken (one partner withdraws consent), then the contract is broken. I have no idea why you think this is a conflict and insist upon dwelling on it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/13 01:13 AM
3

Oh, so where does RPS fall in this "bad faith" scale of yours?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/13 01:05 AM
6

So, you're saying we do understand TRP, you just think we aren't nice enough about it? After all, that seems to be what "the difference" being combativeness and judgement implies.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 11:20 PM
3

So, as long as I do it in a polite way, is it okay for me to claim TRPers are broken sociopaths?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 10:55 PM
3

If SpermJackalope identifies with a group of highly promiscuous women, and takes it as a measure of pride that her partner count is what... double digits perhaps, then that's entirely her choice. It's not a matter of me "identifying with" a group. It's a fact that if you're talking about women who have had sex with several people, you are talking about me as a member of that group. I have no idea where "pride" comes into it. If she doesn't want to be evaluated on that basis as a potential romant…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 10:53 PM
4

So then you can't ever have sex with someone against their immediate will, so why do you even talk about "consent contracts"? Also, I was primarily addressing this misunderstanding of contract law: If consent followed contract law, then having sex against the immediate will of somebody would be considered sex with consent under a consent contract, thus negating any rape having taken place (rape being defined as sex without consent). There is no version of contract law analogous to that. (There i…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 06:24 PM
8

If consent followed contract law, then having sex against the immediate will of somebody would be considered sex with consent under a consent contract, thus negating any rape having taken place (rape being defined as sex without consent). This is a blatant misunderstanding of contract law. If consent followed contract law, then having sex against the immediate will of somebody would still be considered illegal because you aren't allowed to enforce contracts with violence. For example, when you m…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 03:50 PM
2

Hmmmm . . . . . fits right in with ODTs, physical punishment of your wife, and the whole "a woman's job is to please her man" thing . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 11:51 AM
5

No. I'm literally responding to someone claiming I am inferior and "used" and have no ability to bond romantically anymore. This is unsupported by any research, only the commentor's misogyny. I've talked to the mods about this multiple times. It is unfair to expect politeness from me/Blue Pillers, when the subjects we are arguing about are already offensive and hostile to us. Please tell me how you respond to utterly untrue (that's important - I believe we've proved that claim wrong in this sub …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 11:48 AM
14

The problem is we have read it. And we just get y'all constantly saying we understood it wrong, without ever explaining how you understand it that's apparently right.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 11:32 AM
2

Unless 99% of your conversations are attempts to make up broad, unfounded generalizations that cause people to call bullshit on you, no, it wouldn't apply.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 01:56 AM
12

"Context"
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 01:39 AM
5

Oh, sorry, I didn't realize you don't try to base your opinions in reality. Have fun with that!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 01:38 AM
3

Mongamy didn't become popular until the advent of agriculture - long after humanity had become the "dominant species" on the planet with nonmonogamous ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 01:19 AM
3

My boyfriend is thrilled to have your approval for dating me.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/13 01:14 AM
28

No, it's not. Burden of proof is on someone advancing a position. Not on the people being like "I doubt it". But again, as you so commonly do, you simply did not address my point. You're claiming it's unfair for us to criticize you when we can't easily explain your position, when we can't do that because you refuse to coherently explain your position!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 10:10 PM
33

I think this post is unnecessarily combative and inflammatory. It also puts an undue burden on Blue Pillers, as different Red Pillers do not agree among themselves on the focus/goal/position of TRP. It's impossible for us to know your cohesive positions when y'all don't have one. Instead we argue the specific topics brought up here, that are advocated by some number of TRPers as TRP positions. In fact, you, RPS, have never once put forth a coherent idea of what you believe TRP is. Dissent among …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 09:25 PM
2

Someone who may have indiscriminately disrupted their innate bonding mechanism for one person is quite litterally "used goods," when considering a partner long-term relationship, and caveat emptor definitely applies. What the fuck are you talking about? Sorry you're insecure, however I doubt many women want that in a partner anyway, so maybe their sleeping around isn't a problem for the men they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 09:06 PM
3

I mean, I'm not into blonde or skinny people, doesn't mean I need to use something offensive to label them. That's just being douchey. Well, it sounds like you dislike attention-seeking behavior. So you could say you dislike attention-seekers.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 08:48 PM
5

No, I'm arguing that there are other terms you would use for that behavior unless you wanted to insult or demean the people engaging in it. If you know someone with unmarried parents, you don't just call them a "bastard" offhanded. It's insulting, and unless you wanted to insult that person, you'd use a different term.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 07:46 PM
6

Yeah, cite that. I can pull ideas out of my ass, too, doesn't make them accurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 07:44 PM
2

By unrooting men, most men have "forgotten" how the mating game works and feminism has killed their social skills or esteem. TRP tries to fill that void and teach men how to deal with women. Don't confuse rants about feminism either. Citation plz. You're basically enforcing that men need to pipe down, bottle up all their emotions, and act like they're emotionless robots in order to be real men. No, I'm saying men should express their emotions without misogynist nonsense. Don't be surprised when …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 07:43 PM
4

They're both considered slurs. In the dictionary. Their use in media is regulated by the FCC with age-recommendations. They are almost universally recognized to be offensive, at least in the US. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slut Started off meaning "dirty and slovenly", then became applied to promiscuous women. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bastard -arde started as a derogatory suffix.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:53 PM
2

Women are mostly a byproduct. Then why is the majority of your content about women? Op also pointed out exceptions to his generalization. But he still claimed the generalization is true. Without any evidence except his own biased observations. do I still need to point out that OP was clearly generalizing after a frustrating moment he likely went through recently involving women? A bloobloobloo, poor baby needs his misogyny to work through feelings. Fuck that. Be an adult, deal with frustrating s…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:45 PM
5

I know both men and women who have been promiscuous and then cheated in supposedly committed relationships. I know both men and women who have been promiscuous and then entered monogamous relationships and been perfectly happy and never had a desire to cheat. I know both men and women who are still virgins as college seniors. I know both men and women who only like having sex in committed relationships. I think "slut" is a term that essentially means "they have sex in a way I personally don't li…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:30 PM
4

Luckily, I don't know any idiots who write off the speech capabilities of half the planet with unfounded "generalizations". What makes the things men say so much more important, worthwhile, and impactful?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:23 PM
3

A manslut has demonstrated he will invest considerable time and resources in pursuing sex with strangers. Obviously, he cannot be expected to be faithful in marriage with this history of so valuing one-night stands. Thus, mansluts should be avoided for commitment.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:15 PM
9

Then how does this jive with men being the "gatekeepers of commitment"? Cause I don't know any women who fall in love that easily, and if to have to pretend to be less invested than you actually are to keep a woman's interest, that would seem to make them the commitment gatekeeper. (I also sincerely doubt you can really love someone only knowing them 2 weeks, but whatever. Maybe you get attached like a puppy. Or maybe your emotions don't go deeper than that.)
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:09 PM
5

Being a "bastard" isn't good or bad, it simply is. The word is clearly insulting. I have no idea how you can deny that. Things like "bastard" and "slut" become insults because they are associated with things presumed to be undesirable No, I think those words were created specifically to demean people born out of wedlock and women deemed promiscuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:04 PM
3

Well, your interpretation of the goal of TRP would seem to disagree with RPS and your sidebar, then. The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men. Unless your sub is largely gay, that goal revolves around women. You tried to narrow the discussion to just impactful, but OP is about impatful, worthwhile, or important speech. Reals not feels. I'm super-impressed you apparently toilet-trained yourself and have vivid recollections of when y…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 04:01 PM
6

"Love" is by definition the deepest feeling of human connection and commitment. Sex is a physical activity. Saying someone can't be in love after two weeks - barring rare circumstances - is a statement of fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:50 PM
5

Hahaha, that's cool. high fives I am stumped as to how not wanting your partner to profess "love" after just a few dates is seen as female-specific.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:46 PM
2

Soooooooo, what happened to alphabet-mod? Also, why has this been up for 15 hours? It adds nothing to the conversation, and is basically an attempt to . . . be gross? Seriously, all it does is call underage girls hot. This is not discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:42 PM
12

Do we as men not set our own threshold for what we will and will not sleep with? No one's saying you don't. Hell, if you want to sleep only with red-headed Asian women exactly 5'6" tall with two older siblings who went to trade school and have exactly 1 previous sexual partner, to for it! You can set whatever standards you like. The problem is claiming that people you aren't personally interested in are somehow inferior, worthless, or damaged, and then mocking them. That's pointless, juvenile be…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:36 PM
8

For the same reason guys would dump me if I did the exact same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:31 PM
5

I think he's saying the women are helpful and say productive things in meetings and such. They can communicate effectively. That requires talking.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:27 PM
8

But no woman ever mattered. No female teacher played a part in teaching you to read and add, your mom didn't potty train you or teach you to dress yourself, the fucking goal of TRP doesn't actually revolve around women . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 03:25 PM
2

And a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 02:01 PM
12

That's like claiming that "bastard" isn't bad. It's a loaded word, used primarily to insult someone. So you're insulting folks, and then trying to backtrack and claim "well, no, the word just means what they are!" It's like using "nigger" constantly, and then claiming all you're doing is accurately describing black folks.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 01:55 PM
7

That's ridiculously subjective, though, and pretty meaningless. Why not just call someone an attention seeker if that's the actual problem?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 01:10 PM
4

Ah, I'm sure this prejudice has nothing to do with your belief that you've never heard a woman say anything important. Nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 12:54 PM
10

No, I just like sex. I certainly wasn't writing field reports about my escapades for approval and bro-fives, unlike a certain subreddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 12:41 PM
8

I can totally prove all of it but I don't feel like Googling right now, so just take my word for it that I've done my research. Oh, and also my personal experience. And if you try to say my personal experience can't be generalized to the whole world, you lose because that's solipsism.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 12:26 PM
10

I disagree, I think slut-shaming is simply an unfair lock society places upon a woman's naturally promiscuous sexuality. Women want strange, there's nothing to be done about it. Men have to accept this, and realize that instead of resenting sluts, they should introspect about why they are pumpable and dumpable. Men should strive to be less dumpable. Then a slut will want to commit to them, and they will have a happy relationship, except for sometimes the woman will need to cheat, which men shoul…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 11:47 AM
11

A metaphor is a type of analogy, and it's what you're still using.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 11:10 AM
8

Please explain why a slut is "beat up". Also how a slut can "break" a guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 11:04 AM
6

I went through a period where I just really enjoyed sex with new people. Am I a slut or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/13 11:03 AM
2

It would probably be a good idea to write a mod-flaired reply to comments you delete with with the reason for deletion. Helps keep things transparent.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 11:26 PM
8

Maybe that's because the interesting women avoid you? If joking about dating high schoolers is a normal thing for you, I couldn't imagine why. If only we could all match the depth and gravitas of your arguments about The Matrix :'(
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 11:12 PM
8

Wait, so you like conversation to be a competition, except for when it's with a woman? But non-competitive female conversation is still inferior to your masculine bro-debate talk? Yeah, thanks, I'm new to existence, so the whole "talking football during football season" trend escaped me. My point that men also engage in utterly pointless conversation still stands.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 10:52 PM
5

Uhhh, most people don't frame all conversation as a competition, in my experience. And your generalization of female conversation bears no resemblance to anything in my life after high school. And it's not as if men don't have uses bullshit they talk about. I just listened to my boyfriend and his buds going over an endless amount of football stats and I wanted to pull my hair out from the inanity of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 10:14 PM
5

And yet these same men are outraged by women venting about things like catcalling.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 10:08 PM
10

Men are rapist pigs! Men are creepy! It's cool, it's not serious.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/13 08:20 PM
2

BOOOOOOOO weak, bot
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 11:12 PM
3

Fixed the broken link, it should work now. I believe my point still stands that there isn't a proven causal link between testosterone levels and aggression.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 09:41 PM
3

No problem. I have this issue when I write sometimes where I just skip words cause I try to write at the same speed I think. :P
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 06:20 PM
3

Pretty much exactly what I think, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 06:01 PM
3

I think you left the end off your second sentence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 06:00 PM
2

See my response to sigmalays - some studies have found the aggressive behavior of people with high testosterone is due to te cultural association of testosterone and aggression. This is far more complicated than just "testosterone makes men naturally aggressive and violent".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 04:21 PM
5

I'd prefer a double-blind study, like this. People's expectations of being more aggressive when receiving testosterone can cause a placebo affect. Testosterone's actual impact in behavior seems much more complex. Also this. This study argues that men aren't even more aggressive than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 04:19 PM
4

I believe OP's point is "I really wanna feel good!" is a pretty emotional desire, not that sex is always ooey-gooey lovey feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 03:00 PM
3

But women are socially discouraged from expressing anger. Happiness, insecurity, sadness, ect are all acceptable states. But a woman being angry, especially being aggressive with that anger, is frowned upon. So obviously women won't express that or talk about it as much. Whereas anger is one of the few emotions men are allowed to express. I'm just saying I don't think it makes sense to go assuming what's "natural" when we live in such a strongly gendered society.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 05:00 AM
6

My personal experience indicates otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 04:56 AM
4

I agree with your assessment, but disagree with the cause, I think the tendencies towards different expressions have a large social component. Not all, but likely a substantial amount. That's one of those things I don't think we can prove one way or the other, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 03:45 AM
5

I'm saying that neither gender is more emotional. That just seems the logical conclusion of Spartacus' line of thought. Please explain why you think feminine women make decisions base on emotion instead of long-term thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 03:41 AM
5

I read books, watch movies, and listen to music created by men. The emotions in these things are all comprehensible and relatable to me. They are relating an emotional experience I can identify with.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 02:42 AM
4

Yes. I've been reporting them all.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 02:23 AM
11

I disagree women are more emotional than men. I do think it would be fair to say women verbally express their emotions more, and are more open about them generally. However, the high rates of violence men engage in would seem to indicate ther are much more prone to uncontrolled outbursts of anger, jealousy, and insecurity - probably due to the culture requirement that men repress their emotions and thereby never allowing them to be healthfully worked through.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 01:12 AM
8

I disagree with this. No one has ever died from virginity.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 12:36 AM
5

Meanwhile multiple Red Pillers have been personally insulting me, with their comments left up for days.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/13 12:24 AM
2

Playing 20 questions about someone's pen is not "the art of conversation". If anything that's annoying. A much better conversation opener - that I'd expect a Casanova like Roosh to realize - would be to make an appreciative or joking comment about how old-fashioned writing itself seems to be these days. Clearly, from her stationary, nice handwriting, and solid pen, writing is something she cares about, so that opens up an actual conversation, rather than a bunch of ridiculous questions. This "ga…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 09:30 PM
2

Oh, I agree those things are more important, I was just trying to point out that even the thing about sex apparently has conflicting evidence. We are participating in discussion with people who act as if sex is the be-all and end-all.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 08:32 PM
2

Ah. The study that article's about contradicts in part an earlier study. http://jfi.sagepub.com/content/31/2/135 However, it looks like the study you're citing broke chores down into traditionally masculine and feminine ones, while the study I'd read before just looks at who does domestic labor, period. It's possible they could both be right, and the couples having the most sex are the ones where men and women spend an equal amount of time on chores, but stick mostly to chores coded for their ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 07:21 PM
4

reasonable Sounds like a legal standard based on feelings, to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 05:29 PM
7

Read the OP next time The date rape issue can be solved overnight by restoring shotgun marriage—but with the shotgun at the woman’s back. The “victim” should be told to get into the kitchen and fi x supper for her new lord and master. Is doin something at gunpoint not compulsory now?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 05:28 PM
2

Actually couples with a more equal division of labor have more sex from what I've read.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 05:17 PM
12

If you attempt to personally enforce a contract by force, you're breaking the law. This is why banks cannot track down and injure debtors who owe them money. You for some reason think men have a right to violently force women to do things. To enforce "consequences" for women's actions. If a woman did enter a sex-on-demand marriage and then refused sex, the proper response is to dissolve the marriage, not rape her. She broke the contract, so the contract is over.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 05:15 PM
4

Yes, handshakes, really. Battery is "unlawful physical contact". Assault is just threatening someone. An unconsensual handshake could fit both of those.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 05:11 PM
7

Wait, literally the writings in the OP are about bringing back that contract. Why the fuck are you even here defending them if you don't agree with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 04:58 PM
9

Yes. Unforeseen circumstances occur. A woman may go into a marriage totally meaning to be down for sex 24/7. But if she gets the flu, or breaks her leg, or whatever, she may not want to have sex for a while.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 04:51 PM
6

You realize the difference between assault and a hug is also how someone "feels", right? Or between theft and borrowing something from a friend. Law has several areas that turn on how people "feel". Like the entire concept of mens rea. I think the entire "I COULD FUCK ONE PERSON AND IT'S LEGAL, BUT IF I FUCK ANOTHER PERSON IT'S RAPE" tangent is frankly ridiculous. If I flash my boyfriend my ass when I'm wearing a skirt, it's flirting. If I flash a random stranger, it's sexual harassment. Because…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 04:21 PM
1

Shweeeeeet. I feel kinda awkward explaining your thoughts a motivations in a thread where you're here :P
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 03:42 PM
7

People can want to make each other happy without wanting to sign away their bodies to the other's use indefinitely.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 12:23 PM
2

Please define grand larceny and 2nd degree sexual assault here, as different jurisdictions define crimes differently.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 12:22 PM
6

Are there no women who engage in acts of self-sacrifice? If male love is so "sacrificial", why do most women in dual-income households do more work than their husbands around the home? You'd think husbands would be jumping at the chance to at least do their fair share, instead of letting it fall on their wife. Have you personally ever fought an animal or jumped on a grenade or something similar?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 11:05 AM
5

It's never an "equivalent" violation because literally every legal system in the world acknowledges crimes against the person as worse than property crimes, and treats them thusly. You can go on a worldwide campaign to try and convince people that their possessions are the same as their body. Or you can recognize that fact and stop pretending theft and rape are in any way the same or should be handled similarly.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 11:02 AM
10

No, I think the question is still "Is it ever right to use someone else's body for your own sexual pleasure against their will?" The answer is "No", btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 10:58 AM
8

Except most commenters in the linked thread aren't talking about self defense.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 10:53 AM
1

You, you just aren't actually reading any of that, are you? This guy is saying he literally asks for consent for everything he does with another person. He basically gathers an exhaustive list of folks' boundaries so he doesn't get near them. His idea of being imperfect about consent isn't "Well I fucked her when she didn't seem into it, but she didn't say no", his idea of being imperfect about consent is closer to "I didn't ask before I put my hand under their shirt while we made out!"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 10:49 AM
8

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 04:37 AM
3

Okay, go. Start.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 03:44 AM
15

Heartiste agrees, he even has a shitty acronym for it: Occasional displays of testosterone (ODTs) are more effective, require less effort, and are more fun than “talking it out” when the relationship is rocky. Curse profligately, punch a wall, slam a door, grab a wrist, break a lamp, menacingly wield a heavy object, and disappear for days at a time — then sit back as she swoons and resubmits to your authority. Just to demonstrate it isn't something fringe or "just him".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 03:41 AM
2

Way to fail statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 02:34 AM
2

Yes, exactly. It's also known as "positive consent". That guy clearly doesn't understand the concept. The entire reason people switched to advocating enthusiastic consent is because "No Means No" campaigns in the 90s resulted in somepeople all "Well she was flinching and said it was late and she wanted to sleep, but she never said Noooooooo". (Which is bullshit, for the vey reason that yes, you don't get to assume consent.)
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 02:30 AM
9

I think we need to draw distinctions among shades of rape-- a guy who grooms a woman and premeditates an act of rape, I believe shouldn't be given the same punishment as a guy who thought he was having consensual sex and is gutted later to find that in spite of not ever hearing a "no", that the girl he'd had sex with is saying she was violated. First, degrees of rape and sexual assault are a good concept that many districts already use, and hopefully becomes a universal standard. Second, the sec…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/13 01:13 AM
9

I'd imagine for the same reason accupuncture and penis-enlargement pills are still around. Many people will believe bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 11:46 PM
11

Solipsism?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 11:15 PM
15

Except a husband is not a government. A government is a unique entity and can legally/morally do all sorts of things individuals can't. Most people also consider imprisoning criminals moral. This does not translate to it being moral for one adult to imprison another adult who, say, stole their car. The entire analogy breaks down if you reconize that the morality of government and individual actions are not measured identically.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 11:03 PM
12

Except that scenario basically never happens, and the idea of it is used to dismiss and attack rape victims regularly. The majority of rapists are repeat offenders. By pretending that this extremely unlikely scenario is common, the author is harming people and promoting a falsehood.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 10:56 PM
4

Somehow you turned "Nothing in the whole thing was worded nuetrally" into that. The whole thing was about sexual assault. If you'd left the post up we could be discussing whether that's what the author meant there. Because the writing is frankly misleading and self-contradictory.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 08:07 PM
7

You know that the last time you brought up the Vagina Monologues I already stated that the one monologue dealing with child rape is roundly denounced and frequently not performed. What else do you want? amoral sexually unselective degenerates Why not just say "pedophiles"? In the realm of hypermasculinity his declarations are much more likely to get him an instantaneous ass whooping. Uhh . . . wut? Since when?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:51 PM
6

It was blatantly misleading and took quotes out of context. Is she supposed to copy-paste every post and blog article in its entirety? She quoted what she thought was relevant, the appropriate reaction would have been for others to point out context they thought was relevant that she missed. Not to mention the entire post violated sidebar rule #4. Nothing in the whole thing was worded neutrally. "Please, ladies, talk about sexual assault nuetrally." As the definition of marriage stands today (no…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:26 PM
9

We can quibble over whether or not this "encourages" rape, but results speak for themselves. Women like an assertive man. Please explain what "results" you're referring to.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:22 PM
6

No, it's all Salonas' fault. I'm just saying her reasons for shooting him had nothing to do with SCUM.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:22 PM
2

Hey, /u/ResearchToBeDone, could you address this misunderstanding of your blog post and you basic demeanor (which I just guess to be not casanova-like from your self-descriptions in your blog)?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:19 PM
3

Except what's linked proves that's not true. Enthusiastic consent isn't a turnoff. You can get enthusiastic consent and have lots of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:12 PM
5

AM I MASCULINE OR AM I FEMININE? DO I FLIP BETWEEN THE TWO SUDDENLY? DOES THIS MAKE ME ANDROGYNOUS? I MUST KNOW, WHAT IF I'VE BEEN DOING MY GENDER WRONG MY WHOLE LIFE?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 06:01 PM
7

Except it's not a debate over abstractions when your sub also gives out advice like "Be dominant towards women. Asking what a woman wants will turn her off. Just bend her over a couch and fuck her!"
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 05:58 PM
5

applebloom has posted in TRP that he believes 7-12 years old is the ideal time for a girl to get married.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 05:50 PM
4

Hon, if she was trying to act out the SCUM Manifesto, she wouldn't have started with Andy Warhol. The murder attempt was predicated by personal disagreement and Warhol's refusal to return a script she had asked him to look over.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 05:50 PM
7

First, The SCUM Manifesto was dark satire, and Valerie Solanis was literally crazy. She was not a leader of the feminist movement. RPS and ZionController are/were mods, the only "leaders" TRP sub has. That "State of the Sub" post is a bunch of backtracking crap. First he says they believe in bodily autonomy, but then he goes on about how if a draft exist, clearly marital rape doesn't/shouldn't. And why the fuck is a self-proclaimed atheist (which RPS is) talking about the biblical view of rape a…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 02:22 PM
4

So, uhhhhhh, on my left hand my ring finger is noticeably longer than my index finger. On my right hand the index finger's a bit longer than the ring finger. Where do I fit?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 02:12 PM
8

She fucking quoted the parts she said were rape apology. You can argue interpretations, but it was a well-constructed argument. ZionController was not a "radical". He was a mod. RPS is the head mod. The vast majority of the downvotes came from SRD brigades.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 02:03 PM
2

Sociology is a science. That's its academic designation. You don't get to just decide it's something else.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/13 01:15 AM
1

That's the point. The majority of our preferences are irrational.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 04:23 PM
2

I laugh every time I read it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 03:21 PM
3

Where did you find these stats on 150% of women?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 02:22 PM
3

Well, TRP isn't full of women talking about how they shouldn't listen to men's objections, sooooooooooo I think she just phrased it I the relevant way.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 02:20 PM
1

Being illogical doesn't mean it's bad. People get nice cars because they illogically like nice cars. Same way people's favorite bands aren't logical. Idk what the guy who mentioned women being illogical was referring to, and he hasn't responded to me either.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 02:12 PM
5

I, for one, have never heard of spinster jokes. Has a single women ever been told she'll end up alone with her cats? I think not! Nor prude jokes, what are those?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 12:23 PM
15

Dressing in skimpy cloths is not an invitation to be raped. Jesus, it's not a complicated point. They explain it on signs.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 12:19 PM
6

No, see, patriarchy don't real because women can gender police too!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 12:12 PM
4

Yeah, that's super-fucking rare, most con-noncon is what safewords are for. Jesus fuck, are you pretending you sit down and do BDSM contracts with your hookups now?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 05:10 AM
2

Yep, basically.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 05:08 AM
5

The fuck is metaconsent? The fuck are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 04:55 AM
3

Cars are money pits. Financially, you should always be buying the least car and the most land you can for your money. Even if you do get one of the rare cars that maintains or gains value as you own it, actually using a car requires driving it around. On the road. Where it statistically will get damaged eventually, and then you have to spend hundreds more dollars repairing it, not to mention the high maintenance costs . . . Logically, nice cars don't make sense to own.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 04:46 AM
8

Give. Fucking. Evidence. And stop pretending you know our thoughts and desires better than we do.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 04:39 AM
3

You realize you're begging the question now, right? Men's value is in usefulness to women because men don't have intrinsic value and women do. You have to prove that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 04:37 AM
11

http://www.reddit.com/r/askTRP I rest my case. Questions like "How do I answer this text?", "How do I handle my beta baggage?", and LITERALLY "Should I do simple things?" Doesn't exactly speak to confidence in social abilities or knowledge that there is actually no way to "win" social interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 03:59 AM
3

I just told you: THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE MARRY PEOPLE THEIR OWN AGE. If THE MAJORITY of people marry folks their own age, so OBVIOUSLY the majority of men are NOT marrying younger women! That is the pattern they aren't following! http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/sep/12/age-difference-dr-luisa-dillner
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 03:40 AM
4

Well you do have an obsession with following strict rules to be "alpha".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 03:34 AM
5

No. How do you "suggest" consent without "expressing" it? This is the same reason Locke's social contract theory doesn't hold up. You can't imply consent. Either you and and another entity both know you're communicating consent and that happens, or you don't and no consent is communicated.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 03:33 AM
3

No, you aren't. Look at the context. Men want younger women who won't have a life that "competes" with theirs. Women want an older man with a more established life she can essentially join. Mikey's interpretation relies on utterly ignoring everything around that line.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 02:06 AM
4

Are you trying to claim "confidence" as a Red Pill trait? Dude is confident in many things, he's just awkward in social interaction. He's a research scientist, what do you expect?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 01:50 AM
3

There's no such thing as implied consent. Either there's given consent, or there isn't. Consent can be non-verbal, but that's still a clear communication of consent. If nonverbal communication isn't clear, you have words.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 01:49 AM
1

Hon, you aren't telepathic, don't pretend you know what's going on inside other people's heads.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 01:42 AM
3

Your source agrees with me, basically men like Red Pillers are insecure. The majority of men don't follow those patterns, though. Generalization means "Most X's are Y". I'm being generous, because his statement was actually a universal - "X's are Y". He has done nothing to show either of those statements are true, and so I shouldn't need actual evidence to disprove them. He has to prove them. But myself and the entirety of TBP thinks these statements are full of shit, so that's a lot of people t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 01:40 AM
4

I am a woman, so I can say that his generalizations of women are wrong. And you're very much twisting what he wrote to make it more palatable. He's claiming that men like younger women so the women will basically be their sidekick, and that women like older men because they like being sidekicks. This is all demonstrably false. For example: the majority of people marry within their age cohort, not much older or younger.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 12:28 AM
6

Blue Pillers are being serious here. Red Pillers actually are that nutty.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/13 12:12 AM
4

One more question, you say a guy doesn't want to compete with his SO, what does that mean? A lot of the reason why guys like younger girls is because of this. In relationships, women tend to want a man that has his own life in which she can be a part of. Also, good men tend to want to be busy building their life, empire, career, and just general everything. So men often want a women that will help him go through life and advance, and not require him to make her the center of his life (neither ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 11:50 PM
2

Indiana atm.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 10:38 PM
1

And women who have lots of sex have psychological issues because......?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 09:41 PM
3

Equal marriages are happy. Couples who share housework have more sex. The more education and economic independence a woman has, the less likely her marriage is to end in divorce. It doesn't sound like most women want to be submissive, nor does it work well for most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 08:53 PM
3

Funny, my SO is happier with me making decisions, too! Except he's a man and I'm a woman . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 08:38 PM
5

Wait, is your last paragraph assuming that the desire for a life purpose is exclusive to men?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 08:25 PM
2

But that's just Michael Fassbender being sexy. Like, yeah, sexy people are sexy. I thought he was saying something about how Magneto is hot as a character. That's like saying dudes who recognize Michelle Pfieffer is super hot in Scarface must think Elvira is an attractive character.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 08:20 PM
1

Condoms, hon. They work. There's also this thing called "STI testing", that reasonable people get regularly, so even a women who's had 200 partners can know with 100% certainty that she has no diseases.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 07:29 PM
5

What are these illogical decisions? Did you ever try talking to a female friend about them?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:55 PM
10

Sounds healthy. Clearly that's a good path.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:49 PM
7

Are you joking? Who the fuck is into Magneto? Gambit and Angel are widely recognized as the hot/sexy male X-Men
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:47 PM
2

Lol, yeah, cause an immature Shia Labouf is a woman's fantasy. Right.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:43 PM
12

Women WANT men to lead the relationship. No, we don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:41 PM
8

In relationships, women tend to want a man that has his own life in which she can be a part of. No we fucking don't. We want our own lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:29 PM
3

Whoa. That's, like, the only thing cooler than rocket science!!!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:15 PM
6

Do you even know that ovulation is occurring for only about 3 days a month? That's a hella-short amount of time - only about 10% of her fertile life span. These preferences also only exist in statistically signficant intensity in women who had early-onset puberty. So, yeah, you build your sexual habits about women who had early onset puberty who are also ovulating. I'm sure that's a huge pool. You'll meet great success.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 12:03 PM
6

NAMALT
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 11:49 AM
9

Why are you in a sub with so much content you disagree with?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 11:24 AM
4

Well, sorry you disagree with basic psychology then, because you're simply wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/13 11:19 AM
3

Well, duh. And if you constantly have terrible sex with a man, the same fucking thing will happen. Do you think this is news? Or weird? Or specific to women?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 04:16 PM
3

There are even women who would not have sex with you a second time, if you were lousy in bed. Far less put up with a lifetime of bad sex. What if I told you that first-time sex is usually bad for women. That is, most women don't orgasm their first time having sex with a new partner. Normal people do this thing called "talking", though, and the sex gets better as they communicate more.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 12:21 PM
6

Someone call the burn unit!!!!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 12:10 PM
7

See; TRP's insistence that women are tricking them with those black lines around their eyes!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 12:08 PM
8

Oh, is that why TRP has regular hate jerks about promiscuous women, because you aren't judging them?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 12:03 PM
1

OMG, you think people winning at gambling means it isn't gambling! Excuse me while I laugh my ass off.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 03:49 AM
1

Stock traders aren't economists, further, stocks are just a random walk that follow the general health of the economy, so no, I don't care all too much about stocks or stock traders. You're very much missing the point. Traders follow all sorts of economic indicators (although usually they care more about reports on specific companies so they know what to buy or sell), because they're trying to keep up with the general feel of the market. Which is also what the CCI tried to measure. Traders are a…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 03:07 AM
1

Lol, the CCI is more important to finance and business than actual economics study. It's a sidenote at best in a class - "BTW, this is a thing, whoop." And no, the CCI doesn't cause change in the stock market no matter how many times you repeat it. Actual consumer expectations cause changes in the stock market, which are also recorded in the CCI.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 02:20 AM
1

Stock market returns are a leading indicator: the stock market usually begins to decline before the economy as a whole declines and usually begins to improve before the general economy begins to recover from a slump. Dude, seriously, read the things you cite. Holy shit. The CCI is one of 10 things the Consumer Board uses in their leading economic index - it's generally a leading indicator (which the stock market ALSO IS), but it's not perfect on its own. Again, this is in what you cited.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 01:58 AM
1

Dude, both the stock market and the CCI go up and down depending on people's assessment of the economy and their short-term future expectations. The CCI doesn't move the stock market, it moves with the stock market. Go back to the kids' table now, let the adults talk about complicated money things.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 01:11 AM
2

They're in the consumer confidence report, just not the index. Which is a simple rule-of-thumb that isn't used as anything more than a rough guide. And yes, a perception is not a feeling. "I feel like the economy's doing bad" is just another way of stating a perception. Because unless people are fucking telepaths, they don't "feel" anything about the economy. As you can see, the report actually asks for people's rational assessments of economic conditions. There's no bullshit "Does the economy m…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/13 12:24 AM
2

I don't even . . . Your ignorance is astounding. Read the fucking source you just cited. They're asking about perceptions, not feelings. As in "Do you believe inflation is high, normal, or low right now?" Or "Do you believe business conditions are currently positive, normal, or negative?" These are not "feelings". The survery also asks about plans to buy cars, homes, and appliances, and take a vacation - which is the meat of it that economists and businesses care about even though the news likes…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 11:20 PM
5

I agree. Except that suppressing your emotions doesn't actually make you any more logical. It makes you freaking illogical because you still have them, but you can't identify or deal with them in a health manner. See how much more men tend to violently act out than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 09:28 PM
13

Ultimate Red Pill move: Go to Utah, covert to Mormonism. Drown in dat conservative family-centric lifestyle.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 08:07 PM
1

Ah, I didn't know we were acronyming the rest of them. I'm only familiar with RPS for redpillschool :P
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 08:05 PM
0

Basically that's my assessment of them, too. Did you reply to the wrong person? I'm not red pill. At all. I'm a dirty feminazi.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 07:55 PM
7

You know most people are illogical and general unpredictable, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 04:30 PM
10

Shockingly, the vast majority of women are nothing like your asshole sister.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 04:28 PM
3

the degree of optimism on the state of the economy that consumers are expressing through their activities of savings and spending It's basically "What is the trend of people spending and investing money?" It has a catchy name, but it's following a quantifiable trend, of money usage. It's not some voodoo regarding surveying people's feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 04:23 PM
2

*field of economics Profit is measurable in dollars. Happiness and love are not measurable. So no one tries to quantify them. The closest thing I know of to a field trying quantify something immeasurable is the concept of "utility" in economics, but that's just a ranking of preference, it specifically avoids attempting to measure things like pleasure and enjoyment. Heck, utility isn't even considered cardinal in most uses, only ordinal (which means the numbers don't actually express units basica…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 03:08 PM
5

These dudes fucking majored in Hypocrisy at P U of A.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 03:40 AM
5

. . . so for you TRP explained why none of the small population of girls in your ugh school wasn't into you, then was validated when one of them wrote a nice platitude in your yearbook? And you want to marry someone who makes more money than you? The last few sentences are really hard to understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 03:33 AM
4

I keep fucking reporting his comments here but the mods aren't deleting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 03:27 AM
7

Lying usually means your intentions aren't clear. Because you're lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 03:26 AM
6

Are you still in high school?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/13 02:32 AM
7

Pls make sense okthnx
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 11:46 PM
5

True, but you can't completely discount intuitive argumentation either. Yes, yes you can.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 06:32 PM
5

You'ee asking for evidence when you refuse to provide any for your views! WTF?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 06:31 PM
7

You're going to have to demonstrate that men don't like women who give an excellent blowjob.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 06:27 PM
2

Social studies does not attempt to quantify subjective, unmeasurable traits, though. No one tries to count units of happiness or anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 06:24 PM
14

Yeah, we don't. We just think everyone should be able to wear whatever the hell they want. No one else has to like it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/13 02:01 AM
15

. . . are you trying to hit on me or something? Who the fuck says "feisty"?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 10:00 PM
22

And do they honestly maintain this isn't misogynistic?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 09:52 PM
10

Hon, that's not what confidence is.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 09:49 PM
19

. . . right. How weird and pathetic, that I'm not just making ridiculous assumptions about what other people think. If only I was Red Pill like you, then I'd be confident with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 09:36 PM
15

Helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 09:31 PM
12

Not necessarily. Lots of casual sex could mean just a preference for lots of sex. Which would then become a lot of sex with their partner. Divorce rates have been dropping for decades. Rates of premarital sex are increasing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:57 PM
5

Still must be demonstrated.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:44 PM
4

Except female celebrities have huge male followings as well, and celebrities are not representative of the general population.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:26 PM
5

Bullshit. Why do the habits of less than 1% of the population even matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:21 PM
5

OMG, the lock and key bullshit now? A pencil sharper that sharpens many pencils is an excellent sharpener. A pencil that has been sharpened many times is useless.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:18 PM
3

You have to prove premise 1 though, it's not obviously true.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:15 PM
3

And female celebrities don't have lots of sex with different people too?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:12 PM
9

Well, the divorce rate has been dropping since the 90s but premarital sex just keeps increasing . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 08:10 PM
6

I think men should be offended if people try to assume that from this study, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 06:27 PM
5

the study notes that while the overall disparity in math shrinks, boys tend to maintain an advantage in the subfields geometry and arithmetic. No, it says that while boys lose their advantage in all math fields, they remain better at geometry than arithmetic. Arithmetic is the math field where boys always have the least advantage over girls (frequently none), while geometry is the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 06:15 PM
6

I really don't understand why you such an enormous coward about your own opinion. "Based on what I've seen, here's what I suspect" - you can still have an open mind everything, but you act as though you have no mind at all. She's not a coward, she's scientifically minded. If you asked a bunch of students in a biology PhD program this question, you'd get similar hedging. Science teaches not to assume things, because the more assumptions you make the more biased your observations are.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 06:06 PM
5

No, I knew what you thought. You may think your OP is subtle, but it's really not. I just expect that you'll take this as Proof that genders are Totes Different and start thinking you can biotruth everything because this study indicates there may be an evolved difference in two genders in intellectual performance on standardized tests. (Btw, an innate difference is not necessarily evolved. I highly doubt men evolved to be less successful in math and reading than women. It's more likely an accide…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 05:58 PM
6

You're just bitter because I'm so interesting and motivated but have no time for a relationship with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:34 PM
6

Pretending is beta. I'm a Bear Alpha.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:13 PM
2

And that is indeed what the study indicates.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 12:41 PM
6

"If you don't agree with this sexist opinion I have absolutely no scientific evidence to back up, how can I take you seriously?" . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 12:16 PM
3

Lol, did you happen to red redpillschool's contribution to the same comment section? Should he be an ex-mod too?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 12:16 PM
5

And yet I see no evidence for women tending to go for the same small number of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 12:12 PM
12

Also most of the studies that show a relationship between a woman's number of sexual partners and her chance of divorce use data from the 60s and 70s. Dating and relationships have changed significantly since then.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 12:11 PM
0

Their partner count wod certainly be above 1, unless all the folks in this study were on their first relationship. It's the number of people you'be had sex with. TRP says a higher one makes women less attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 11:04 AM
8

Well, I don't have to guess, since the article itself says: This evidence suggests that intra-gender performance differences in reading versus mathematics and in arithmetic versus geometry are not eliminated in a more gender-equal culture. By contrast, girls’ underperformance in math relative to boys is eliminated in more gender-equal cultures. In more gender-equal societies, girls perform as well as boys in mathematics and much better than them in reading. These findings shed some light on rece…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:56 AM
5

Can you just fucking answer the question? Jesus, why can't you handle someone being blunt and a bit aggressive? Where's the "man talk mentality" TRP seems to pride itself on? Simple criticism and you break down.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:45 AM
7

I killed and skinned a grizzly bear. Does that increase my SMV? How about my stamp collection. I have some super-rare ones!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:28 AM
9

http://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/comments/1gl26m/should_i_lie_to_men_about_my_sexual_partnercount/cam9e0u http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/1d84fl/used_cars_vs_sluts/c9nxphe?context=2 There's a couple I found. And don't forget the lovely implication of "the thousand cock stare"!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/13 02:26 AM
1

Did, did you just blame birth control for men's sexual harassment? You know sexual harassment was a thing long before birth control, right? And that "consequence free" sex in no way means men should be able to abandon basic human decency?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 03:27 PM
0

Okay, except you guys frequently say that your generalizations do apply to effectively all women. "NAWALT LOL" And I'm also trying to point out that your generalizations are based entirely on anecdotes, which means they can't hold up in the face of opposing anecdotes, so you need actual scientific evidence. For example: Person 1: Apples are usually red. Person 2: But I see tons of green apples when I go to the store. How can this be resolved? As neither person's opinions carries more weight, the…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 03:19 PM
3

Also: Explain bonobos, pls. They are just as closely related to us as chimps, and I see them having a lot of orgies. Female-led orgies. Sooooooo . . . yeah, that mammalian evolution doesn't quite lead where you want it to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 03:10 PM
2

Also, for most of human history, the fact that women can get pregnant from having sex would likely not have mattered nearly as much as it does today. In the abscence of moral prohibitions on infanticide, well, the biggest problem is just gone. Female animals abandon their young in times of hardship. Early humans quite possibly would have done the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 03:08 PM
3

I'm p sure that's exactly what they're doing. Or they're all 16 and saw the word exactly once and now think they know everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 02:32 PM
3

Bro doesn't even definitions, apparently.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 01:23 PM
2

If people are making generalizations about a group I belong to, how in the world does that no apply to me?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 11:58 AM
3

So it sounds like every other study I'be seen on gender differences in partner selection, then. Most every one I've read concludes that 1) men and women both mostly care about having considerate, reliable partners, 2) women do tend to care a bit more about wealth and men a bit more about looks, 3) these differences are small - as in men have looks at #4 on their priority list instead of #6 like women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 11:37 AM
8

Solipsism is the philosophical idea that only one's own mind is sure to exist. Yeah, pretty much actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 01:21 AM
8

Literally solipsism.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/13 01:09 AM
3

Sorry you can't logic. :(
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 11:15 PM
3

Except that "bug" arose in computer programming as a literal term. When we used huge-ass computers, bugs crawling or flying into the system were a legitimate source of problems. It then got expanded into a general term for computer problems. "Solipsism" is just wholesale "We've decided this word means something else."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 09:29 PM
3

[Citation needed for claims about how the world works]
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 09:25 PM
3

Heh, I do economics. Our understanding of "science" basically boils down to "CORRELATION NEVER EVER EVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR PROVES CAUSATION".
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 04:13 PM
3

Maybe we should have a Teach Them How To Science thread?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 03:13 PM
4

Yes. In the Nature vs. Nurture thread there is literally a Red Piller claiming that having to demonstrate a behavior is cross-culturally universal before assuming it's an evolutionary adaptation is a "ridiculously high standard". He continued to argue this after I quote a textbook on evolutionary psychology agreeing with me.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 03:08 PM
6

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sex_ratio Actually most of the world has more women than men. Or that a proposer will keep asking until candidates run out. A lot of them drop out way earlier than reviewers do if rejected enough. And reviewers who never get propositioned? In the real world they drop out, too. In other words, everything that's set up to give proposers an edge in the ideal just does not hold water irl. You seem to be missing the point. The very act of being the chooser (in tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 12:58 PM
4

Exactly. I just don't understand why the reaction some people have to "This gender role is bullshit" is then "Guess I better defend it and claim it's unchangable with my last breath!" To me the far more obvious reaction is "Let's get rid of it!"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 12:47 PM
4

Gatekeeping is not an entirely different topic, as they're corresponding gender roles. Women are considered "gatekeepers" because men are considered "pursuers". She can also much more easily gauge the interest of other men on looks they give her and other such social cues, which is something women are better at. No, you can't just claim something like "women are better at X" without evidence. I refuse to accept this as support for your argument. No, women actually can't gauge other interest well…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 12:30 PM
3

I didn't confuse them with proper evidence. I used anecdotes until he provided real evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 12:04 PM
2

Also, I'm still puzzled by this : It is hypoagency when we advocate listening to and respecting what women say? It is not hypoagency to, when you hear a "no", assume you know the women's desires better than her?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 12:02 PM
11

You realize this actually gives men power in relationships, right? Seriously, economists have studied this shit. In pairing-up, the people who do the approaching can go straight for their most-preferred partner(s, if they get rejected and approach someone else). Meanwhile the approached partner can only hope that someone they like approaches them, and they have no harsh they'll get a shot with their most-preferred partner, and they have to judge every rejection whether their future offers are li…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 11:28 AM
1

Your point being?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 11:21 AM
9

False. My boyfriend "gatekeeps" sex in our relationship (I have a higher libido) and I was the one "gatekeeping" commitment (I was meh about the idea of monogamy). As Red Pillers love to say they rely on personal experience, my personal experience shows TRP to simply have no value.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/13 02:26 AM
1

I'm just waiting for it to come out that he has a bunker under his house for the inevitable apocalypse resulting from the socialist/Marxist/fascist/Muslim/Jewish/liberal/athiest conspiracy.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 07:07 PM
5

I'm sorry this is the only thing you've found that works for you. It sounds unpleasant. But just because it works for you doesn't mean it works universally. This also doesn't at all address my point: That I have no faith in the social skills of a group that's been self-selected for a lack of social skils.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 06:52 PM
5

Except my friends and I aren't special. We're normal. Note that conversation took place before you brought the sources up. (And Jesus, you really love playing "gotcha" with me about this conversation, don't you? Cause you know I never bother to remember there were two threads and check out the whole thing. Or even remember the conversation, really.) You made assertions about women that you claimed were supported by sources inaccessible to me. It they're so true you should have been able to Googl…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 06:05 PM
2

I love you. My firstborn shall be named "Stairington Catingwell". (Cause I mean, I gotta be fancy about it.)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 05:51 PM
6

My point ----------------> . . . . . . . . . . . You ----------------> You claimed women are attracted to signals of status. I responded "No, myself and all the women I know are attracted to physical features and bodies." Unless you're going to claim good cheekbones or nice abs signal high status now . . . You never did provide a citation. And I see you're making another baseless assertion of gender differences here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 05:20 PM
3

Find that culture. I'll wait. I'm not the fucking arbiter. These are standards used in anthropology and academic evolutionary psychology. Universal expression is a requirement for considering a trait innate. Because until we can break down our genetics and brain chemistry to such a level that we can identify inborn preferences biologically, we have to have rigorous standards for the inductions we make from society.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 02:41 PM
3

Isn't that exactly what TRP advocates you do to women?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 02:29 PM
2

And yet I never did that. My boyfriend never did when he went out looking for girls. Thise things never happened to either of us, and we were both quite sexually successful. My boyfriend's not that attractive, his friends were always fucking stumped by how he always had women into him. It's because he was genuine. Bitches love genuineness.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 02:27 PM
3

Sorry if I don't have immense belief in the social skills of people who admit they had terrible social skills and had to have basic shit like "Dressing well makes you more attractive" explained to them. Most men can tell when a woman's uncomfortable. PUAs and TRP only attract men who are naturally bad at interacting with women. Oh, and then they encourage these men not to care if a woman's uncomfortable. So obviously yes, I doubt their ability to read a woman and I think encouraging a bunch of f…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 02:24 PM
2

Depends on which PUA you're talking to.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 02:20 PM
3

No, there are many things that are innate. All cultures love fatty and sweet foods. All cultures have music. All cultures have developed a language. All cultures recognize sex as pleasurable and important. These things are all innate. Things that are innate to humans are present in all human cultures.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 04:49 AM
2

That monologue is very fucked up, generally hated by the feminist community, and frequently just not performed. It's also one monologue in the whole play; it does not make up the entirety. Edit: Also, you seem to be implying TRP advocates homosexuality. I'm p sure it doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/13 04:47 AM
3

First of all, saying game is manipulative implies to me that the person values sex as something a woman GIVES to men and that game is tricking women to do something not in their interest. This is kind of funny as sex is supposed to be a mutually enjoyable activity. How is this congruent with the Red Pill idea that women trade sexual for relationships and men trade relationships for sex? Edit: ALSO, as TRP states partner count negatively impacts a woman's SMV, being tricked into a ONS would indee…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/13 04:23 PM
3

No, I'm pretty sure you're the one who brought that up.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 08:02 PM
4

You can have sex with people without objectifying them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 06:38 PM
5

Reducing other people to sexual objects to be conquered is nothing but immoral.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 06:21 PM
7

The latter things you mentioned I have no problem with at all. Yes, I'm just concerned about things like lying, pressuring women into things, ect. I'm not using the con artistry comparison in that women lose something, I'm simply trying to point out that we judge other behaviors immoral purely on the basis of deception and manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 05:57 PM
7

Anyways game doesn't aim to be moral or take the other person into account much. It's just a way to get laid. THAT'S THE EXACT FUCKING PROBLEM. We're saying "This shit is unethical and needlessly hurtful to people around you," and you're just saying "Well, we aren't trying to be ethical". You're basically just conceding our point. It's immoral, and you don't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 05:53 PM
7

No, it's moreso "You shouldn't fucking rape people on the off chance they're into that." There are a few shitty women who think saying no when they mean yes is funny or cute or something. Shitty people will be shitty, sadly. Don't play along with them, they suck. After getting rejected a few times they'll realize how much they suck.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 05:49 PM
3

I don't see any crime being committed in con artistry. It's just one adult giving another money.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 05:05 PM
3

There's a group of people on Reddit who think it's the height of hilarity and/or irony to use social justice terms against those they're intended to help. See also: The endless rants about how black people are truly racist.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 02:46 PM
3

It's immoral to deceive of manipulate people into sex. Do you think con artistry is fine as long as it's not actually blackmail?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 02:33 PM
2

. . . wut? Blowjobs . . . on my non-existent penis?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/13 01:00 AM
8

I disagree. That's like saying it's impossible for con artists to commit crime because all they're doing is using basic knowledge of psychology to make people trust them.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 11:57 PM
4

Education isn't satire either.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 11:56 PM
9

Don't forget: Reddit. This whole site is basically a waste of time.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 11:55 PM
8

Or maybe you'd have to be a real judgmental prick to get pissed about someone not wanting to shake your hand?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 11:54 PM
4

Chateau Heartiste text game techniques and unloaded it all on one unsuspecting girl So things like "yo pussy rocks" are text game techniques, apparently. Too much game, all at once, can make you seem unattainable. Or uninterested. Or clownish. Yes. It was too much game. /s Notice that even this funnyman’s blatant disregard of the rule against overgaming doesn’t kill his chances with the woman Failure to recognize her obvious disinterest. She's supposed to be at a party, doing fun things with oth…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 11:24 PM
10

A handshake is wrong if the other person doesn't want to shake your hand - that's the general rule I use for all physical contact.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 08:41 PM
11

Have you read TBP side bar? We aren't trying to have a point, it's Red Piller's who keep insisting we must.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 07:44 PM
8

Game. I'm not impressed. Heartiste claims texting like an annoying 13yo is "game", and somehow classifies getting shot down as a win. (Because the women explained herself and was trying to be polite?)
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:28 PM
9

My next research project: An economic analysis of gender discrimination in WoW. (Does presenting as feminine have negative economic outcomes?)
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:23 PM
3

Hon, stop lying. You said they would move to the center by copying Dark Triad traits. That's not true, as Dark Triad traits are by definition extreme, not in the center, and have a bad impact on a person's life. And you still haven't provided a single source.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:15 PM
5

Hon, what are the three traits that make up the Dark Triad? Do you think narcissism and Machiavellianism somehow have a tempering effect on psychopathy? I see you've also utterly ignored my request for your sources, while making ridiculous demands of me. I just found a source that shows psychopaths are more than twice as likely to go to prison as the population at large. Please explain how that doesn't demonstrate they are not, in fact, rewarded by society for their psychopathy with "money, weal…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:21 AM
10

. . . you know a lack of kindness to children and animals are things that are indicative of psychopathy, right? Do you or do you not advocate Dark Triad traits? Because "be like a psychopath" and "be kind" are impossible pieces of advice to follow at the same time. Improving your appearance continues not to be something you do to someone else and is therefore not equivalent to actions to perform towards other people. That's my contention, and that reply didn't address it at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:08 AM
6

Okay. Psychopaths make up 1% of the general population but at least 20% of the prison population.. Yeah, that sounds like they're primed for success to me!! "Not being a doormat" is not a "Dark Triad" trait. Assertiveness is something mentally healthy people have. Dark Triad traits are extreme. Someone with self-confidence is not narcissistic. Someone with such an intense belief in their own superiority that it causes problems in their life is narsissistic. You got any sources to prove that Dark…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 04:04 AM
11

Except that's bullshit. You're equating women's appearances to men's actions toward women. Women are not dying their hair at you. The equivalent of women improving their appearance is men improving their appearance. The equivalent of men "gaming" and manipulating women is women "gaming" and manipulating men. These are actions taken toward another person.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 03:48 AM
4

This view is supported by the fact that men have multiple "kinds" of sperm - some sperm hang out and seem to have the purpose of blocking the way of other sperm. In a highly sexually promiscuous environment, these factors will matter in who ends up siring a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 03:42 AM
9

Men can and do die their hair. Men can and do use hair-loss treatments. Men can and do dress well and work out to improve their appearance. These actions are fine. Lying to people is not fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/13 03:21 AM
2

“for the five-year period 2007 through 2011, the total number of self-protective behaviors involving a firearm by victims of attempted or completed violent crimes or property crimes totaled only 338,700.” http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/4/263.full I was wrong on the number of accidental deaths, though, I mixed it up with a death and injury number, which is much higher. I'm having a surprisingly hard time nailing down some stats on it, I'll try to find better ones when I get off my phon…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 10:40 PM
4

Yeah, the pushback is both because some of those people are blaming the victim, and because the attitudes as a whole are damaging, even though those who hold them are most likely well-meaning.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 10:29 PM
2

O wow, u know me IRL?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 09:37 PM
5

Well, first you'd have to demonstrate it's near-universal across cultures, for one thing. You can't just observe Americans and decide that's how the whole human race is. In Iceland women outperform men on math and spatial reasoning tests and enter STEM fields at a higher rate. Would this be grounds to claim women obviously have an inborn superior ability to do math?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 09:36 PM
9

First, it's because most of these pieces of advise are actually useless. Some things, like pouring your own drinks and not leaving them unattended can be helpful, but women already know these things and they're either forgotten in momentarily lapses which are really unavoidable in the big picture (people also lose their car keys and forget their credit cards places, no one can remember everything all the time), or they're not followed because women trust the people around them. So the advice kin…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 09:27 PM
2

So you admit crime would probably go down, there would be less crime, but your problem is that people wouldn't be able to use guns to defend themselves from the much smaller amount of crime? Do you know the number of people who actually use guns to defend themselves from crime is pretty minuscule? In fact, it's less than the number of children who kill or injure themselves or each other with their parents' improperly stored guns. Edit: Was wrong, messed up the stats.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 08:52 PM
1

Where did I assume that? I just said your metaphor is bullshit based on a profound misunderstanding of the book.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 08:45 PM
4

No, I'm saying that I literally can't find the research you said he did in his CV.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 08:43 PM
6

I'm just gonna put this out there - I read that article, and I think someone who reads it and thinks "Wow, this is so relatable" is fucked up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 07:57 PM
3

I can't find anything from Roy Baumeister on the Pareto Principal or dna evidence of descendance, which I don't find surprising as he's a social psychologist and doesn't research evolution. He does have some very interesting work on how narcissistic men are more likely to rape women because they react violently to rejection, though. Edit: foiled by autocorrect
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 07:54 PM
7

It does when a sub decides to include it in it's sidebar. Even your idea that the article is relatable to men who'd be interested in TRP - you think violent hatred of women is relatable?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 07:15 PM
4

Most rapists aren't convicted.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 06:01 PM
6

Why exactly aren't 80% of men having sex with 20% of women? What evidence is there for this rule applying to human relationships at all? It's invalid to request evidence to disprove something when you're given no evidence to prove it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 05:02 PM
5

The reason that the option is so valuable, in my opinion, is that people who are predators cannot tell the difference between the armed, and the disarmed. Thus, giving people, women included, the option to CCW has a chilling effect on street-crime which is a benefit to all people, again, women included. Or it could mean that all the rapists now carry guns.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 04:39 PM
3

This dude is using "alpha" just to mean "people I think are cool".
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 04:35 PM
3

80/20 rule? In marriage?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 04:30 PM
4

Except you're trying to come up with reasons that are disproved by the statistical analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 04:23 PM
3

The issue here is that it's an affirmative defense without a shred of evidence. A defense essentially based on "feels." So I don't know if you've heard of it, but this case involving a guy named George Zimmerman has been kind of a big deal, lately . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 04:22 PM
4

Yep. This was literally the basis of Hobbes' idea that literally everyone was equal in a state of nature. It doesn't matter if one person is amazingly intelligent and strong if someone else bashes his head with a rock while he sleeps.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 03:55 PM
3

Yes, because your entire recollection of the book's society is wrong, and your "metaphor' about feminism using it is thereby baseless and ridiculous. No, The Female Eunuch isn't really mainstream feminism. It isn't taught in any gender studies course I know, it isn't particularly well-reasoned or thoughtful. It's a book many feminists have read, but moreso as a "Wow, this writer is certainly out there," type of thing. Greer is also rejected as a person by most mainstream feminists now because of…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 02:30 PM
3

Can we please have a rule like "You don't get to dismiss academic evidence as inferior to your own thoughts"? Or "Saying 'Marxism' is not an argument"? This stuff kills the entire purpose of the sub, and it personally enrages me.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 02:17 PM
7

All the Presidents have been men. Women are underrepresented in all levels of government.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 02:06 PM
3

Gammas weren't married. No one got married. You don't remember the damn book.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 02:04 PM
3

. . . are you kidding? Barack Obama is a dork who makes lame jokes that embarrass his wife because they're so supremely uncool. He enjoys basketball but is terrible at it, was never very good with women, and was an utter nerd in college. He's cried in public on multiple occasions. If you defining "alpha" as "confident", then it's an utterly unnecessary word. Do you seriously think that game gets someone elected President? Jeez, let's tell Jimmy Carter he suddenly became cool. You claimed betas s…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 02:01 PM
1

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:49 PM
8

ANECDOTES ARE NOT DATA. YOUR LITTLE FIRE EXPLORER GROUP IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF ALL WOMEN WHO WANT TO BE FIREFIGHTERS, AND FURTHER, THERE IS NO PROBLEM IN THAT STORY UNLESS THOSE GIRLS WHO COULDN'T DO THE REQUIRED TASKS STILL BECAME FIREFIGHTERS.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:48 PM
10

Exactly. So throw down some fucking evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:46 PM
4

What are these fucking "truths"? I'm criticizing dudes in the Internet. I have no idea if they're rich or meet your idea of a beta or whatever. But, I was making fun of Newt Gingrich on TBP just the other day. Rich, powerful, married to a younger woman - or is he still "beta" in your view?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:43 PM
3

I think you're trying to argue with a creationist about evolution, here.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:39 PM
5

I do not think that anything resembling 'patriarchy' has ever existed in the world. Then maybe you should read a fucking book. It's an accepted concept in sociology, anthropology, political economy, and history. If all science indicates that betas and alphas exist, then it should be really damn easy to present a study.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:37 PM
4

If women find betas repulsive, why do they want to make men be betas? Wouldn't women want all men to be alphas, so they can be around attractive men all the time?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:36 PM
3

Have you ever found a man 'creepy'? This was a beta. False. I find men TRP would consider "alpha" creepy frequently. You do not know my interactions with other people and thoughts. If I am wrong then how are we to account for the huge differences in income between men of the same IQ and qualifications? How hard they work? How lucky they are? How agreeable they are? Are you somehow claiming Bill Gates is an "alpha" right now? Or Barack Obama? So would you agree that no men can study or know what …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:30 PM
3

You misunderstood BNW deeply. First, everyone in their society had sex all the time. Even the Gammas. Second, Alphas and Betas had sex with each other, they were just discouraged from interacting with lower classes. Third, Betas were so intelligent, just not as smart as the Alphas. Alphas also took soma. The entire book is about the perils of and fears around industrialization. And it's not subtle. Trying to shoehorn it into ideas about feminism (which frequently opposes consumerism) doesn't mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 01:10 PM
3

I think you're purposefully misunderstanding the Snyder study. And you're obviously seizing onto one issue in order to ignore everything else mrmamsa said.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 12:47 PM
8

Did you know many police departments work to recruit more female candidates because women are generally found less threatening which aides in deescalating situations? Did you know that crime rates have been dropping steadily since police forces started accepting women? (No, I don't believe this is due to women in the police force. But it certainly indicates they aren't causing a crimepocalypse with their lower pull-up scores.) Have you ever seen an actual news article or study about women in the…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 12:19 PM
11

Sociology isn't the study of "personal life", it's the study of how people interact and organize in social groups. Are you saying you think sociology should be a series of memoirs, basically? "No experts in life" - good thing that's not what sociologists try to do! Do you know what science is?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 12:01 PM
7

Not to mention that incel article was also the opposite of taking responsibility, which we're hearing here is a Red Pill fundamental.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 11:58 AM
12

No, but my experience with women does match yours. Why is your experience with women for important or representative than mine? This is why everyone in TBP keeps asking for scientific evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 11:18 AM
4

How come women are frequently given modified requirements for certain jobs? What jobs? As far as I know, giving women modified requirements in actually very uncommon. I do not think women should have jobs that require a great deal of strength, unless they are proven to be able to match a man then I do not think they should be hired. Uhh, are you under the impression women frequently get hired for jobs they can't do? I don't understand the point of your comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 11:16 AM
5

The mainstream media is feminist dominated No, it's not. If it was freaking "feminist dominated", you'd think women would get more than just 30% of speaking roles in movies. Why are there so few female directors if it's so feminist dominated? This has resulted in such a trashing of men that it has become invisible to most people. This is fucking ridiculous. You're making claim after unsupported claim. You need evidence. On the whole TRP is less extreme than mainstream media but it comes as a sho…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 11:11 AM
4

You're trying to extrapolate a universal rule from one case. Come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 03:48 AM
14

The basis for TRP is personal experience. Which science and logic would tell us isn't the best basis for any real strategy, as our experiences are colored by our own emotions and biases. jimmies FTFY bitterness Seriously? The Red Pill is self-admittedly full of dudes who are angry about either their lack of sexual experience or some specific woman who left them, and you're calling other people bitter? Glass houses, bro. It's a boys club on the internet, what do you expect? See, this is exactly t…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/13 03:30 AM
2

Except the whole "being a normal person gives you better odds overall". I don't think anyone was arguing no asshole ever get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 11:35 PM
2

Because you're posting that information as part of an argument that Dark Triad personalities are attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 10:56 PM
6

Oh, I agree. I'm just speaking from the other side: I'm 5'4", and never work out. But I've seriously hurt people larger than me before because I have a very strong panic/fight/I don't even know the proper name for it reaction. I have a friend who's even smaller than me, and she's generally considered A Person Not To Be Fucked With, because she doesn't respond to pain.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 10:54 PM
4

So, really y'all: Why is this in your sidebar?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 10:05 PM
3

I was trying to point out that those very articles demonstrate that "Dark Triad" personalities are attractive to only a small subset of women, and thus mimicking them would reduce the number of women you are attractive to.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 09:15 PM
9

Most people would die if suddenly thrown into a survival situation. Few of us have the skills to survive on our own. Things Pregnant Women Are Fully Capable Of: building a shelter trapping small animals fishing gathering edible plants I'm confused as to why you seem to be reducing "survival" to "ability to hunt large game".
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 09:04 PM
5

God, why is everyone so pressed over me? I haven't insulted anyone, I'm being fucking cordial given that we're seriously debating things like whether I have the same mental faculties as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 08:41 PM
9

OK, you're alone in the wilderness in 500 AD, what are you going to eat? It depends on where I am and what the season is, but my most likely source of nutrition is to find an edible plant nearby. Tubers are high in carbohydrates although you have to dig for them, fruit is both high-calorie and easy to gather when it's available. If it's winter I may well end up scratching at a tree to peel off the outer layer of bark and get at the softer inner layer.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 08:14 PM
5

I already said this in a reply to RPS, but I thought you'd find it interesting - strength is rarely a determining factor in a "real" fight. It's usually more dependent on who's willing to do serious permanent damage. It takes only 20 pounds of force to remove someone's ear. About the same to collapse a trachea. In a real fight, the person who loses is the person less willing to really hurt someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 08:06 PM
8

Women can't help me in fights. They'd get destroyed. They are physically incapable. That's my point- I don't expect them to. Feminism is the one pushing for equality. This is really starting to make me doubt you're even being honest about your experiences. The determining factor in most physical fights isn't strength, or even skill, but who is more willing to seriously injure another person. It takes only 20 pounds of pressure to remove someone's ear. Even the smallest woman is physically capabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 08:03 PM
11

If a man and a woman go hiking in the woods and they anger a mother bear with her cubs, the best outcome for the species is to either kill the bear (unlikely) or have the man sacrifice himself for the woman. If it's two men they live together or die together. This has absolutely no support. You can't jump from "evolutionarily best outcome" to "so obviously this predicts how people act all the time". After all, evolutionarily, if two men meet a bear, the best outcome is also for only one of them …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:38 PM
13

I agree with this post. And it expresses what I see as fundamentally flawed about TRP and MRM. They think the solution to the current flux gender roles are in is to revert to the 1950s. With no thought to the fact that the rigorous demands and extreme inequality those gender roles produced were inherently unstable themselves, and gave rise to feminism in the first place. Continuing forward to dismantle gender roles entirely is obviously the only good option, in my view.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:14 PM
8

Why does that matter? Participation in your government is a right. You have to prove someone doesn't deserve it, not that they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:10 PM
5

The closest thing drunk-me gets to that is when I manage to input my credit card information to Amazon correctly. Drunk-me is very good at buying sober-me presents, though!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:09 PM
5

This is a cheap evasive tactic that amounts to an admission there's no scientific backing for your ideas.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:04 PM
1

However, I believe the more general RP response might be something similar to: "She can have sex, just don't get pregnant. Use contraceptives (pill, condom, etc.)." Birth control isn't perfect, though. And in many parts of the US, it used to be hard to get it for many women. Simply the fact that a woman got an abortion doesn't prove she wasn't using birth control.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:03 PM
4

Ah, so I'm supposed to listen to men rage against women as a whole, a group I belong to, and not take it personally? And yet men get so upset if a woman says something along the lines of "Please don't talk to women on the street - we get harassed in public a lot and don't know whether or not you'll do it."
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 07:00 PM
17

Can you think of an example where men die in order to save women? How about the Titanic? In most maritime disasters, men survived at higher rates than women and children. Can you think of an example where women die in order to save men? Oh, here's one. It sounds like you don't understand what men expect from other men. Sacrifice and death? I'm pretty sure that's not a normal expectation. Women have equal rights, you want equal outcomes. I don't have the right to full control of my own body. I do…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 06:01 PM
14

Most of the women holding those double-standards aren't feminists, though. They're unthinking women benefitting from the work feminists have done. And I agree, not much has been done on expanding men's gender roles, but that is seriously on the feminist to-do list. After all, expanding men's gender roles is intrinsically connected to removing the societal disparagement of tasks and traits considered "feminine", which is why men are supposed to stick to "masculine" things or they lose status. If …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 05:49 PM
6

Please demonstrate that beta males exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 05:23 PM
5

My citation is the Blue Pill. Note the hostility (almost rage) directed at incels. I saw the Vimero film that was posted here and the men seemed quite harmless to me. A little introverted, a little badly dressed, but harmless. Why the anger at a bunch of men who cannot get laid. What have they ever done to you? They think they're entitled to fuck me and act oppressed and wrong-done-by because I don't want to. That's why we dislike them so much. Because they are angry at us. They cast the first s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 05:08 PM
9

There are regular posts on how I shouldn't really be able to vote. I agree with saintmorning, I'd flee any country where Red Pillers gained power.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 05:03 PM
6

Jump to the "results". The first several pages are a review of the previous literature on the topic, and then an explanation of their math and days that won't interest you unless you do statistics a lot. I replied to that because the poster you quoted is arguing that the legal system is biased toward women and harsh on men. I'm pointing out this is clearly not universal. And yes, that is where things start getting interesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 04:56 PM
20

Men are instinctively programmed to maximize her survival as well. No, I'm 100% sure men also have an instinctive aversion to their own death, you're gonna have to provide evidence for that. Of course women are less likely to join the war, we evolved as a species that minimized that requirement for one gender. Gonna need a citation for that. I think it's much more reasonable to say "Of course women are less likely to join the war, we have a society where they're expected to take care of the chil…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 04:47 PM
9

One of the most interesting tidbits about the lighter prison sentences women typically receive is that the greater the proportion of female judges in a district, the lower the gender disparity for that district. Light sentences for women are the benevolent sexism of male judges not thinking of women as "really" dangerous, violent, competent in their criminality ect. They are not created by feminism or women, but by men working off of anti-feminist gender norms. And seriously, y'all are actually …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 04:29 PM
2

Yep. And if you want your day utterly ruined, google Angola Prison in Louisiana. Spoiler: it's literally a government-run cotton plantation with slave prisoner labor.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 04:17 PM
5

I really appreciate you being involved in these discussions, btw. I've never taken anything behind AP Psychology, so I never know how accurate stuff from Wikipedia and whatnot is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 04:08 PM
2

No problem. I have a friend who's been exposing me to the prison-reform movement. It's kinda depressing how bad things are.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:34 PM
4

Uhhhhhhh, you know women are ovulating less than a week out of the month, right? And the studies themselves say this effect mostly happens only in women who had early onset puberty. Limiting your target pool to less than 1/4th of women at any given time isn't exactly great strategy, and is far less likely to give an advantage than cultivating traits that appeal to non- ovulating women, or ovulating women who had later onset of puberty.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:29 PM
2

TRP is pretending mental disorders are attractive and desirable. That's what all the Blue Pillers in here are saying, because that's what the science leads us to conclude.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:22 PM
5

Have you ever heard of OJ Simpson? Or Ted Kennedy? Or Ben Rothlesberger?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:16 PM
6

When I'm drunk I have fantasies about getting a tattoo of Socrates with "Examine this!" on the bottom of my foot. . . . I'm not terribly clever when I'm drunk.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:11 PM
5

In fact, we've gone to the point of committing a fundamental miscarriage of justice out of gender bias, and we've done so at the highest possible level. It happened where it is absolutely not supposed to happen, and as a consequence has called into disrepute the judiciary as a whole. We've abandoned the things that made us fair the moment that a woman said the right things. It didn't matter that what she said didn't have a shred of truth, the courts quite literally abandoned the pursuit of truth…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:57 PM
10

Dude, your words required no twisting. Say what you mean. If you mean "I don't think women are inferior", then say that. What is hedging on that statement supposed to communicate to someone other than that you don't fully believe it? Complimenting people on something they do well or that you appreciate isn't really my idea of manipulation, but I can see why you'd view it that way if you take a very calculated attitude toward interactions. I don't think of it as manipulative to tell my boyfriend …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:49 PM
7

It seems their entire idea of Dark Triad traits being attractive and things to emulate is based on a very deep misunderstanding of what Dark Triad traits even are. A Red Piller once claimed to me that sociopaths and psychopaths are enviable in their impenetrable calm. Which utterly ignores that a low threshold for engaging in violence and aggressive behaviors are part of the diagnosis. Because nothing says "calm" like aggression.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:38 PM
2

The "parts you find beneficial" of mimicking people with destructive mental disorders. This isn't a Red Pill sub, you don't get to pretend the Dark Triad is something it's not here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:31 PM
7

Good thing the topic is asking what we think then, aye?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:25 PM
11

I mean, it seems kind of . . . obviously not nice in any way to manipulate people. And then brag about it online. Oh, and also saying you don't "really" see have of humanity as inferior. Just kind of?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:22 PM
2

The Red Pill did not make up the term "Dark Triad". It's a psychological term that's recently become much more popular in culture at large. That is what it means, you don't get to change the meanings of things to suit yourself. Sociopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism are not attractive traits or mating strategies. They are mental disorders, they get treated by mental health professionals. I have no idea why you seem to be pretending they aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:17 PM
8

generally nice person women are mostly easy to manipulate into doing what I want. Does not compute.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 02:01 PM
2

You must hate European philosophy. It'sajoooooooooke.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 01:46 PM
24

I think you all choose to participate in a sub that holds the inferiority of women as a truth and advocates all sorts of unsavory behavior. Red Pillers: Do you think all women are the same?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 12:11 PM
7

There is evidence for this, therefore evidence in favor of hypergamy. Or evidence in favor of socially constructed gender roles. That's the problem; yes, some of these things exist. That doesn't constitute proof it's an inborn preference.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/13 03:01 AM
4

No, I think you're incorrectly understanding the Dark Triad. It isn't a "strategy" or a group of "attractive traits". It's a name for mental disorders that exhibit frequent comorbidity.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/13 11:56 PM
2

But that guy has no empathy for me. That's a fucking tall order "Have empathy for this guy who irrationally hates you".
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 10:50 PM
3

Men can have respect for women a lot easier than you may think. Even if they all watch Faux News. It's not really a question of respect. It's a question of bosses thinking - entirely with what they assume to be my best interests in mind - "We'll SpermJackalope's a woman, and most women want to have kids and lighten up the work load, so I should probably not recommend her for partner because that takes 60 hour weeks sometimes". And the perception of women as less authoritative and intelligent tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 07:21 PM
8

I thought they were all about Hard Facts and Not Being Sensitive and Seeing The Truth, though? Because claiming women are mentally inferior and immature in face of contrary evidence meets most people's standards of misogyny. It's pretty weak to be unable to handle the assessment other people have of your beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 04:58 PM
1

100% agree. Our trade policy has been coopted by the state department, trading the health and protection of our local industries and workers for other countries agreeing to our foreign policy goals. (The state department loves offering sweet-ass trade deals that eliminate all our tariffs against a country's goods while allowing them to keep theirs against us as a bartering tool.)
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 04:52 PM
3

Indeed. No one in TBP argues that spending some time learning social skills is a bad thing. But there are much better places to learn social skills - places that don't also advise you ignore what women want, engage in physical violence, ect - than TRP. I'm personally a very big fan of the Captain Awkward site. They're set up kinda like an "Ask Alice" column, but they give excellent, detailed advice on all sorts of social situations. Is p good advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 04:33 PM
3

Okay, this is real evidence for pre-selection. It does certainly seem to merit more study from these results. I would like to add that many people would also want to be friends with someone they find attractive or a possible romantic partner, which can be a confounding factor in this research.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 03:34 PM
1

But I thought y'all were claiming anecdotal evidence to support this idea? So how do you know if folks don't "advertise it"?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 03:13 PM
0

Again, I find it hard to believe that when I've never met any of these people. You'd think I would, if they're a majority. (As opposed to fetishists, who are obviously a minority.)
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 02:48 PM
1

Brilliant argument. So, do you not think that pre-selection is a general rule of the sexual market place?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 02:25 PM
0

U no hav pancakes???? :'( U come visit me, I take u to Cracker Barrel. And then this amazing chicken and waffles place :D
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 12:56 PM
5

If you want mad sads you should look up grain elevator safety. Basically, there are a few extremely simple steps farmers can follow to prevent death and injury for field hands who have to go inside a grain elevator (the silos they keep corn and wheat in - the grain can get pockets that fall and crush people, it can act like quicksand and swallow people, ect. The most relevant rule is basically "wear a safety harness attached to the top of the silo) Farmers don't wanna cause it takes time or some…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 12:42 PM
2

. . . so you think pre-selection is a rule, or at least a guideline, to operate off of in pursuing romantic relationships, but you don't think it's common?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 04:13 AM
8

Yeah, OP, why don't you give your info first? And maybe actually engage in discussion? I'd also just like to point out that you claimed our lack of empathy for a dude whose response to a lack of sex is to hate half the human race is harsher than the multiple Red Pillers have voiced a desire to take away my right to vote. Or the multiple times they have claimed I have no honor. Or the multiple times they have mocked and disparaged women for having sex, or not having sex, or doing anything they do…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 03:42 AM
3

Well there are fetish sites for furries to meet up and bang or for masochists to find someone to whip them, too. Doesn't mean either thing is actually common.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 03:34 AM
5

Idk, I just find it weird to believe that there's apparently some huge group of people who prefer to pursue folks already in relationships. And somehow I've met none of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/13 01:28 AM
3

Ah. No, I don't think they ever did.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 10:46 PM
3

No? Megan Fox has been married for years.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 09:55 PM
3

Umm, I think that's usually cause when you're single you are wanting the interest, and when you aren't looking you aren't thinking about when you aren't getting it. I, similarly, have heard women say they almost seem to notice men hitting on them more when they're in a relationship. Being reasonable people, we assumed this was likely perception bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 09:52 PM
2

Hi, I'm someone who has a lot of casual sex and bar-precipitated one night stands when I'm not in a relationship. There's two sides to a coin, and I feel like this is the elephant in the room when it comes to discussing this ugly aspect of game outside of TRP; the women that game works on isn't because they're being 'tricked' or 'manipulated' into sleeping with guys that hold these beliefs, they're enthusiastically consenting to it. Well, most of what's unique to "game" is literally manipulation…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 08:19 PM
1

Men's reports of their romantic success aren't necessarily more honest or accurate than women's reports of their preferences, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 07:39 PM
17

Dude lost his virginity at 17 in a relationship. Doesn't sound like "literally no attention from the opposite sex" to me. I have friends who are still virgins in their 20s. They manage not to hate life and other people over it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/13 03:18 AM
3

Have had sex with 3 virgins. Never viewed any of them as my pet to groom and control to my liking. This is disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 05:13 AM
2

That wasn't at all clear when you initially made the comparison. And further, that is worse. It just went from clownish lack of understanding to creepy desire to control another human's sexuality and train them like a pet.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 04:29 AM
1

I gave an example of why, and you refuse for this hypothetical because you think there is no way a successful person should place any value on his time if he's not on the clock, or that successful people might actually work outside of a 40 hour work week? I just thought your example was silly. Yes, maybe it saves time or uncertainty, but it's ridiculous to claim most people would be on the clock during evening going-out-to-pick-someone-up hours. What about a badly disfigured veteran who yearns f…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 04:06 AM
2

No, because it just means debate. "Empty rhetoric" would make sense in your usage.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:57 AM
2

I disagree that TRP argues a woman is more valuable, as they assert that men are superior in every way.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:54 AM
2

I mostly agree with your second two points and I enjoyed reading them, but I just have to ask about your use of "feminist ally" vs calling yourself a "male feminist." Maybe I'm just a really crappy feminist, but I've never thought of feminism as a movement OF women, but rather a movement to help women achieve the rights we have been denied for so long. Among men I know, it's generally a personal preference thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:17 AM
2

I want you to define what they mean in your usage. When I say traditional gender roles, I mean things like "all women should be stay-at-home parents". That doesn't really relate to sexual attraction, though. Other things that would fall under "gender roles" would be jobs viewed as normal for each gender, the fact that boys are encouraged to be aggressive while girls are encouraged to be quiet/passive, pink is for girls vs blue for boys, ect. Some of these things could apply to picking people up,…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:14 AM
7

Therefore, if I'm trying to increase my chances of approaching any given woman on the street and striking up a conversation that leads to a romantic/sexual relationship, it makes more sense to be more masculine. But, seriously, why would you change your personality just so you can be more successful at hitting on strangers on the street? (And that actually makes me and most women I know uncomfortable and has a very small chance of working anyway.) There are other options, fun options that let yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:09 AM
6

Do I get to be attracted to them too, or is that only a female prerogative? . . . yes? Why the hell wouldn't you? I thought it was a given that you only enter into relationships when both parties are attracted to each other. To suggest that a behavior will find success because some small group has a fetish is disingenuous and unhelpful as dating advice. Howso? I'm not saying that being a sub into cross-dressing will net you a wide pool of interest, but if you prefer that (which is what you said,…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 03:01 AM
3

In my experience, and I would venture to say that most RedPillers agree with me, women are, on average, more attracted to men who possess traditionally masculine traits. And in my experience, "traditionally masculine traits" is a very incoherent category. Further, in my experience, many women are into guys who look more effeminate. I mean, just look at KPop stars. Men are, on average, more attracted to traditionally feminine traits. Again, I think "traditionally feminine traits" is a very vague …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/13 12:34 AM
4

Quite successful, if you find the dommes who are into feminine men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 10:17 PM
8

Or you can find women who aren't interested in gender roles. The LGBTQ, feminist, liberal groups at my college are freaking hotbeds of sex. I would not doubt that many of us are having more sex - and more kinky sex and group sex - than athletes and Greeks who follow strict gender roles. Seriously, I was at a party our Queer Feminist Collective was throwing, met a guy who also identified as bi, and we were discussing having a threesome within the hour. It got derailed when I ended up making out w…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 10:14 PM
3

The guys I know who are most successful with women are two skinny, fey-looking guys with very playful personalities, and another guy who's an utterly unathletic feminist musician.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 10:04 PM
3

Have you ever made one guy wait to have sex with you, but gave it up to another guy much quicker? Yes. If yes, was the guy you gave it up to more "aggressive" about trying to have sex with you? No. Have you ever kept a male friend around who you knew desired you but you didn't feel any attraction to? Yes. He still wanted to be my friend. Have you ever had sex with a different guy immediately or up to two weeks following a breakup? Yes. Have you ever made sure you had a new boyfriend "secured" be…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 10:00 PM
2

See, but that's the whole thing: vaginas do not get broken in. That is a factually incorrect idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 09:03 PM
2

If it's just your collective reality, then why you y'all so frequently discuss how wrong other people are for not sharing it?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 09:00 PM
2

So, your argument is NARPALT, then?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 08:58 PM
2

But what is the "all else"? Because everything I'be seen in TRP seems to claim there's really nothing equal between men and women. Not morality (honor is male-exclusive, women voting is ruining the US), not intellectually, not emotionally . . .
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 08:57 PM
8

Umm, yes? And boys don't? And 14yo girls can't want both sex and love? Wasn't there a thread a while back where a bunch of Red Pillers recounted women who had hurt them terribly by not loving them back, starting their journey to TRP?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 05:31 PM
0

. . . unless you usually pick up women or see prostitutes during business hours, that doesn't make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 05:26 PM
0

But you only have to buy prostitutes? I don't see how that could possibly be a better deal than picking up women for free with game for a ONS, which TRP should give you the skills to do easily.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 04:51 PM
2

Dude, I was specifically referring to the time you compared vaginas to an old chair that gets a butt-print.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 04:47 PM
5

Let me get this straight Not Condescending: Pretending 14yo girls have no sex drive and are incapable of understanding men's sex drives and further, attempting to explain to us Blue Pill women how we were as 14yos. Condescending: Taking issue with this, asserting that maybe it's actually you who doesn't know what goes on in a 14yo girl's head. Got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 04:45 PM
7

Ballin so hard mothafuckas tryna fine me!!
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 04:02 PM
2

But I have lots and lots of experience too, and so do my friends. Being an affectionate guy is rarely seen as clingy. One of my friends - who is beautiful and charming as fuck and always has multiple guys pursuing her - even seems to have a preference for "clingy" guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:55 PM
1

I "broke up" with a friend because they did something similar to the 2/3 rule. After a few months, I was just like "fuck it, this is too much work and consistently makes me feel like shit".
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:50 PM
3

What are male and female sexual strategy, though? How/why are they different?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:41 PM
2

It's entirely relevant to the OP. This is something I just don't understand about TRP. Kindly stop telling me how to behave, as you aren't a mod here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:39 PM
10

Err . . . what you just described basically is the definition of patriarchy. It's not that there's a "force" trying to oppress women, it's that women have been oppressed throughout most of recorded history (largely due to economic paternity concerns and how division of labor works out in farming families), and this history continues to affect us. Modern society was largely established by men. They weren't sitting around twirling their mustaches, they just didn't ask for any women's opinions - an…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:23 PM
2

The claim that promiscuous women get loose vaginas is frequently repeated and upvoted on TRP. Are common upvoted statements on your sub not representative of your sub? Many Red Pillers also claim they are sexually experienced.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 03:15 PM
3

You'd think they would notice the carousel riders they keep around as plates don't actually have vaginas any loser than other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 02:56 PM
7

Having been a 14yo girl with many 14yo girl friends: I think 14yo girls are way more into (the idea of) sex than you can understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 01:58 PM
2

This. My main objections to the 2:3 rule are that it is not female specific - all people start seeking attention harder if you withhold it - and that it isn't a recipe for a fun, happy relationship anyway. I don't want to withhold attention from my SO because I don't want him working for my attention and I don't want to be evaluating our interactions. I prefer relationships that are more soothing and dependable.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 01:47 PM
2

I've seen the second one happen and it was considered generally adorable by everyone around.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/13 01:34 PM
1

Np. Diva Cups are made of medical-grade silicone, so they're antimicrobial, although washing with soap at the end of your period is necessary. Most women I know who use them simply empty the cup in the toilet, wipe any blood that may be on the lip/outside of the cup with toilet paper and reinsert it a couple times a day. No more mess or hassle than changing a tampon. Some women have two or three so they can wash them more frequently, though.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 06:40 PM
1

For the same reason you have to change the bandages on wounds. Blood is nutrient-rich, and cotton is an easy substrate for bacteria to grow in.
/r/MensRights10/06/13 05:10 PM
4

Only in your fucked up little club.
/r/TheRedPill29/04/13 02:05 PM
3

It was available for men. It just wasn't recommended that men get it because the vaccine was developed primarily to address cervical cancer, which men don't get. Then they realized it also prevents some other cancers that do affect men, so now they're recommending it for men, too.
/r/TheRedPill29/04/13 02:04 PM
2

Dude, it is the most painful vaccine I've ever gotten, but you seriously can't handle a few minutes of pain and a couple days feeling sick-ish to knock a few cancers off the list of things you ever have to worry about?
/r/TheRedPill29/04/13 02:03 PM
6

Yeah, everyone, genital warts and cancer are totally cooler than possible side effects from a vaccine!
/r/TheRedPill29/04/13 02:00 PM
2

Dude, hymens don't work that way.
/r/TheRedPill29/04/13 01:57 PM
2

Women have more to lose in marriage so they should avoid sluts like the plague. Sidelining their careers, making less money, negative health effects of pregnancy, ect.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 08:04 PM
9

Yes, but that gives no explanation for why you only apply judgements of sluttiness to women. That study did not even look at how a man's sexual history could effect his odds of divorce.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 07:56 PM
11

That study only compared women to women. Not men. It doesn't at all explain why you don't think sluttiness matters for men.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 07:23 PM
5

This might be due to the irrational idea that promiscuity matters more in women than in men.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 05:39 PM
5

You're ignoring that it's illogical for this sub to apply these ideas to women but not to men.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 05:18 PM
9

Yes, being promiscuous during what's supposed to be a committed relationship will negatively effect it. But why are you assuming promiscuous people are all cheaters? Most of them are promiscuous because they haven't met someone they want to commit to yet, and why are you all only applying this to women, not men?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 04:50 PM
8

You realize evo-psych is unprovable because it can't be experimentally tested?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 04:38 PM
11

I love how Red Pillers are convinced my boyfriend and I don't exist. (I have commitment issues and a high sex drive, boyfriend has a lower libido than I do and enough confidence that he doesn't give a fuck who else I sleep with when he's not around.)
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 04:37 PM
13

So I assume Red Pillers who spin plates are ruined for long term relationships?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 04:31 PM
15

Why are sluts not virtuous? Why aren't promiscuous women good at having long term relationships?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 03:02 PM
11

Your analogy doesn't explain sluts vs. studs at all. It explains why you see some women as sluts. It totally fails to explain why you don't think the same applies to men.
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 03:19 AM
15

Why/how?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 03:17 AM
12

How is virtue defined by sexual partners?
/r/TheRedPill28/04/13 03:17 AM
8

The post you started defending was about staring. It's fine to look at a woman for the same length of time you could look at a man to see his nice suit or cool shoes or whatever. Beyond that gets exponentially less okay as time increases.
/r/TheRedPill22/04/13 03:46 AM
21

It's rude to stare, except for at women dressed in a way you subjectively term "revealing". I'm guessing because you don't think those women deserve basic decency or manners? Yeah, that makes you an asshole and a rude person.
/r/TheRedPill22/04/13 03:19 AM
22

99% of women are NOT dressing for the attention of rando guys on the street. They're dressing for their boyfriend, or to show off a new dress to friends, or because looking good improves your sales at work, or because they want to feel confident for a job interview, or because that skirt happens to look great with the tights and heels, or because her less revealing clothes are in the wash, or what fucking ever. They are NOT putting on clothes with the thought "I hope some dude on the street star…
/r/TheRedPill22/04/13 02:58 AM
28

I'm saying women never control your actions. Be a man and own what you're doing. Say "I don't care how women feel, I will stare at them if I want because I think their bodies are public property(/I don't understand basic social rules like 'it's rude to stare'/whatever your lame excuse is)". Don't pretend they secretly want it or they're making you. That's pathetic.
/r/TheRedPill22/04/13 02:52 AM
30

Jesus it's kink. It probably does the same thing to his self-perception that caning or cock cages or latex body suits or being tied up and hung from the rafters or any of the other unusual things people get up to do to self-perception. Which is nothing. No one's going to ask you to wear a cock sleeve out of the blue. -_-
/r/TheRedPill21/04/13 11:52 PM
29

Sorry we expect you to be humans with full control over your own actions?
/r/TheRedPill21/04/13 06:40 PM
25

That's why monogamy didn't become widespread until the advent of agriculture, which precipitated people acquiring surplus goods and property, and developing families to work the land. What standards are you talking about? Only OP broke any promises, only OP has been lying. His girlfriend didn't do anything wrong by any standards. Edit: missed a letter
/r/TheRedPill17/04/13 10:47 PM
28

Monogamy allows men to know children belong to them and gives them some assurance they aren't investing resources on another man's children. I don't even get what point you're trying to make here. This guy is butthurt because when his relationship with this woman wasn't exclusive she had sex with another guy, then they became exclusive and he cheated on her. He's hamstering hardcore and trying to blame all his oneitis and bad decisions on her. He probably shouldn't have entered into an exclusive…
/r/TheRedPill17/04/13 01:45 PM
27

Isn't it in women's biological nature to pursue the best alpha genes possible?
/r/TheRedPill17/04/13 11:55 AM
32

So deep you're still holding it against her after you've actually cheated multiple times? Grow up. You don't get to freak out when someone who hasn't promised you monogamy doesn't give it to you. The only things you can expect out of any relationship a things you've explicitly communicated. Only betas expect women to read their minds and automatically satisfy their every need.
/r/TheRedPill17/04/13 11:02 AM
5

The dudes here think you should only want to be with ultra-submissive women who give in to your every desire and want to be stay-at-home wives. Don't listen to them.
/r/TheRedPill15/04/13 01:22 AM
3

Exactly, but I also see - particularly highlighted here on Reddit - a lot of young men who are irrationally afraid that they could be falsely accused of raping someone, and are constantly giving the benefit of the doubt to men they can relate to (young white men, mostly) who have been accused of rape. This results from an acceptance of rape myths (that rape can be accidental, that it can result from miscommunication, ect.) and leads to victims feeling unsupported in their social groups, and some…
/r/MensRights07/03/13 12:34 AM
2

Many rape campaigns aren't targeted specifically at rapists, but moreso at the groups they operate in. If you've read Lisak, you've probably heard about the idea of the Social License to Operate. That is, we live in a culture that fosters ideas that rape can be a "miscommunication", or that a good guy can "accidentally" rape someone. Which rapists (who are actually a small number of repeat offenders), use to gain sympathy and manipulate people. So when some guy is all "She never said no, I was j…
/r/MensRights06/03/13 11:23 PM
9

Or a lot of women are having sex with a lot of men, and just very few men get infected with herpes????
/r/MensRights24/09/12 05:37 PM
2

That would require either the victim to be some kind of master actor or the rapist to be socially inept to a degree that would imply some kind of mental abnormality. These supposed crazies who think all intercourse is rape 1) probably don't exist, 2) if they do exist are very small in number, 3) would probably just be lesbians. Your situation with half a beer is so unlikely as to be improbable, so unless you can offer evidence that something like that has happened, it's rational for me to assume…
/r/MensRights26/07/12 01:43 PM
1

I'm saying that if someone feels intimidated they can't give consent. Consent given under threat or intimidation is no consent at all. It is impossible that someone who felt threatened would, or even could, initiate and enthusiastically participate in consensual sex. I have heard stories of captured women during wartime or women who'd been kidnapped having sex with their captors so they wouldn't be killed and stuff like that. And that is in no way healthy, consensual sex. If someone feels intimi…
/r/MensRights25/07/12 09:08 PM
1

If you're intimidated you can't give consent, so that would be rape. It's kind of your obligation to ensure you don't threaten or intimidate sexual partners. No one in the history of the world has ever thought they were raped because they had half a beer. That's ridiculous.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:56 PM
1

No they don't. Neither of those would be rape under turtle's definition because both partners gave consent. You can't consent or not consent to something after it happens, you consent at the time, or before.
/r/MensRights25/07/12 05:17 PM
1

Dude, the situations you just described are not rape. No significant number of people would ever claim they're rape (there's maybe one or two liars out there who would, but that's separate issue). Rape is sex without consent. If both partners give consent then it is not rape. If someone doesn't give consent, then it is rape. It's that easy. If you aren't 100% sure about consent, ask. Seriously, you're inventing ridiculously implausible situations to justify your idea that rape is this hard-to-de…
/r/MensRights25/07/12 04:12 PM
1

lying about BC No, seriously, use a condom. Yes, the choice to be pregnant and have a kid is only the woman's because it can only be the woman's. She's the only one whose body is involved. Let's imagine that the most unjust way a woman could get herself pregnant occurred. She lied to a man about being on birth control, and poked holes in the condom he used. She gets pregnant and the man in no way wants her to have the child. But enforcing the man's will here requires quite literally visiting vio…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:57 PM
1

Do you have citations for any of this? I've never heard of this marriage blackmail racket. The other assertion is ridiculous. None of those things are a reason to have a kid, none of those benefits outweigh the investment of labor and money that a child requires. Not even all of them together. Seriously, you think there are women out there who have kids so they can get food stamps? Cause the food food stamps provide is just freaking abundant, right? And all the other shit you have to buy for a b…
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:37 PM
1

You could just as easily say men should wait until they are in a career, and a committed relationship with a woman before fathering a kid. Men can use condoms, they're over 90% effective.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 06:22 PM
1

The majority of people are not rich. For most people, raising a child comfortably requires two incomes. The large majority of single parents work.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 12:25 AM
1

If the father is known and has a job yes, they do.
/r/MensRights17/07/12 12:10 AM
-1

So campaign to get the definition of rape improved. Don't pretend that the answer to the legal system failing to recognize male victims of rape is to have it fail to recognize other victims of rape as well. The answer is to seek justice for everyone.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 08:54 PM
0

If you don't know they're drunk then it's clearly not your fault. Mistake of fact is a viable justification in any situation. I think we're operating off two different definitions of "drunk", though. It's clearly not rape to have sex with someone who's had two or three drinks, and is still acting normally. However, I've met a few men who have had sex with women who couldn't walk on their own and/or they had seen throw up and then said it was totally cool cause she was coming on to them. In that …
/r/MensRights16/07/12 08:44 PM
1

No, that would totally be rape.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 08:19 PM
1

The majority of women who have abortions are mothers already raising at least one kid. They aren't being selfish, they're refusing to take on more than they can handle so their can raise the kids they already have.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:58 PM
1

As I said above, when you're drunk, you are responsible for your actions. Not things other people do to you. You can't sell a drunk person a car, because their reduced mental status means they can't make contracts. Similarly, they can't really give consent to sex. If you have sex with a drunk person, you're taking advantage of them.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:48 PM
5

You can't dismiss health issues, though. 15 of 100,000 pregnancies in the US result in the death of the mother. Half of pregnancies include some kind of complication (most commonly UTIs, anemia, mental health issues, hypertension, or damage to the pelvis or perenium); 2-10% of pregnancies result in gestational diabetes, which can have serious health risks if not treated and also greatly increases the mother's chance of developing diabetes later in life; and that doesn't even get into the normal …
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:36 PM
-1

Driving while you're drunk is something you do. Just like if you beat someone up while you're drunk, that's legally assault. If someone has sex with you when you're too drunk to consent, that is someone else doing something to you, or taking advantage of your reduced mental state. The applicable analogy would be if a car salesman sold you a car while you were drunk. That contract would be void, and the salesman could be prosecuted for taking advantage of your reduced state.
/r/MensRights16/07/12 07:07 PM
0

I think you're mischaracterizing the fundamental principles. The right to abortion isn't about women not being forced into parenthood, it is about the woman's literal control over her physical self. Child support is not comparable, as it is solely an economic obligation. (It's the same reason taxes aren't the same thing as slavery.)
/r/MensRights16/07/12 06:47 PM
1

Things people expect when they drink too much: - Being loud - Getting in an argument - Throwing up - Getting really sleepy - Being emotional - Slurring speech - Saying inappropriate things - Stumbling, falling, being uncoordinated - Having to take a cab or sleep at a friend's house - Peeing a lot - Getting a hangover - Maybe your friends being pissed at something stupid you did the next day Things people do NOT expect when they drink too much: - Someone having sex with you against your will (als…
/r/MensRights16/07/12 06:36 PM
1

You don't know how friendship works. Real friends, and decent human beings, NEVER respond to "I think I was roofied and/or raped" with "Oh really? Sounds doubtful." You also don't get to decide how someone else should handle their victimization. As her friend, it is NOT my job to make sure she goes to the police. It is my job to support her and help her deal with it as well as she can. If I'm going to make her go to anyone, it'll be a counselor. Only she gets to decide if she wants to put hersel…
/r/MensRights13/07/12 03:38 AM
1

I don't want to argue about physical fitness tests for police. I was just pointing out that the person you were claiming was blindly defending "female privilege" could have a legitimate point.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 09:44 PM
1

TIL highway patrol is not a police unit.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 08:37 PM
1

I think the point with the cop thing is moreso that the physical fitness test may not actually be a good indicator of who makes a good cop. If fitness is actually super-important to being a cop, why aren't there any more required fitness tests after you graduate from the acadmey? There seem to be a lot of out-of-shape cops around who let themselves go after academy, but they're never said to be unable to do their jobs.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 05:05 PM
1

Or you could be her friend and not pretend that social interaction operates on the same rules as a court of law. Women don't go around pretending they were raped. But a large number of women do get raped and don't report it. (The criminal justice system is really hard on rape victims. Women are frequently assumed to be lying, treated poorly by the police, and only half of reports go to trial anyway because of how little physical evidence rapes produce and assumptions about women "asking for it".…
/r/MensRights11/07/12 01:32 PM
3

Most rapes aren't reported to law enforcement, and that radio host wasn't talking about women making police reports. He was talking about women telling their friends they thought they'd been roofied.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 06:34 AM
-13

Team Vagina? Cause men and women are separate teams now, and advocating for the rights of rape victims is somehow damaging to men? Belittling women who've been raped doesn't help anyone.
/r/MensRights11/07/12 03:56 AM
2

And how exactly are women supposed to prove that? With home drug-testing kits?
/r/MensRights11/07/12 03:46 AM
1

You have no basis for assuming that fire stations are being staffed by women who can't actually do the job. Yes, most women aren't strong enough. Luckily, most women aren't firefighters. You're trying to claim that because men are generally stronger than women, no strong women exist. That is bullshit.
/r/MensRights10/07/12 05:23 PM
1

Hopi and Iriqouis Native American tribes, pre-1500BC Crete, the Trobriand Iands, the Mosuo who live in a remote part of China's Yunnan province, and a few others. Of course, they're exceeding rare now, with the glocal domination of western European society.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 11:00 PM
1

Greater muscle mass doesn't keep smoke from poisoning you. So what you're saying basically is that all firefighters have to be strong and capable of carrying a lot of weight to do their jobs, regardless of whether they're male or female? And that obviously fire departments wouldn't be sending anyone into burning buildings unless they could handle the situation, so why shouldn't women who can do that job be firefighters?
/r/MensRights09/07/12 10:34 PM
1

Could you cite some sociologists who believe western society hasn't been patriarchal for 100 years? Cause that's definitely not what I've learned. You said it was debatable, but then put forth an untestable claim of evolutionary psychology and claimed that societal conditions are a totally bogus explanation, thereby precluding any actual debate.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 10:23 PM
1

Just because you don't clearly understand the meaning of word doesn't mean you can assume that a clear definition doesn't exist. Also, it's hypocritical to accuse Frightened_Turtle of stating guesses as fact when that's exactly what you were doing with your evo psych theory on why women want men to pay for dates.
/r/MensRights09/07/12 06:46 PM
5

Thanks for having a source. I do find his methodology rather strange. Police officers are required to report every time they shoot their gun. It would be a lot of information to go through, but you could literally tally how much more likely female officers are to fire their guns than male officers. The fact that he instead correlated it with police force-wide civilian shootings is rather strange. He says that he wants to control for the fact that women and minorities may be more likely to be hir…
/r/MensRights09/07/12 01:59 AM
1

we didn't just up and change roles when we planted a seed -- and beside we already had an effective culture. we didn't just up and change roles as soon as a token coin came into existence -- and besides we already had an effective culture. Our culture didn't stagnate, either. A LOT of our culture changed. You're arguing that literally the ONLY WAY people survived up until modern times was through the oppression of women. That's how history played out, but that doesn't mean it was the ONLY possib…
/r/MensRights08/07/12 11:33 PM
1

There is an entire history of "hunter and gatherer" gender roles prior to agrarian culture. These gender roles were advantageous allowing women greater safety (most important sex for reproduction) while men were left tasks of greater physical risk. And . . . what does this have to do with women's economic oppression in the Western world from the start of recorded history until about 50 years ago? When the technology of agriculture (outside of home, physical risk and strength based) lead to a tol…
/r/MensRights08/07/12 09:56 PM
3

Citation please. Some studies have claimed female officers tend to deescalate situations with communication more frequently than male officers, and so reduce the number of violent altercations over all.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 09:19 PM
1

Err . . . dude, people can carry more than half their body weight. Have you seriously never seen someone give another person the same size a piggy-back ride? Also, muscle mass has nothing to do with surviving smoke and heat exposure.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 09:04 PM
2

It's moreso, "Women were oppressed by being made economically dependent upon others their whole lives." Yeah, it seems like the 50s housewife's life is pretty easy when all you think about is that she doesn't have to make any money! But she didn't get to choose that. She never got the option of making or having money. And now she's completely dependent upon someone else for her livelihood.
/r/MensRights08/07/12 08:54 PM
-8

No. Not lol. Most rape reports are false, don't you know? And the ones that aren't false are the ones filed by men, men who were raped by women. (Obviously men get raped by men in prison, but those rarely get reported.) Whereas the threat of being falsely accused of rape is a HUGE possibility in a man's life, and is entirely valid as a reason never to trust women. Particularly not feminist women. We all know how trivially feminists treat rape, after all.
/r/MensRights23/06/12 10:43 PM
1

Wait, why is the idea of rape culture a problem for men? Men and boys are raped too, and the rapes men experience are also dismissed and ignored. Seriously, how is it a problem for men ever?
/r/MensRights22/06/12 03:14 AM
1

Correctly stating that I am not committing a fallacy in no demonstrates a lack of objectivity. Your erroneous claims I am committing a fallacy, however, do. You should try logic sometime, and using legitimate studies to back up your ideas. The road they take you down might surprise you.
/r/MensRights08/06/12 01:50 AM
1

I'm not making that fallacy. You are claiming that all of society has a general disadvantage against men. I said, "Well, all of society is in general controlled by men, so why would this be?" Your fallacy would apply if I claimed that men being advantaged in one part of society proved they were not disadvantaged on the whole. But that's not what I was saying.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 08:30 PM
1

It's a legitimate study that disproves the one you brought up earlier as support for your sexist joke. Sorry you don't like facts.
/r/MensRights06/06/12 08:18 PM
1

I'm trying to point out that your views are illogical and ignore how societies are constructed. Societies get set up by those in power. This is why rich people, the victors of any wars that occur, ect. all get the best deals. They have the power, they're making the decisions, they don't make decisions against their own interests. This is frequently expressed by the quote, "History is written by the victors." Men currently control the vast majority of political, economic, and cultural power, and …
/r/MensRights06/06/12 08:00 PM
1

I have no idea what your point is and I think you may be misunderstanding mine. My quip about sexual advances was not what offended my ex friend. She didn't even understand it until after I explained it and even then wasn't offended by it. You're being so oblique I have no idea what you're even talking about. Is the quip the "lock and key" thing you mentioned? If she wasn't offended by it why were you guys even going to meet up? "Oh, I said this offensive thing you didn't understand because you …
/r/MensRights06/06/12 07:49 PM
0

Yeah, cause cops always jump all over rape cases. That's why only 1/4 of reported rapes result in charges. The thing is, the way motherhood works, it's literally immoral for someone to control what I do with my body. As a society we haven't worked out how to ensure the same parenthood freedom for men yet while ensuring the child's interests are always taken care of. And why do men run for office more? Women are sidelined in the workforce and work fewer hours because the majority of childrearing …
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:58 AM
0

People are not falsely accused of rape any more than they are falsely accused of other crimes, the rates are comparable to murder. If you accidentally get a woman pregnant and she decides to carry it to term, there is now a third person in existence who has vital interests that must also be taken into account. However, the child support system is just a quick fix that was created when divorce became a common thing and the legal system realized they didn't have a way to deal with it for the kids.…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 03:30 AM
3

Dude, "I was being glib" isn't actually a defense for saying something douchey and offensive. It's basically equivalent to "Oh, yes, I said that offensive thing, but I didn't personally feel it was a big deal." That in no way actually makes the statement less offensive. Also, when someone talks about a victim of domestic violence being slut-shamed, it's probably not the best time to start making slut jokes. Just, you know, general life advice. As to the college proposition study you're city: The…
/r/MensRights28/05/12 02:00 AM
1

Oh, cool, so just ignore the other points I made then. "Men in positions of power not helping other men solely because they are men" would not result in men being more disadvantaged than women. The unequal power distributions had to be established at some point, and at no point in Western history have women had more power than men to create those.
/r/MensRights27/05/12 07:55 PM
0

Language is fluid. Wrong use is now right use due to mass misuse. That's how language works. But that hasn't happened to this word. You're just trying to pretend you aren't applying it incorrectly when you are. Okay, we can say Dawkins didn't make an argument. He just made a really patronizing, racist statement in an attempt to make Watson look ridiculous through the use of an ethical fallacy.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 11:46 PM
0

Nice try. Right from their point of view. Exactly. Which relates back to my point earlier about how people criticize ideas they disagree with. Unfortunately improper use of it is the norm(99% of the time it's used). It's used to say "hey you're speaking from a privilege perspective" and mock. If you want to educate start with SRS, not me. Basically improper use is proper use. That makes no sense. You're telling me that because the word is frequently use wrong, you should be able to use it wrong …
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:46 PM
0

It would and it does daily, as long as it's not racist towards a minority group somewhere. Though that's not what I meant. It's the exact same style just aimed at the wrong person. SRS would LOVE that style of commentary if it were against someone they didn't like. But the entire point of SRS is that things have to be aimed at the right people. SRS loves comments with that tone, but almost everything of the substance they would find problematic and take issue with. Yes it was. Great argument the…
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:23 PM
0

Well, no, a comment that patronizing and racist would never fly on SRS. And Dawkins' response was not saying "check your privilege", it was claiming that because Watson has privilege on the axes of nationality and race and wealth and some others, it's somehow improper for her to complain about disadvantages she faces on the axes of gender. This would also be an improper application of the term "check your privilege". That term is used when someone with privilege is failing to understand an issue…
/r/MensRights26/05/12 10:09 PM
-5

Dawkins' argument was "Things are much worse for Muslim women. Therefore, your problem is of no consequence." This is a fallacy, as other problems in the world can never negate the existence of one you happen to be dealing with. What are the other established "facts"? You also ignored my final comment. In common speech, calling a complaint or opinion "unnecessary" is simply an idiomatic way of saying you believe it is wrong or unhelpful. Assuming you live in an English-speaking country, I have t…
/r/MensRights26/05/12 08:10 PM
-7

Except that rebelipar is apparently viewing Watson's complaint as legitimate - she was irked that this guy hit on her in so inappropriate a way, and complained about it - and Dawkins' as illegitimate - it ignores that Watson is aware of her racial and national privilege, and is based on an ethical fallacy as well as being racist and patronizing. Illegitimate complaints are commonly referred to as unnecessary.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 07:01 PM
-10

It's not oppressive, Rebecca was just trying to make the point that women have just as much right to be involved in skepticism as men, and to be socially comfortable while they do so. And doing douchey things that make women uncomfortable and potentially drive them away from skepticism just IS DOUCHEY and potentially drives women away from the movement and weakens it. So please cut that shit out.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:44 PM
-8

Are you on crack? You can criticize people for expressing opinions if they're the wrong opinions. See: tons of posts in this thread criticizing attitudes of misandry in various forms. Freedom of speech is not the same thing as freedom from criticism.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:40 PM
2

I'm just going to leave this here.
/r/MensRights26/05/12 06:22 PM
85

Calm down dudebro. It's pretty instinctive when you're in the moment. Start with your lips relaxed, or just slightly puckered. You aren't kissing a relative where you do that "MUA" thing with your lips looking like you're about to blow out a candle. My personal preference is heads tilted to the left, my lower lip between dude's lips, his upper lip between my lips. (I'm a chick, btw.) Just . . . do to her what feels good to you. That is to say, if she does something you like, do it back to her. D…
/r/seduction19/05/12 04:39 AM
5

And how many kids who disclosed sexual abuse by a male were not believed by the first person they told? You can't just give half of the relevant facts. To have a comparison, you have to give the other side.
/r/MensRights18/05/12 09:11 PM
1

Ha, nice pun! I turn off my snark detection when I argue with assholes.
/r/seduction18/05/12 08:56 PM
1

What part of that is incompatible with being angry at sexist bullshit? I would say that being a decent human frequently requires that you get angry, like when you encounter sexist bullshit.
/r/seduction18/05/12 08:02 PM
2

No, I think that's something we can actually agree on. Women are valued for what they are, men are valued for what they do. And that's really fucked up. The reason women only get killed in movies if it's a really emotional "SHIT JUST GOT REAL" scene (whereas men die in movies left and right) is the same reason I can't serve in forward-combat positions in the military. I believe we disagree in that I think that dichotomy results from the patriarchy, which has a need to define strict gender roles,…
/r/seduction18/05/12 07:48 PM
1

How about "Person equipped with basic human decency", which most of you seem to lack. Also, I already referred to myself as "a woman who likes to fuck men", so I don't think you should have much confusion making that assessment.
/r/seduction18/05/12 07:42 PM
3

I am. Why the fuck do you think women are having sex? Because we want to. Or, at least, all the women I know do. If you're having sex with women who are just there because you buy them shit or something weird, that's just fucked up. Oh, cute. Your dumbass opinion is "the truth" now. Ah, I hope you continue to have absolutely horrible, loveless and trustless relationships for the rest of your pathetic, sexless life then.
/r/seduction18/05/12 05:04 AM
4

As a woman who likes to fuck men, I object to the idea of male sexuality as worthless. You seriously think I'm missing sleep to give someone a gift or some shit? Hey, dude, fuck you. Seriously, cut off at 25? And also, you realize those 100-year-old men aren't attractive to women, right? It's a marketplace of mutual selection. . . . wait, do all of you honestly think that all women are basically prostitutes who have sex in exchange for other things?
/r/seduction18/05/12 04:52 AM
5

I think the healthiest way to go about sex is to take every no as a hard no. Especially when there's alcohol involved. It's really easy to misread someone trying to turn you down gently as "Oh, they just need to be more turned on" or whatever. And then you're violating someone's boundaries. (Also: the headgames. They are not fun.) Even if someone's entertaining the idea of sex, I'd much rather wait for them to be 100% into it or just not have sex. I don't even get the appeal of having sex with s…
/r/seduction17/05/12 11:30 PM
1

Dude, I get freaking /tired/ of it. Like, literally, sometimes I feel like the world hates me so much why should I even bother getting out of bed. It's so painful to know that simply because of the sex I was born with, I'm automatically less-valued and less-advantaged than half the freaking population.
/r/MensRights17/05/12 05:46 AM
2

Yeah, I was just trying to clarify that my objection isn't to promiscuity or anyone just wanting to get laid, it's just to the disrespectful way they go about it.
/r/seduction17/05/12 05:39 AM
7

It's not even about having a relationship or just wanting sex. I sleep around. A lot. The thing is, I don't number them, or pressure them, or neg them, or play some absurd game where I believe if I say the right things and hit the right buttons I'll win sex from them. I just treat them like people, make it known I'm attracted, and if they're attracted back (which fully half the time they aren't, which is fine, you accept that and find someone who is) we have sex. If the sex is good, we keep havi…
/r/seduction17/05/12 05:29 AM
11

Let's count the ways: Rating women with numbers, basing your own self worth off of how sexually successful you are, and that whole thing where you analyze women and play off their insecurities . . . Oh, also the concept of "LMR", which everyone else refers to as "a women saying she doesn't want to have sex, at which point you respect her decision and stop trying to bed her, rather than pressuring or manipulating her into it".
/r/seduction17/05/12 04:30 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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