TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TheAutismPill Archive

View 19 posts and 350 comments by TheAutismPill on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
109

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/23 10:06 PM
58

ScienceTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 10:46 AM
55

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/23 01:33 PM
50

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/22 11:38 PM
46

ScienceTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/23 12:23 AM
45

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/22 12:04 AM
40

DebateTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 07:11 AM
34

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 07:26 AM
31

TheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 07:28 AM
25

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:32 AM
23

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/23 02:01 AM
18

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:11 AM
12

DiscussionTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 04:42 AM
12

TheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 11:42 AM
9

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/22 03:26 AM
6

TheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 07:24 PM
3

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 05:42 AM
1

DiscussionTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 06:10 AM
1

CMVTheAutismPill/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 07:28 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

It is undeniably hard on apps, it's just that the extrapolation from this is stupid: https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/are-dating-apps-facilitating-chadopolies
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:34 PM
0

"How men and women interpret that questions seems to be very different." The gap, even in the Pew survey where it seems to be exaggerated, isn't mostly caused by more young women claiming to be in a non-cohabiting and non-marital relationship though. 75-100% of it is caused by more young women than men reporting being married or cohabiting. https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/is-the-young-male-singleness-crisis
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:32 PM
0

The reason this is unlikely is the same reason the 'plate spinning chad' explanation is unlikely, which is that the gap is caused primarily by more young women than men reporting being married or in a cohabiting relationship, leaving little room for ambiguity. The gap is also probably not 29%. A single survey result isn't the be all end all, unless it had a random sample of like 5,000+ 18-29s (it had less than 1,000 and online panel respondents aren't representative samples even if they were rec…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:24 PM
0

The Pew survey itself is another thing which is mindlessly parroted, though other surveys show significantly lower gaps between 10-20% and no sign of a widening of the gap (it's been a thing for over 100 years, as have half or more of young men being single). The reason why we're all aware of this survey and not others is that it makes for sensational headlines and fits a popular narrative. It's absurd how people will spend YEARS debating stats without ever questioning their accuracy (see also t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 03:18 PM
0

It's not replicated by other survey results: https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/is-the-young-male-singleness-crisis The 10-20% gap that does exist is plausibly explained by age gaps. The 'plate spinning chads' narrative favoured here and elsewhere doesn't hold up as the gap is caused primarily by more women than men married or cohabiting, not caused by more women selecting the more vague third option (non-cohabiting, non-marital committed relationship) which is the only one in which this narrativ…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/24 02:49 PM
3

When it comes to reported sex partners in the past year, since they're so even it can't be the case that a substantial number are doing this. We can also look at STD rates which show highly similar positivity rates for women and heterosexual men, and no emerging gap: https://datepsychology.com/casual-sex-is-often-mismeasured-and-overestimated/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 01:39 AM
4

The OLD data you're referencing shows absolutely nothing about actual sexual encounters. When it comes to data on that and on dates and relationships formed through it, the percentages are virtually identical for men and women, and hook-ups facilitated through them are rare: https://nuancepill.com/are-dating-apps-producing-incels/ The data does not point to an increasing skew in sexual partner counts in men either. If anything the most promiscuous men are reporting less sex partners in recent ye…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:24 AM
7

There is virtually no difference: https://nuancepill.com/has-the-sexlessness-epidemic-been-overstated/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:20 AM
7

The percentage of young men and women reporting 2 or more sex partners in the past year has been dropping. Promiscuity is very rare if you look at the sex partner distributions of young men and women: https://nuancepill.com/why-the-80-20-rule-is-only-half-true/ Even the 80th and 95th percentile of men in lifetime sex partners have been reporting less in recent years so it is not because of an increasing skew: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:19 AM
4

Why is monogamy so common even in cultures which permit polygamy? In MENA countries the rate is about 1% and in SSA countries about 11%. Biparental care was especially important in human evolutionary history since human children have such long development periods. Most male chimps do reproduce btw even if there is a skew: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2689943/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:16 AM
14

This is not a justified interpretation of the genetic data whatsoever, there are much more plausible explanations: https://nuancepill.com/did-1-man-reproduce-for-every-17-women/ Kin groups had patrilineal descent systems, and when they were wiped out it would have a greater impact on Y-DNA diversity since women would practice exogamy, be r*ped, or taken as concubines. Even if it were true that for thousands of 17x as many women reproduced, there's no reason to believe it was due to women's choic…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:10 AM
4

A survey with a much higher sample size showed remarkably similar sex partner distributions between men and women: https://nuancepill.com/why-the-80-20-rule-is-only-half-true/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 12:00 AM
4

Not true, there's virtually no difference in either in surveys with large sample sizes: https://nuancepill.com/why-the-80-20-rule-is-only-half-true/ Weird to frame it as a competition too, though I'm guessing it was just a playful use of language
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 11:59 PM
2

Only 10% of those who had sex in the past year had it only once or twice. The median 18-29 male who had sex in the past year had sex about once a week, though the vast majority of men and women have sex only with 1-2 partners in the past year, promiscuity is rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 11:54 PM
1

Everyone has seen this a million times. If you actually do some proper research however you'll find: -Other sources show much smaller gaps, generally closer to 10-15%, and no indication of a widening of the gap -The gap is caused primarily by more women being married or cohabiting rather than simply being in a more vague 'committed relationship', leaving little room for your narrative -Most young men have been single for the better part of the last 120+ years https://nuancepill.substack.com/p/is…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/24 11:51 PM
0

For one thing it didn't find that they met 'via dating apps', it simply found that about that many met 'online'. Only 10% or so had met through dating apps specifically. Moreover other sources don't corroborate that number, the sample size was very small for people who'd met on that year. A more accurate estimate is closer to 25-30%, even now 7 years after that survey. https://nuancepill.com/do-most-couples-now-meet-online/ https://nuancepill.com/no-most-people-are-not-meeting-online/ It's also …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/24 06:45 AM
-1

"But truth is 63 percent of gen z men are single but not the same about women" The gap in that survey is not corroborated by other surveys which show gaps closer to 10% and no indication of a widening of the gap. https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ There is also nothing new about most young men being single, it has been the case for most of the past 100 years or more.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/24 06:38 AM
1

Sexual partner count has virtually nothing to do with attractiveness or height, and sex partner distributions are basically the same for men and women: https://nuancepill.com/why-the-80-20-rule-is-only-half-true/
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 03:56 AM
1

Sexual partner count has virtually nothing to do with attractiveness, and sex partner distributions between men and women are highly similar: https://nuancepill.com/why-the-80-20-rule-is-only-half-true/
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/24 03:53 AM
1

Less than 2% of 18-29 men report paying for sex in the past year: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/18-29-het-men-whove-paid-for-sex-in-past-year-gss.webp?w=640&ssl=1 Only 10% of young men and women report having had sex only once or twice in the past year: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Sexual-Frequency-18-30-Heterosexuals.webp?resize=768%2C576&ssl=1 The sex partner distributions are basically identical for men and women, hookup culture doe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/24 02:06 PM
3

Less than 2% of 18-29 men report paying for sex in the past year: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/18-29-het-men-whove-paid-for-sex-in-past-year-gss.webp?w=640&ssl=1 "men who hooked up with someone they were not attracted to" Aren't you always talking about how women only find 5% of men attractive? This means by this standard the figure will be far higher for women. "which excludes men who just got lucky one night." Only 10% of young men and women report having had sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/24 02:01 PM
–

False. The rate dropped in the next two surveys among 18-29s as well. https://ifstudies.org/blog/is-the-sex-recession-over A survey with a 15x higher sample size never showed a massive rise, nor a gendered one: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/No-Opposite-Sex-Sex-Partners-In-Past-Year-18-30-Heterosexuals-NSFG.webp?resize=768%2C576&ssl=1 Other sources don't corroborate the Pew gap, showing one closer to 10%: https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/24 12:54 AM
2

The data is already in. We can look at STD rates if you refuse to accept all self-reported data (which would still show a shift in the sex partner distributions if your narrative was true). There's no change in the STD ratio between men and women like you'd expect under your narrative. They're also very similar overall with the exception of Chlamydia due to it being screened more in women due to its harmful effects being more severe (e.g. infertility). Nonetheless, there is no disproportionate r…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/24 09:49 AM
1

It's frustrating that even critics use the same sources as the manosphere when arguing with them. If you do some research you'll find that this gap doesn't replicate. Pew is not the only source which collects such data, and a single survey by them is not the be all end all. Other sources show gaps closer to 10% on the same year. Additionally it's caused by more women than men reporting being married or cohabiting which goes against the 'spinning plates' narrative. https://nuancepill.com/what-exp…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/24 12:27 AM
1

Why do you always ignore the skewed gender ratio? It's also the case that the number of men and women who date, hook up with, or form a relationship with someone through a dating app is the same. There is not a higher proportion of women having sex through dating apps than men. Either they don't actually want to engage in endless orgies with 'chads', or he does have some standards after all: https://nuancepill.com/are-dating-apps-producing-incels/
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:30 PM
1

Other sources show a gap closer to 10% and no indication of a widening of it: https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ The gap is also caused primarily by more women than men reporting being married or in a cohabiting relationship, leaving little room for your 'plate spinning chads' narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:18 PM
1

Other sources show a gap closer to 10% and no indication of a widening of it: https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ The gap is also caused primarily by more women than men reporting being married or in a cohabiting relationship, leaving little room for your 'plate spinning chads' narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 09:18 PM
0

First link: This shows a gap in singleness, nothing to do with promiscuity per se. Additionally, other sources show a lower gap closer to 10% with no indication of a widening of the gap, and even in the Pew survey the gap was caused by more women cohabiting or married rather than simply in a 'committed relationship'. This leaves little room for the spinning plates narrative. https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ Second link: I thought you were talking about the average (…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/24 02:16 AM
3

It actually means they didn't see it to begin with as the sex questions weren't included on all ballots/forms: https://nuancepill.com/is-the-2022-gss-sex-data-reliable/
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/24 04:21 AM
1

Could you provide the original source for the meme graph you've provided? The best I've gotten was 'some ex-employee leaked it on reddit'. You'll find that it's not actually on Statista if you cared to check. Even if it's real, there's a clear selection effect as not all women set the height filter. Moreover, 'look at what they do not what they say' is a popular mantra in the manosphere. If we actually look at men's sexual, relationship, reproductive outcomes by height, we don't find that it has…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 02:07 PM
–

People are still citing the outdated 2018 GSS ad nauseam, but you have a problem with someone trying to spread some awareness about the more recent data? Why's that?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 11:31 AM
3

Red pill is just as in denial or ignorant of such sex differences. They act like women have just as much of a short-term orientation as men and that they desire polygamy. Absurd solipsism.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/24 10:50 PM
-1

Yawn, always the same couple of meme stats repeated over and over. I knew someone would've posted this because it's all you have. First, other sources show a gap closer to 10% and no indication of widening over time. You can't take a single survey from a single source as gospel truth. Even going back 40 or so years it was true that 'most young men and single while most young women are not'. This more reasonable estimate is easily explained by age gaps. Second, even in the Pew survey the gap is c…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/24 10:30 PM
1

In terms of Tinder app success rate, a guy has a 2.8% chance of landing a match, while a girl has a 35% chance of landing a match. (source : Roast data set, 2024)The Tinder success rate for girls far outweighs those for guys, but guys can still stand out. Success in landing a match is different from number of matches. The group that swipes a lot more and includes a lot more users is obviously going to have a lower success rate, but the disparity in actual matches is a lot lower. For the median t…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 07:14 AM
1

I want a source on that one because I fail to see how it's possible. If you take Tinder for example, women have infinitely more matches than men. Based on that the outcomes can't be the same, especially considering that there are far more men than women on these platforms. Firstly, they actually don't. The same source the 5% swipe graph came from showed that the median woman had 3x the matches of the median man. This is exactly what you'd expect based on the gender ratio of current users. Second…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 06:00 AM
2

You don't have to be clinically autistic to be relatively socially inept. There are men higher in autistic traits than others. The rate is also much higher in men so the general population stat isn't what you should be looking at, although obviously the male rate is still not massive. Still, if you look at the men who struggle to the point of becoming wizards then you are looking at about 1-2% of the male population. There are different degrees of struggle.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 05:24 AM
0

Also, in the GSS survey your source is pulling, 55% answered "inapplicable" which is the highest rate the survey has gotten since the polling began in the early 90s. They didn't 'answer' inapplicable. 'No reply' or 'Don't know' would be selected in that case. It was inapplicable because the sex questions weren't included on all ballots/forms. What would inapplicable even mean in this context? Who wouldn't it apply to? If you look at earlier years you'll see that 100% of answers were 'inapplicabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 05:08 AM
0

But it doesn’t explique such a large gap. It does actually if you go by the gap shown by the American Perspectives Survey or the General Social Survey on the same year the Pew survey was conducted. There's no reason to rely solely on a single survey. The Pew sample size wasn't any larger than the APS one. These other sources also fail to show evidence for a widening of the gap over time. So why pretty much any studies on OLD since then reached the conclusion that men shouldn’t bother with OLD be…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 04:56 AM
-1

The 95% upper confidence bound was 23%. The sample size is still enough to determine that it hasn't skyrocketed and that the trend was probably exaggerated by noise. A survey with a 15x higher sample size (the NSFG) didn't find a young male-driven trend in the same time span, and also showed a much more modest rise as sexlessness began at a higher point and ended at a lower point. YouGov also shows a rate of sexual inactivity of about 20%.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 04:37 AM
0

Others sources show a lower gap closer to 10%, and the gap exists due to more young women cohabitating and married rather than in the more general 'committed relationships'. This means that it can't be due to women 'sharing the same guy' like you want to believe, unless you think they're literally polygamous/polyamorous: https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ Moreover there is only a weak at best correlation with attractiveness and being in a relationship. Even if less th…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/24 04:31 AM
0

They don't sleep with any more than they did ten or twenty years ago but if anything less: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ It's also not any more influenced by physical attractiveness than it was, and both it and height have only very weak correlations (especially height): https://nuancepill.com/has-the-attractiveness-and-sex-partners-correlation-increased/ It's also true of women, a promiscuous minority have most of the sexual encounters (even if there's mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 03:38 AM
1

Even framing it as men that have the least children are at the 'bottom' of some hierarchy is misguided. It's not the highest quality specimens having the most offspring by most metrics. It's the most extraverted, impulsive, impoverished, and prone to risk-taking: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35790706/
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/24 03:35 AM
1

Says the one posting data from a 6 year old survey when two subsequent ones have not shown a continuation of that trend: https://ifstudies.org/blog/is-the-sex-recession-over A survey with a 15x sample size didn't show a male-driven trend across the same time-span, and also showed a much more modest rise overall as it started at a higher point and ended at a lower one: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/No-Opposite-Sex-Sex-Partners-In-Past-Year-18-30-Heterosexuals-NSFG.we…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:21 AM
2

They basically do though. The GSS did not show a continuation of the male-driven sexlessness trend: https://ifstudies.org/blog/is-the-sex-recession-over A survey with a 15x sample size didn't show a male-driven trend across the same time-span, and also showed a much more modest rise overall as it started at a higher point and ended at a lower one: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/No-Opposite-Sex-Sex-Partners-In-Past-Year-18-30-Heterosexuals-NSFG.webp?resize=768%2C576&s…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:16 AM
0

This idea of a growing sexual skew is simply not supported. The top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex partners has not risen in the past decade since what it was before (low): https://nuancepill.com/has-the-attractiveness-and-sex-partners-correlation-increased The GSS did not show a continu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:15 AM
1

This idea of a growing sexual skew is simply not supported. The top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex partners has not risen in the past decade since what it was before (low): https://nuancepill.com/has-the-attractiveness-and-sex-partners-correlation-increased The GSS did not show a continu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:13 AM
1

Not really. It's right here in this CDC report. Looks like according to the CDC they are not rising disproportionately in women compared to heterosexual men and are very similar overall except for chlamydia due to women being screened more due to having worse sequalae: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831743/
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:07 AM
1

Let's do that. Looks like according to the CDC they are not rising disproportionately in women compared to heterosexual men and are very similar overall except for chlamydia due to women being screened more due to having worse sequalae: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831743/
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:07 AM
-1

women who are having sex are having sex with the same guys over time. Tina dates Tommy in the spring. Rebecca dates him in the fall. He probably cheated on both. This is how those women are getting the STDs most likely. In this case it's strange how the top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:06 AM
1

There is a difference when it comes to Chlamydia as they're screened more for itdue to having worse sequalae, there is not when it comes to Gonorrhea or Syphilis, and all three of these are not rising disproportionately among women compared to heterosexual men which your narrative would predict: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831743/
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:04 AM
1

The GSS did not show a continuation of the male-driven sexlessness trend: https://ifstudies.org/blog/is-the-sex-recession-over A survey with a 15x sample size didn't show a male-driven trend across the same time-span, and also showed a much more modest rise overall as it started at a higher point and ended at a lower one: https://i0.wp.com/nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/No-Opposite-Sex-Sex-Partners-In-Past-Year-18-30-Heterosexuals-NSFG.webp?resize=768%2C576&ssl=1
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:02 AM
3

They are screened for chlamydia more due to worse sequelae: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831743/ There is not a higher rate of Syphilis or Gonorrhea among women however, and both these and Chlamydia are not rising disproportionately among women compared to heterosexual men: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 03:01 AM
1

This idea of a growing sexual skew is simply not supported. The top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex partners has not risen in the past decade since what it was before (low): https://nuancepill.com/has-the-attractiveness-and-sex-partners-correlation-increased The GSS did not show a continu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:54 AM
3

They are not rising disproportionately compared to heterosexual men and are very similar overall except for chlamydia due to women being screened more due to suffering worse sequelae: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf The top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:48 AM
3

They are not rising disproportionately compared to heterosexual men which is what the chad conspiracy theory would predict, and are very similar overall except for chlamydia due to women being screened more due to suffering worse sequelae: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:43 AM
2

They are not rising disproportionately compared to heterosexual men and are very similar overall except for chlamydia due to women being screened more due to suffering worse sequelae: https://www.cdc.gov/std/statistics/2019/std-surveillance-2019.pdf The top 80th and 95th percentiles of men in lifetime sex partners are if anything reporting less sex partners in recent years: https://nuancepill.com/are-the-male-elite-enjoying-a-sexual-boomtime/ The correlation between attractiveness/height and sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/24 02:36 AM
7

Women only orgasm in a minority of hookups compared to a majority of the time in committed relationships. It seems like demisexual is a good descriptor for the majority of women. Why are they always sleeping around then? They're not. 'Hookup culture' is a baseless conspiracy theory. It's a small minority of women and men who are promiscuous in their behaviour which is why heterosexual men and women have the same STD rates. Studies show even attractive men get rejected the vast majority of the ti…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 07:01 PM
2

They have a natural drive to be hyper-promiscuous? Why are they so restrained then despite such a supposedly sex-positive culture? Why aren't their STD rates skyrocketing to the level of gay men?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 03:15 AM
2

From what I see it's 15% for 30-59s, 13% for boomers
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 03:03 AM
3

The very first question shows that young men are more likely to view toxic masculinity as being a helpful concept than 30+ men are, so there are at least some mixed findings here.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 03:00 AM
0

Other sources show a gap closer to 10% and no evidence for a widening of the gap over time, you can't base everything on a single survey from a single source: https://nuancepill.com/what-explains-the-young-singleness-gap/ Moreover, the gap even in the Pew survey was primarily caused by more women cohabiting and married, contradicting the 'spinning plate' narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/24 02:45 AM
1

It also hasn't increased following the introduction of dating apps: https://nuancepill.com/has-the-attractiveness-and-sex-partners-correlation-increased/
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/24 11:04 PM
–

Correct, a small top 10% of dudes are banging a lot of women. But all of those women are "monogamous", even though they're all banging one guy Despite this, STD rates are somehow virtually identical between young women and straight men. They're not higher or rising disproportionately among young women like your conspiracy theory would predict.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:38 AM
–

University students have a much lower mean age, and sexlessness rates are significantly higher for 18-23s than 24-29s. Still, it probably is closer to 10-15%.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 08:31 AM
1

The actual data shows that physical attractiveness and height correlates very weakly with lifetime sex partners, casual or otherwise. .1-.2 for facial attractiveness which means about 1-4% of the variance. .07 for height. Behavioural traits actually correlate a lot higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/23 06:01 AM
1

Don't mean to nitpick but: Can we PLEASE stop arguing over casual sex for average men? It's not for them. It's not a problem they don't have it. They never had it in the past and they will never have it in the future. This isn't true from the data I've seen. From a large Swiss survey for instance the vast majority of men (75%) and women (70%) mostly aged 26 had had hookup experience. If you're saying frequently though then sure. It also doesn't seem to correlate any more with physical attractive…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/23 05:51 AM
1

That is in no way an unprecedented figure: https://nuancepill.com/is-the-singleness-gap-caused-by-chad-harems/ The single rate for 18-29 men was above half as long as 4 decades ago, maybe longer, and there is no good evidence for a male-specific rise in singleness. It's also not caused by the chad bogeyman hoarding the women. The gap is probably in the range of 10-20% according to multiple other sources and regardless the gap exists primarily in the categories of cohabitation and marriage, leavi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/23 05:41 AM
2

The NSFG which has a 15x higher sample size never showed a statistically significant gap between young men and women in the survey cycle of 2017-19. the most attractive men are having drastically more sex with much more women than the rest of men Not even remotely true. When it comes to physical attractiveness at least, the correlation between it and lifetime sex partners or sex partners in the past year tends to be between .1-.2, meaning 1-4% of the variance in sexual experience is explained by…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/23 05:38 AM
7

The GSS data was never too reliable. The sample size is barely above 100 for 18-30 men in recent years and weighting by age tends to skew the results further. The NSFG with a much higher sample size among 18-30 men never showed a male specific rise in sexlessness, and also showed a much more modest rise overall (although from a higher starting point).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:59 PM
5

We'd still expect to see an increasing gap in sexlessness if that were the trend, unless you think there's also a trend whereby people are increasingly choosing to lie on anonymous surveys. Females only pick the top 5 to 1% of men on the Dating Apps Yet the median match rates are equal when controlling for the gender ratio, and all available sources show that the actual outcomes are completely equal by gender: https://thenuancepill.wordpress.com/2023/09/26/are-dating-apps-producing-sexual-inequa…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:55 PM
9

Only about 10% of the men who had sex in the past year reported having it only once or twice.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:47 PM
11

Other data sources don't show the same gap, but one closer to 10-15%: https://www.americansurveycenter.org/research/from-swiping-to-sexting-the-enduring-gender-divide-in-american-dating-and-relationships/ The GSS shows no evidence for the gap increasing over time either: https://ifstudies.org/blog/theres-no-huge-gender-gap-in-being-single-among-young-adults Moreover, the gap exists mostly in the categories of cohabitation and marriage, leaving little room for your 'chad spinning plates' narrativ…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:46 PM
2

You are the one denying reality: https://thenuancepill.wordpress.com/2023/09/26/are-dating-apps-producing-sexual-inequality/ This meme narrative is pure cope.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:44 PM
5

It's not even real: https://thenuancepill.wordpress.com/2023/09/26/are-dating-apps-producing-sexual-inequality/ This data is outdated, and the vast bulk of the evidence doesn't support this meme narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:43 PM
6

the correlation is extremely weak though: https://datepsychology.com/male-attractiveness-and-sexual-partner-count/
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:41 PM
1

Both of these data sources are outdated. That gap in sexlessness reversed and then closed in the next GSS surveys, and was never present in the NSFG data which has a much higher sample size. The top 80th and 95th percentile men in lifetime sex partners also reported less sex partners in the subsequent NSFG surveys. That study also did show a proportionally similar increase in opposite-sex sex partners among women, and also the increase was heavily concentrated in Hispanic men for some reason. An…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/23 03:40 PM
–

The only purpose of this pathetic subreddit now is to spread black pill propaganda and serve as a hugbox echo chamber since most of the other incel subreddits have been purged. Virtually every single post could have been picked from an incel forum at random. You can't post any threads criticizing the ideology either, even if you put in more effort than all the threads which are basically copy pastes of the ones from the previous day and include numerous citations. Anything that goes against the …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/23 01:13 AM
3

What a pathetic subreddit this is. Every single post is just whining about how hard life is when you're not a male model and repeating generic 'black pill' talking points ad nauseam and any thread that goes against your dogma now is deleted. Purple pill 'debate' my ass. It's really just BlackPillPropaganda as all the other incel subreddits have been purged now.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/09/23 12:56 AM
–

Pretty much all of them actually. The fact that you pin anyone that disagrees with any of your views as a radical man hating feminist just shows how dogmatic you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 12:12 AM
–

Yet the place is flooded with incel/black pill content on a daily basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 10:04 PM
–

It's telling that you think that's the only alternative to your kind of hugbox. A 'debate' subreddit where its users can't even conceive of a space where ideas are challenged, or the idea that anyone would be interested in such a space.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 09:53 PM
–

As opposed to other threads?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 09:45 PM
–

The 'no incel/black-pill content' "rule" should be changed to no content critical incel/black-pill content. At least some of the mods here are obviously biased and want to cultivate a black pill echo chamber. I've had multiple threads I've made recently deleted and the only feasible reason is that they were challenging incel/black-pill dogma.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 09:24 PM
–

Women can go in an app now in her pajamas and order dick like dominoes, and the best dick at that, completely discreet Why would you assume they're interested in doing this? Women only orgasm about 10% of the time from hookups. Women make up 20% of dating app users. There's no evidence that it's leading to unequal outcomes. All the data shows that a similar number of men and women have sex through dating apps. There's no reason that women can't have found a top 20% (1 in 5 men) guy to have sex w…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/23 04:57 AM
0

No other sources replicate that data. Speed dating studies and other studies where men and women rate each other show much closer means and distributions. Regardless, at most it would show that women aren't as spontaneously attracted to visual stimuli. It doesn't mean that men can't generate attraction in other ways such as humour.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 09:11 PM
1

There is a much more reasonable explanation for that bottleneck offered by this study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-04375-6 The rest of the stats are also either wrong or lacking context. I won't copy paste my responses to them though.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:58 PM
2

​ The 80% thing is ripped from an OKC blogpost which also showed that when it came to actual messaging if anything men's messages were influenced by the women's attractiveness more, though the gap was lower when it came to responding to messages. This was determined based on multipliers of messages sent to people rated 0. So even if it were the case it doesn't seem to inform their behaviour much. Other datasets such as from speed dating studies show much closer means and distributions between me…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:53 PM
-1

There is literally zero evidence that Tinder is leading to unequal outcomes. All data shows a similar number of men and women meet or hook up through it. Even if you deny that data there is no evidence in the STD rates that it's facilitating hookups between a small portion of men and a large portion of women as women's STD rates would be increasing disproportionately. Unless she was stranded on a farm or something there is no reason why a woman couldn't have bumped into a 'top 20%' guy without t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:45 PM
1

Even when they're true they're lacking in important context. Here's a quick rundown of that context. The 80% thing is ripped from an OKC blogpost which also showed that when it came to actual messaging if anything men's messages were influenced by the women's attractiveness more, though the gap was lower when it came to responding to messages. This was determined based on multipliers of messages sent to people rated 0. So even if it were the case it doesn't seem to inform their behaviour much. O…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:33 PM
1

Gonorrhea and Syphilis rates are virtually equal and have risen in tandem for heterosexual men and women as per the CDC. Chlamydia rates are higher for women because they're screened more for it as they suffer worse sequelae. Nonetheless it has not risen disproportionately among women.
/r/AllPillDebate08/09/23 03:52 PM
6

That's what I'm pointing out, yet the Pew article just left us with the vague 'committed relationships' which allowed for more speculation on possible causes than this specific breakdown of relationship types probably does.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 05:56 AM
2

Neither do I, yet a good amount of people think that the singleness gap is due to some kind of polygyny. This seems to rule that out as a significant factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 05:53 AM
3

It's a dataset that didn't lead to any articles as far as I'm aware: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/dataset/american-trends-panel-wave-103/
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 05:49 AM
1

Sorry to hear about your loss. The gap in marriage rates just shows that age gaps are a large factor though.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/23 04:19 AM
1

That first link defines not being married or cohabiting as 'single', ignoring the possibility of non-cohabiting relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 01:10 PM
1

Other sources show the singleness rate for 18-29 women being significantly higher, 45-50%. The actual gap is probably closer to 10-15% and thus reasonably explained by age gaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 01:04 PM
1

It was more like 300-400 guys. The 900 or whatever it was was for both men and women. The male rate is probably pretty close to accurate though going by other sources, it's the female rate which is suspiciously low.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 01:01 PM
2

Except the gap exists primarily in the categories of cohabitation and marriage according to the 2022 Pew survey conducted earlier in that year and the American Perspectives survey (which showed a much lower gap of 12%). The vast majority of the gap was in cohabitation in the Pew survey with the larger gap. So these men are cohabiting with their partners but selecting single? Are they cohabiting with multiple women?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 11:33 AM
5

Other sources (American Perspectives Survey & GSS) showed a 10-12% gap in their 2022 surveys among single 18-29 men and women. The simplest explanation is that the Pew stat is simply not accurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 11:29 AM
0

" Average men in the ages of 18 - 30 are mostly single. " Slightly more than 18-29 men were single in 1986 according to the GSS. The GSS measured physical attractiveness in 2016 and 2018. There was no difference between the mean attractiveness ratings of men who were single or in relationships. Also I thought that attractive men were supposed to be sleeping around because they had no 'need' to be in a relationship? What happened to that?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/23 11:27 AM
2

height is not being positively selected in either gender in modern western society according to the UK biobank polygenic data, and NSFG and GSS survey data showing if anything shorter men are having more children. part of this is Hispanics being shorter and having higher fertility rates but even controlling for that there's a slight negative effect of height.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/23 12:21 AM
1

the gap is much lower in other sources such as the GSS and American Perspectives Survey. for 18-29 men and women it was 10% in the 2022 GSS and 12% in the 2022 American Perspectives survey (which had a comparable sample size). you can't just take the result of a single survey at face value. the gap existed primarily in the categories of cohabitation and marriage in the earlier pew poll in 2022, with only a small percentage in the 'non-cohabiting' category, same for the other sources, so you have…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/23 11:58 PM
1

The figure is referring specifically to single men. It's either being misread or misreported: https://www.gender.go.jp/about_danjo/whitepaper/r04/zentai/pdf/r04_print.pdf Page 51
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:24 AM
2

The 40% figure is specifically referring to single men in the original source, it's being misread or misrepresented.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:19 AM
6

You can give as much data and proof as you want, women will NEVER admit that they are all casually fucking the same small set of guys As in literally zero. Why aren't STD rates rising disproportionately among women? There's no room for lying when it comes to those. You're the one that has to engage in mental gymnastics to maintain your pathetic meme narrative that you desperately latch onto because you need to externalize your issues onto society rather than accept that you have any shortcomings…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:18 AM
1

That gap is almost certainly overblown as well. All other data sources show a smaller gap: https://www.americansurveycenter.org/research/from-swiping-to-sexting-the-enduring-gender-divide-in-american-dating-and-relationships/ The gap also exists primarily in marriage and cohabitation, leaving little room for the 'spinning plates' meme.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:14 AM
1

It's referring specifically to single men and women. The article is either misreading or misrepresenting the original source.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:12 AM
0

Go to the actual source, the figure is referring specifically to single men and women: https://www.gender.go.jp/about_danjo/whitepaper/r04/zentai/pdf/r04_print.pdf Page 51
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:10 AM
5

>Basically, society is being re-engineered in such a way that the top 20% of men get the lion's share of women and the others get the left-overs.. if any. Meme tier garbage with 0 evidence supporting it. All data sources show that if anything the top 20% of men are having less sex than they were one or two decades ago (GSS, NSFG, etc.). There's also little to no gap in sexlessness between men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:09 AM
2

Of course it's in Japanese so it's easy to misread or even misrepresent, but that figure is referring specifically to single men and women. You can go to page 51 of the paper to see. 女性／20代／独身 女性／20代／既婚 Female/20s/single Female/20s/married
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 09:01 AM
1

I must be doing this wrong because I find a rate of 57.7% for 18-29 men and 30.8% for 18-29 women in the Feb 2022 data set. Married: 15.5% men, 21.21% women Cohabiting: 8.83% men, 26.39% women Non-cohabiting: 18% men, 21.65% women
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 10:35 PM
7

It seems unlikely that the male samples in these studies just happen to be more varied than the overall male population in a way that the female samples aren't. Another example is Townsend & Wasserman, 1997, The Perception of Sexual Attractiveness: Sex Differences in Variability, wherein 40 photos were pre-rated for physical attractiveness by 20 men and 20 women. 58 male and 98 female student subjects were then asked to rank them according to how sexually attractive they found them. They then me…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 07:10 PM
1

It could be. Just saying I haven't seen evidence for it being a significant phenomenon. It's not really needed as an explanation when it comes to the gap seen in the other surveys though as they are consistent with the gap that's existed across time.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 06:21 PM
14

Studies tend to show that women actually have more variance in what they consider attractive, i.e. Roth et al., 2023, Individual attractiveness preferences differentially modulate immediate and voluntary attention. This is sometimes interpreted as evidence for it being more of a salient indicator of mate value in women. There's also a wide range of areas which indicate men's greater preference for looks, such as in the case of porn vs. erotica consumption, sexual fantasies wherein men report a m…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 05:45 PM
1

Got it, thanks. So I guess I'd apply the second question to 4, 5, and 6 to find out the number of people in non-cohabiting relationships. A bit of leg work but that's okay. Yeah I saw those error margins, but even still it seems like a stretch to get to the gaps seen in the other surveys. To go from 29% to 10-12% would be a 17% drop. I guess it's also possible that the other survey results are somewhat incorrect in the other direction.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 05:21 PM
1

So they're marrying and living with chad then? Why just casually ignore that gaping flaw in the meme? Most people would also disagree with your assessment that it's the 'most simple'. You’re either a Chad who is drowning in pussy, or you get little or nothing. Why aren't STD rates rising disproportionately among young women? Things are really dire when even they’re saying 2/3s of young men are now incels. Except they didn't claim that at all, and data actually relating to sexual activity doesn't…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 05:12 PM
2

What evidence is there that there is no discrepancy? Again it's self-report data, which means that it's easy to dismiss it on that basis if it doesn't align with your preconceptions (not a criticism of you or any group in particular though), although I'll mention the bogus pipeline procedure that shows that anonymous sex survey responses are more in line with those obtained under a (fake) lie detector than those obtained under an 'exposure threat' condition. "Nearly half of married men (48 perce…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 05:03 PM
1

Fair point I guess, I couldn't think of a better way to frame it. "Some people say"? "A notion that exists"? Still I don't think you'll hear this take coming from anyone that isn't heavily involved with the 'manosphere', but maybe I'm wrong. And still, no matter the study, younger women still seem to be in relationships far more than men. Not sure how this is supposed to be at all contradictory. There are still less young women in relationships than there were in the past. Are you saying that th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:56 PM
2

Yeah, assuming there's no substantial sample bias which seems likely, I'm guessing it's just sample error, but I wouldn't have imagined the error margins were that large. Cheers. I'm looking at the codebook and the related question says: MARITAL Which of these best describes you? 1 Married 2 Living with a partner 3 Divorced 4 Separated 5 Widowed 6 Never been married So how do I establish how many are non-married, non-cohabiting, but in a relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:44 PM
3

The American Perspectives survey also uses a nationally representative panel named the Ipsos knowledge panel. Does it differ from the American Trends panel in a significant way? Btw can I get a source on the data for specific relationship types? I couldn't find it. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:17 PM
-1

It would also be irrelevant. Casual sex is a different issue. I've seen no good evidence there's a discrepancy there however, and plenty that there isn't. Not just in terms of self-reports either but STD rates are not disproportionately high among heterosexual women (with chlamydia being an exception due to higher susceptibility), nor are they rising disproportionately among them.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:11 PM
2

I didn't set out to broadly refute the 'chad harem' narrative, although I have many critiques of it outside of this context as well, but simply critique its application to these (sketchy) Pew findings.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:08 PM
0

I know it's easy to put anyone with a differing view in a box, but I wouldn't deny that there are typically a wider range of criteria that men must meet to be considered a suitable partner, and that more men may be falling behind (and/or women are jumping ahead). It's probably true that there's likely an increasing portion of women who are WGTOWs as their main incentive for dating is no longer a concern.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 03:06 PM
3

The purpose of oversampling them was to ensure high reliability, they were weighted down when it came to the actual results. They were only overrepresented in the unweighted sample. I mentioned it just because it means that the unweighted hetero sample is more or less the same across the APS and Pew surveys.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:53 PM
1

"This isn't super uncommon" According to the data I presented it must be, unless you think that chad is not reporting it as either a committed relationship or casual dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:29 PM
2

This was meant specifically for the notion being applied to the relationship gap, but I've made my criticisms of the kind you're referring to as well. Numerous data sources (GSS, NSFG, Monitoring the Future) show that there is not an increasing sexual skew in the sense that the 'top 20%' or even 'top 5%' of guys are having more sex over time while the rest have less. In fact they tend to show that they are reporting less sex partners over time too. There is also data specifically relating to dat…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:24 PM
2

They were weighted down so wouldn't explain much of the gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:14 PM
2

They're not, but I'd need to see evidence for a large portion of women foregoing men and dating each other. I don't think that explains too much of the gap. I think the Pew data is just not completely accurate and age gaps are in fact the main reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:14 PM
2

They didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:11 PM
3

It depends what you're referring to. It's not supposed to be a 'rebuttal' of the Pew results, but a case for heavy skepticism as the data is not corroborated by other data sources. There's no reason to take any one result as gospel truth, but the weight of the evidence seems to indicate that the gap is exaggerated in the Pew surveys. In the case of the 'chad harems' narrative, I think I made my rebuttal pretty clear. The main contention is that the type of relationships in which there are a gap …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 02:11 PM
2

They were weighted down though so I don't think it'd affect the overall results much
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/23 01:34 PM
–

based. I've always said it was a cope to feel like less of a personal failure, 'there's nothing subpar about me I'm just a product of society', 'the chad bogeyman is taking all the women', etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 09:31 AM
3

Definitely wouldn't go as far as 'as much as they want', unless they have a low sex drive, but I agree with the sentiment. As my name should imply I think social deficits are the main barrier.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/23 09:27 AM
7

In the traditional form which is more academically termed the dual-mate hypothesis, it's been largely abandoned as it failed to replicate. Women who are ovulating are just more sexually aroused in general, not specifically by more masculine men. Also the rate of extra-pair paternity is only around 1%, consistent across time and various societies, except africa where it may rise to about 10%. In terms of the more memey conception of it where women are all hyper-promiscuous but only sleep with 1% …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 05:22 PM
3

"The Domination of online dating" About 80% of young couples still meet offline. Not sure how 20% translates to a 'domination'. Sources: Pew research 2023 survey, American and British YouGov polling, Singles in America 2022 study
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 04:31 PM
6

"Nobody read the profiles as OKcupid data shows, your picture is your profile." not sure what this OKcupid data you're referring to is, but there's tinder data that shows that just having a bio increases the number of matches men get by over 3x
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 04:11 PM
3

and nothing about that is exclusive to women. men value certain traits in women too (mostly youth and physical attractiveness), and since the species is largely monomorphic and monogamous, selection goes both ways. there's a reason why women are more facially attractive than men on average whether it's men, women, or gay men doing the rating.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 04:02 PM
0

"they no longer need to settle or put with the average beta." "It’s just alpha fucks/beta bucks, it’s the way of life. make up your mind. or is that too much to ask because it's not a coherent worldview? "technology has dramatically expanded the number of hot men that women have access to" we've all heard this before, yet what are the implications of this? you must be aware that the data shows that the vast majority of dating app users are men, so they don't seem to be leaping on this opportunit…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 04:00 PM
2

do you have any data whatsoever to back this up? all the unemployment data I can find shows the rates of men and women follow each other extremely closely. where is the male specific unemployment trend?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 09:50 PM
9

Why are the top 20 and 5% of men not reporting more partners over the past 3 decades then? Why has the rate of sexlessness risen proportionally similarly for both genders?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 09:29 PM
4

It's also true that the sexlessness rate drops by about half when limiting the cohort to those who have no moral qualms with premarital sex though, so it's not obvious that it's 'most', as many of the men who aren't having sex probably would be if they were less traditional. But I recognize that fact to the extent that it's true, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 08:56 PM
2

the point is that Y-DNA was concentrated in tribes, war wouldn't have had nearly as much impact on genetic diversity otherwise. it was an interplay between these factors.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 08:52 PM
3

Though this is basically correct it's not that simple as the main bottleneck was limited to the neolithic era. The reason for this is that following the advent of agriculture men would organize into patrilineal kin groups, and when these groups would be eliminated as a result of inter-tribal competition Y-DNA would be homogenized, while female genetic diversity would be retained through exogamy or women being taken as concubines/raped.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 08:37 PM
6

However it turns out that women sexuality is highly selective and only a few % of men turn them on sexually, which is conflicting with men's more "democratic" sexuality." Maybe if you think that male sexuality is the be all end all. In reality women are more demisexual, which is probably why they orgasm far more often when in relationships than in casual hookups. Many says that social media and dating apps are the root of all problems but I honestly think that they only accelerated an already ex…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/23 08:24 PM
4

Just waiting for it to be approved now.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/23 02:34 AM
4

The fact that so many men sympathise with it means it's true. there are a bunch of women that 'sympathize' with feminist talking points, are they all true by definition then too? what's the difference then? also don't be fooled into thinking you represent anything close to the majority of men, it's still a loud minority mostly relegated to corners of the internet spouting incel cope.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/23 12:53 AM
12

The main problem is just that there's no statistical evidence for it (that I've came across at least). The GSS data for example doesn't show an increasing skew in sex partners over the past 3 decades, i.e. the top 5% or 20% of men monopolizing a higher share of the women. It shows a slight uptick in sexlessness in the past decade among both genders, and maybe slightly more promiscuity among women, but that's about it. I can't really post it here though so I'd need to make a thread including grap…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/23 12:29 AM
1

That uses the exact same data source (the GSS). The 2018 data point was probably a statistical anomaly. The NSFG has a 7x larger sample size in that time period and shows a far slighter rise and no gender gap in the rise either.
/r/AllPillDebate30/01/23 09:41 AM
1

The GSS data also shows that only 4% of 18-30 men paid for sex in the past year in the past 3 surveys, and it's not obvious that they completely relied on them to get laid at all, plenty of guys with relationships still see escorts
/r/AllPillDebate30/01/23 09:39 AM
6

They can still get their back blown whenever they want that's why that n count keeps doubling tripling in so called single phase A similar amount if not more women are sexless while single (even if it's by choice because I know ppl leap on this like they have a point) so this narrative of widespread promiscuity is just nonsense. Twenty-eight percent of the women and 34 percent of the men who were unpartnered at the time of the survey report having engaged in sexual intercourse in the past four w…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/23 01:24 PM
1

it's right under the trackers: https://today.yougov.com/about/panel-methodology/ https://yougov.co.uk/about/panel-methodology/ and I'd assume not many relationships formed during COVID, period. nonetheless dating apps did see a minor increase and for instance through work saw a decrease. I'm pretty sure this has more data when you add all the survey waves together too. it's not just yougov that shows a far lower number either, this is a pew research survey conducted in 2019: For some Americans, …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/23 08:28 AM
1

maybe they are below average since gosling is a 5 at best
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/23 06:23 AM
1

even post-covid and even among younger cohorts the rate of people meeting their most recent partner is much lower, only about 20% of British and American young adults met their most recent partner online: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/relationships/trackers/how-brits-meet-their-partners https://today.yougov.com/topics/society/trackers/meet-latest-partner I have no clue why this outdated meme graph is still being circulated (other than because people want to exaggerate the prevalence of online dati…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/23 09:37 AM
1

ffs, why is it always this meme graph, even when you're trying to make the case that OLD is overblown? every other source shows that even among young cohorts and even more recently the numbers are far lower: For some Americans, these platforms have been instrumental in forging meaningful connections: 12% say they have married or been in a committed relationship with someone they first met through a dating site or app About one-in-five partnered adults ages 18 to 29 (21%) say they met their partn…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/23 09:32 AM
13

I think their stunted social development underlies both phenomenons tbh. most of them probably have little to no contact with women to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/23 11:28 PM
0

it makes it clear that the average user here is a 15 year old edgelord that was just bursting to pull out their 4chan meme folder
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/23 11:25 PM
1

Having sex once is barely different from having no sex. It's still starving. at least once. the amount who had it only a single time is minimal. Any man can literally change their height on a dating app and multiply their matches to prove that women are a hivemind. right and I guess most men preferring larger breasts or hips/ass makes them a hivemind in your view too huh? or is that different somehow? cringe
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 10:57 AM
1

Data from the UK shows more men having sex than women: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/relationships/trackers/how-often-brits-have-sex?crossBreak=male dating apps preferences and swipe data is there to prove it lol no. you can't just make extrapolations from out of context swipe data. not only does it ignore the highly skewed gender ratio of dating apps, it ignores the actual outcome data all of which demonstrates that a similar amount of both genders if not more men meet/hook up through dating apps…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 10:51 AM
1

Today I’m sure that number is even higher according to the 2021 GSS survey it dropped to 20% meaning the earlier data point was likely something of a statistical anomaly. the sample size isn't massive after all. it also include gays in the sample despite the question being about opposite sex partners and could include young people who had sex before 18 but not since. when you instead look at the 'sex in the past 5 years' variable, only 13% hadn't had any partners in the past 5 years and this is …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 10:38 AM
3

because women's arousal is more complex than men's and isn't as spontaneous and appearance based. this is why men are the main consumers of porn while women are the main consumers of erotica.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 01:53 AM
0

you're projecting male sexuality onto women (male solipsism?), a common theme here. they might not be based on their appearance alone, yet when it comes to orgasms, women orgasm almost as much as men do in relationships but only 1/3rd as much in hookups. therefore it appears that a romantic connection is crucial for their arousal and they can very much be aroused by average and below guys in the right context.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/22 01:46 AM
2

to be fair the original source says 68% of men are 'not completely satisfied with it' either, so not a massive gap: https://www.zavamed.com/uk/one-night-only.html the gap was larger among Europeans though Over 38 percent of European men and over 32 percent of American men were very satisfied following a one-night stand, whereas only about 16 percent of European women and 18 percent of American women claimed the same. and if they were asked if they were not satisfied at all I think the gap may be…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 05:47 AM
1

really, even though they're 1/3rd as likely to orgasm as men in a casual encounter, compared to a small gap in the context of relationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 05:44 AM
0

how else do you approach a claim relating to data or statistics without presenting any yourself? just responding with an anecdote is never going to seem convincing. this would just allow others to monopolize them to appear more scientific and fact based
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 04:59 AM
2

Men don’t monkey branch because we aren’t hypegamous really, there aren't any men that trade up when they get rich/famous for instance? what about the fact that someone like decaprio will go from one attractive young woman to the next after they 'expire', how is that not equivalent?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/22 04:44 AM
3

it's not just men having lower standards for hookups it's that men vastly outnumber women on all dating apps (probably largely because they're more keen for hookups in general). this is likely the main reason for the lower standards to begin with. the gender ratio alone is actually enough to explain the outcomes as when you look at how many people actually meet, hookup, or date through OLD the numbers are relatively even by gender, and if anything more men do than women, meaning that it's unlike…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 07:21 AM
3

lmfao. aren't you charming. the only lie is the dumb cope you're spewing because the actual truth that the vast majority of guys are doing fine with women is too emotionally damaging to people like you, you want to believe instead that you're a symptom of society and part of an oppressed majority so you don't have to introspect and acknowledge your personal flaws. the irony of you trying to insinuate anyone else is socially maladjusted when you're this detached from reality in a way that indicat…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 05:01 AM
6

the article you're referring to used data from the GSS (general social survey) and the graph didn't show virgins but how many hadn't had sex in the past year. the numbers you're citing are off too. the number for men in 2018 was 28% and for women 18%, and it was a larger gap than the previous survey. the more recent GSS survey on the other hand basically saw these numbers reverse. COVID may have played a role in the rise for women but for men it shows that the 2018 data point may have easily bee…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:56 AM
3

lmao, you think you're so enlightened and above everyone, don't you? you think you're this brave truth seeker that's unafraid to confront the cold hard facts while everyone else is a 'blue pilled' normie that just can't handle them. no, you're just a contrarian edgelord with a superiority complex that thinks they have society figured out because you mindlessly consumed a bunch of dumb memes on the internet. you don't actually give a fuck about actual facts and data which is why you can't respond…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:45 AM
1

height has obvious evolutionary advantages such as ability to protect and humour production ability which is largely a proxy for verbal intelligence and creativity correlates with sexual success in men (which is probably why men have evolved to be funnier on average)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:39 AM
1

Also, over 40% of all relationships start online (OLD) the graph you're probably referring to said it was 39% and didn't specify 'online dating'. according to other sources a decent amount that meet online meet elsewhere such as social media. you're probably just assuming that it's risen since then ("over 40%") yet all other sources I've seen that are more recent actually show a much lower number (even among younger cohorts) so it's probably an exaggerated number to begin with: For some American…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:34 AM
5

I'd say it's more their autism/social retardation and social isolation, speaking from personal experience at least. their deranged edgelord worldview I think stems from their isolation and lack of success in life rather than being the cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:23 AM
1

the last GSS survey showed it was 80% and it also shows that escort use among men is generally only a few percent at most. not sure what incentive men would have on an anonymous survey to lie about having sex in the past year. Moreover almost half of the men who hadn't had sex were against premarital sex so much of that remaining 20% is likely voluntary.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:20 AM
3

there's actually closer to 32 or 33% of men who are involuntarily celibate. I'm sure you have a reliable source for this. the last GSS survey had the number at around 20% and only a few percent use prostitutes. also how do you square this with your cope that 5% of men are monopolizing 95% of women?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:18 AM
6

where is your evidence? according to the last GSS survey 18-30 women's virginity was higher when using the proxy of opposite gender sex partners since 18 or partners in the past 5 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:12 AM
1

that's based on an almost 5 year outdated graph. the more recent GSS survey showed more men having sex than women, although COVID was probably a factor. the fact that 18-30 men's rate went down to 18%-20% (when the variable is sex partners or sexual frequency which is what the Washington post used) shows that the 2018 data point was likely a statistical anomaly and the actual rates are very close by gender. the GSS sample size isn't strong enough to make strong conclusions from single data point…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 04:07 AM
3

So the top something like 5% of men are fucking the vast majority of women. do you really just not want anyone to take you seriously? even you don't believe this ridiculous cope bullshit, it's a level of delusion that's beyond the most insane mental patients. why keep peddling such an obviously untrue meme?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/22 03:58 AM
1

you can't just use swipe/match ratios out of context as an argument while ignoring that the gender ratio of dating apps tends to also be 80:20, meaning the results are completely unsurprising regardless of 'hypergamy'. if the ratio were 80:20 women to men I doubt the results would be much different and if they are it'll mostly be because more men are looking for casual hookups (which he already acknowledged men are less discriminatory when it comes to). it's mostly just a supply and demand issue…
/r/ExRedPill24/12/22 02:50 AM
1

when we look up to app where woman/men ratio are fairly the same. this doesn't even exist afaik. there are only apps with slightly less skewed gender ratios. generally they are about 4:1 men to women, which is obviously going to heavily affect swiping dynamics. even a minor difference will have a disproportionate effect and it's exponential the more skewed it gets as men get more desperate for matches and women get more selective as most of their swipes will be matches at a certain point. also a…
/r/ExRedPill24/12/22 02:34 AM
1

I have to go now but I'm just going to leave this here as it seems like the Norwegian study which the figures you're citing come from actually disagrees with your conclusion: The main factor behind this is the increase in the number of men in the two year older cohorts relative to the number of women, which primarily reflects the fertility trends from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s (mortality and emigration patterns do not matter.) One might expect that the widening sex gap in childlessness coul…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 07:43 PM
1

If you want to mate and have multiple wives you need to be married but even then only a minority of Muslim men practice polygamy. Think less than 1% in KSA for example. So it's culturally very enforced monogamy. No casual dating, hook ups etc. I realize that, but I still haven't seen evidence that this is due to culturally enforced monogamy. I think that monogamy tends to be self-reinforcing and that women generally don't prefer to share a husband. Yeah the % of men reporting more than reporting…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 06:07 PM
2

Marriage is the strictest form of monogamy. It's very difficult to be polyamorous or have short term mating with multiple partners if fornication is illegal as you'll be killed or jailed for it. huh? you realize polygamy refers generally to multiple wives right? why do the multiple partners have to be short term? And yeah it's not the best survey data since it just shows absence of sex in the last year and nothing about how voluntary it is. Men under 35 is still on average higher though but kind…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 03:26 PM
1

it doesn't prove it but they make a much more compelling case than the vague assertion that 'hypergamy' caused it, and they do give a good reason why it's unlikely to be polygamy which is that inequality between men was highest AFTER the Neolithic and with the emergence of civilization, yet this is also the time in which the bottleneck is lifted. engage in hypergamy similar to a the Tinder age what is this referring to? a similar number of men and women are sexually active still. tinder does not…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 02:51 PM
2

well they point out that smaller tribes would've been cake basically and more large and aggressive ones would come to dominate Furthermore, as success in intergroup competition is associated with group size, borne out empirically in wars43 as ‘increasing returns at all scales’44, and as larger group size may even be associated with increased conflict initiation, borne out in data on feuds45, there may have been positive returns to lineage size. This would accelerate the loss of minor lineages an…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 02:25 PM
1

Fornication is illegal. Adultery gets you killed. Divorce is difficult for women and they are generally shamed for it if they do get it through. These are all measures to enforce strict monogamy. these are measures to enforce marriage, not monogamy per se. none of that inherently goes contrary to polygamy, and again it didn't stop the polygamy rate from shooting up drastically following the Syrian civil war. I mean you see yourself in those statistics that a small pool of men are mating with man…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 01:19 PM
3

yes that's my point. is monogamy socially enforced there despite this polygamous minority and the Qur'an condoning the practice or what? otherwise it seems to contradict your narrative which states that monogamy must be rigourously enforced on the population or else all the women will naturally flow to a small minority of men. I don't think women tend to enjoy polygamy much, they get jealous. Not really. The most concrete example I have of mate selection is from Norway where 1/4 men under the ag…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 11:07 AM
2

along with what others have said it's also commonly claimed that family courts are biased in favour of women when it comes to child custody too so that could be another factor. and no I didn't say that it's likely they'd do it just for that benefit alone, just that there's a higher incentive for women to file for divorce if things aren't going well
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 09:44 AM
2

would you say it's socially enforced in the middle East? is it enforced everywhere? there isn't a single society in which polygamy is the norm. I don't think the effects you describe are 'obvious' either. the data shows sexlessness is rising somewhat for both genders and also across the board, even for the 'top 20%'. it doesn't show that 'vhads' are monopolizing a growing swathe of women
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 09:22 AM
0

it's not the result of anything as it's a complete meme. if it were the case that polygamy caused the bottleneck we should see it get worse after the Neolithic when civilisations began to arise, causing more inequality than ever. researchers have come up with a much more reasonable explanation for the bottleneck and this is their response to the idea that it was cause by extreme polygamy: We believe that it can't, for the following two reasons: (A) for the ratio effective population sizes among …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 09:12 AM
0

the idea that the y chromosomal bottleneck demonstrates that 1 man reproduced for every 17, let alone that it was the result of polygamy, is highly overzealous. researchers have come up with a more reasonable explanation for it wherein in the Neolithic era tribes would organize patrilineally, concentrating the Y-DNA so that when they were wiped out the diversity would suffer over time. meanwhile women would more frequently marry between tribes or be raped or taken as concubines, retaining the mi…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 09:08 AM
3

The actual figure is 69% unless he's referring to some other study I can't find, but this one also included the 90% of college educated women initiating divorces stat so I'm pretty sure it is this. It's important to note however that the rate is much more even when it comes to non-marital breakups, so I think legal inequalities when it comes to divorce may be the main driver of the initiation disparity: Table 1 shows that women accounted for 69% of the breakups of heterosexual marriages, consist…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 07:14 AM
4

The actual figure is 69% unless he's referring to some other study I can't find, but this one also included the 90% of college educated women initiating divorces stat so I'm pretty sure it is this. It's important to note however that the rate is much more even when it comes to non-marital breakups, so I think legal inequalities when it comes to divorce may be the main driver of the initiation disparity: Table 1 shows that women accounted for 69% of the breakups of heterosexual marriages, consist…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 07:12 AM
18

not gunna say you intentionally exaggerated it but I just looked it up and it's 69% (but yes rising to 90% in college educated women). I think the main reason though would be no fault divorce and alimony granting the woman a financial incentive to break up if they're no longer feeling it, while men have an incentive to ride it out. this is corroborated by the fact that in non-married couples women are only at most slightly more likely to initiate a break up: "For heterosexual cohabiters, Table 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 06:59 AM
9

they desperately latch onto it as a cope to explain and externalize their shortcomings without the discomfort that introspection brings. it's a lot easier to say there's nothing inadequate about you and you're just a symptom of a degrading society and oppression against the non-gigachad supermajority than to acknowledge your own personal shortcomings and social ineptitude. I think it pains them that worse looking guys than them are doing absolutely fine with women as well. they want to believe e…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/22 02:41 AM
0

your brain is a meme, repeating dumb memes like an NPC.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:59 PM
2

why were Elliot Rodger, alek minassian, Jake Davison all diagnosed with the same neurodevelopmental disorder then? keep coping bro
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:58 PM
4

it's incredibly hard if you lack the genetic base to be charismatic. I don't know if there's many if any cases of radical transformations from a socially awkward boring guy to funny/suave smooth talker. if it were that easy guys wouldn't spend thousands on PUA courses. generally when one tries to 'learn' charisma it comes off as stilted and artificial. women can pick up on subtle social cues and can tell when you're faking it. since charisma and humour ability have probably been sexually selecte…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:44 PM
1

I'd argue it's not obvious that who you are is more malleable than what you look like. all psychological traits are highly genetically heritable. mental disorders such as autism which is upwards of 90% heritable especially so. I'd argue that it's probably easier to change your looks in fact (grooming, 'gymcelling'), especially if you add surgery into the equation. there's no brain surgery equivalent of plastic surgery for neurological issues like autism.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:24 PM
10

why does high functioning autism in men correlate so highly with sexual inactivity (despite most autistic men having a high sex drive) and being single then? extroversion correlates very highly with lifetime sex partners too, although it may be less to do with how they're perceived and more to do with the actions they take. and are you unaware of the dark triad phenomenon? while being a jerk isn't perhaps the best way to describe it, given how much dark triad is conducive to at least short term …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:17 PM
1

woah there, I thought you guys were supposed to be the cool-headed rational ones? not sure why you're interested if you've already determined it to be 'copium', but ok. I'm on my phone so it's a bit difficult but here are a few examples: In this survey of over 200,000 it was the trait most commonly seen in the top 3 desired traits for women: On average, men ranked good looks and facial attractiveness more important than women did (d = 0.55 and 0.36, respectively), whereas women ranked honesty, h…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 01:03 PM
0

a few issues with the first study: the personality traits were judged by rather vague descriptors which is more limited as a representation of a guy's personality than photos are of a guy's appearance. a real in person interaction with the guy where they can actually vibe with them (or not) could change how they react. it didn't include sense of humour or charisma which are at the top of the list in many dating preferences studies for women. it included unattractive guys but didn't include negat…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 11:04 AM
-1

even if it's true (you've given me no reasons to think so other than anecdotes which conflict with many of my own) a guy's league and attractiveness is still less determined by looks than women's (can provide studies if necessary but this should be a given), meaning a guy can be either more or less successful than his looks equivalent based on his performance in other areas. this is especially true in relationships of course (where most sex happens so they should be the main focus), but charisma…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 10:26 AM
2

you need something more than assertions if you're going to convince anyone that doesn't agree with your view, and again if you're going to accuse a large group of people are lying then you need to provide good evidence, otherwise it's no better than libel. I can't just claim you're a pedophile because I 'feel' it's true.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 10:07 AM
-1

if you're going to make bold claims about large groups of people lying and claim you know their preferences better than they do (or what they claim they are) you should have at least some kind of study(s) supporting your view. so where is it? all I'm hearing in this thread is anecdotes/feels.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/22 09:39 AM
4

women into one type may be more likely to be found in one place than a woman into another type though. for example a librarian whose type is guys into literature and writing are more likely going to be at a library than a rave.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 03:17 PM
6

the key may lie in the name
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 02:09 PM
0

is it arbitrary or is it just generally more simple and immediate (she looks alright to bang)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 12:20 PM
0

That survey asked current students whether they'd had sex as a student, not graduates. When asked if they'd ever had sex when starting university 59% of men and 56% of women reported that they had. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Sex-and-Relationships-Among-Students-Summary-Report.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 04:45 AM
1

They hadn't graduated yet and the number of women who had had sex while in university wasn't that much higher at 47%. More women were in relationships with someone outside of university which probably explains most of the gap. When asked if they'd ever had sex when starting university 59% of men and 56% of women reported that they had. https://www.hepi.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Sex-and-Relationships-Among-Students-Summary-Report.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/22 04:43 AM
1

Even if there's no biological basis for it I don't see why being taught to behave a certain way culturally would make it morally worse than it being a biological impulse. They're both factors that were out of your control. Then again ultimately I'd argue it all is as I'm not much of a free will believer. As long as there's mutual consent I don't see much point in moralizing dating preferences/strategies
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/22 12:25 PM
7

why would you not be picky when the pool you're selecting from is 4x larger than the one you're in, and when most of your swipes will result in a match? anyone would be picky in that situation and you're lying if you deny it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/22 05:31 AM
0

by that definition most of the guys who are sexually active/in relationships are 'low value' as by definition most guys can't do well in such a skewed environment, so it doesn't seem to be that much of an actual barrier if that's all the goal is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/22 03:49 AM
5

If it's so great for them why do they report their OLD experience being less positive and more negative than men's? Experience with OLD has been: Overall positive: 60% of men/52% of women, overall negative: 40% of men/44% of women https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2020/02/06/the-virtues-and-downsides-of-online-dating/ Experience with OLD has been: Very positive: 30% of men/15% of women, somewhat positive: 25% of men/22% of women, somewhat negative: 7% of men/18% of women, very negative: 3% of…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/22 03:41 AM
2

"Out of the two genders, women are the only one that can experience multiple orgasms with ease." have you never heard of the orgasm gap? it's especially prevalent in the context of casual hookups where men are 3x as likely to orgasm. the gap is far smaller in the context of relationships, wherein about 85% of men and 70% of women orgasm. the natural conclusion of this is that women are more suited for monogamy. " From stoning women for adultery" this happens to men too you know. "scaring the bej…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/22 09:35 PM
1

"men want what women have rather than the other way around" this seems highly reductive as just because women don't have as much sexual desire doesn't mean they have no other desires that would compel them to date men. why do you think most women want/are in relationships if it all comes down to sex drive? "we are taught that women and men have equal sexual and romantic desire for one another" you didn't show any studies that showed men have more romantic desire though. I feel like your post is …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/22 09:23 PM
1

that's only true generally when it comes to short term relationships/hookups because their relationships tend to fall apart pretty quickly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/22 06:49 PM
0

probably, but it's not just about desirability either. a large part of why autistic and socially anxious men don't have any success is that they lack social lives and spend all their time alone inside gaming etc., and unless you can compete in apps with massively skewed gender ratios you're out of luck. even if you do get out you're not going to be hitting on many women. less desirable men who are comfortable initiating conversations with women are going to have more success than someone who doe…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/22 06:44 PM
4

the gender ratio of OLD tends to be close to 80% men and 20% women so it doesn't actually mean much
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/22 08:57 PM
4

why is the leap from 'other factors can influence perception of this thing' to 'this thing doesn't actually exist as an independent variable' necessary? there are studies that show that men who are less physically attractive are rated higher when they have higher humour ability. it is also possible that physically attractive people tend to be perceived as funnier than they are. these things can both be simultaneously true
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 11:57 AM
1

"But the good news is we still live in the real world." that's a bold assumption for a sub like this
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 09:02 AM
2

Leagues don't run along the lines of body fat or body height. Your fucking face makes a difference, too. And for men you shouldn't stop there either. A man's league is not just as limited to appearance as a woman's is
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:55 AM
4

you're assuming he leaves the house and doesn't form his worldview solely through internet memes
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:52 AM
6

dumb meme based on a study which ironically invalidates the implication you're drawing from it. if only the 'top 20%' in physical attractiveness is good enough for them then why do they mostly message guys rated 'below average'? https://web.archive.org/web/20100725135317/http://blog.okcupid.com:80/index.php/your-looks-and-online-dating moreover the rating average and distribution in other studies are much closer even if men are still generally rated a bit lower: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:32 AM
2

no, a man's league is just less based on physical appearance. other factors such as personality, wealth, status, can affect it positively or negatively far more than it affects a woman's league. ironically you're the one projecting, projecting the male's disproportionately visually oriented preferences onto women. a fact that is always ignored that bears repeating is that the OKC study you people always cite showed that most messages went to men rated below average. women weren't disproportionat…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:24 AM
1

except a relationship partner's 'value' is less determined by appearance than a hookup partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:07 AM
1

could explain why dating apps are so awful. If you imagine a universe A with 50 dating men and 50 dating women, and a universe B with 100 dating men and 100 dating women dating apps are more like 80 men and 20 women, so this explanation isn't necessary to explain why they're so awful
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/22 08:00 AM
3

That doesn't mean they don't care though, it just means they're settling.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 09:48 AM
1

Thanks for your input, I guess I should've considered that perspective more. It might sound silly but what I'd ask is couldn't a guy ask the same thing 'you just like me because I'm funny (or rich but you'd probably agree that it's bad to only be with a guy for his money), you're not actually attracted to me, I'm just a clown to you', etc.. Especially considering being funny or not is also largely something you're born with, it's rare that someone can 'learn' to be funny. I agree it's not an ide…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 09:48 AM
2

Not even close to accurate. A recent study by Mobile Journey Marketing cloud provider Ogury reveals a massive gender imbalance amongst dating app users in various countries. This imbalance was greatest in Italy - where 91% of dating app users are male. 85% of the UK's dating app user base is male. On Tinder this figure is even higher, with roughly one female user for every nine male users. American women are slightly more likely than those in Europe to use dating apps, but still only make up 27%…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 05:11 AM
0

A 3/10 doesn't think another 3/10 is attractive to them, be it man or woman. This is more true for men. Men can have higher (or lower) attractiveness through factors other than looks to a higher extent than women can.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 05:00 AM
2

Less attractive men end up as being the beta provider and they get transitional sex. Why is the average age of virginity loss for men 17 then, well before they can assume that role? The majority of guys have had sex by 18. The sensible inference from what you're describing would be that women are less visually oriented in their attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 04:54 AM
1

No, all it means is that women's arousal is based less on visual stimuli. Erotica is far more popular among women while visual porn is among men for a reason. Women are also far more likely to orgasm in a romantic relationship than through a casual hookup. That’s the depressing part, that as a man you either have it all or you get nothing. What does this even mean? I doubt you could translate this into something more specific because it would be incredibly easy to pick apart.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 04:46 AM
-1

A frequent stat thrown around this sub is the one from that dating site survey (I think it was ok Cupid) that showed something along the lines of men on average find about 60% of women attractive and women find only like 20% of men attractive (I can’t remember the specifics but I’d be surprised if it’s not already linked in some comment). It's also frequently rebutted, have you not heard for instance that the data also showed that men rated below average received the most messages, and men were …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 04:40 AM
1

"only about 40% of men throughout human history have successfully reproduced" that's not a justified inference from the genetic data. for instance, men in the neolithic era would organize along patrilineal lines which concentrated their Y-Chromosomal DNA, while women would more often marry between tribes. this as well as women being raped meant that men's genetic diversity would suffer more when a tribe was wiped out by a competing tribe. additionally, wealthy/powerful polygamous men may be over…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 04:25 AM
2

"The market is now so fundamentally flawed I don't think there is a saving grace for your average guy in this world anymore." How does this fit with the fact that the vast majority of guys are still having sex? Why do you insist on this ridiculously hyperbolic rhetoric, if you have a point then it doesn't serve it well. "I say that as someone whos never had an issue dating, and who has been successful in real life and on dating apps. I'm clearly above average just by these factors alone" This is…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 03:57 AM
2

most women just want to date the top ~20% of men What's the purpose of this assertion when clearly much more than 20% of men are in relationships? You could just as easily say that most men 'just want to date the top 20% of women', if actually dating women below it doesn't exclude them, and if we assume that most guys would be happier with a highly attractive woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 03:54 AM
1

They are less likely to be spontaneously attracted to guys based on their appearance alone because they're less visual than men in their attraction. Why is this so hard to understand? It's not just a coincidence that every single study on dating preferences confirms this, they're not just making it up. It even holds true for observed preferences and not just declared: https://web.natur.cuni.cz/flegr/pdf/preferences.pdf For an example, men get more of an attractiveness rating boost from higher hu…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 03:48 AM
1

Actual results are far more concrete than a subjective attractiveness rating. It wasn't just true for messaging first either. Other studies have been done on attractiveness ratings and don't show nearly the same outcomes btw, generally women are rated a bit higher but nowhere near as much and the distribution is similar: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cHEQSEPz4eipGHFy9/differential-reproduction-for-men-and-women Regardless, if anything it just shows that women are less visual and require more t…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 03:25 AM
1

This argument falls apart when you actually look at outcome related data showing that a similar amount and if anything more men have met, hooked up, or gotten a relationship through it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/22 03:15 AM
2

None of the data you cite disaggregates as such. If it were to, I’m confident the numbers would undermine your position. Some of it did in terms of age. You can see the rates for younger cohorts here over the past few years: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/relationships/trackers/how-brits-meet-their-partners?crossBreak=2549 https://today.yougov.com/topics/lifestyle/trackers/meet-latest-partner?crossBreak=1829 As I said the rate of those that'd had a partner meeting online for younger cohorts (18-24 …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/22 10:02 AM
0

"But less action can still be 1 time sex over 5 years" It CAN be, but it's highly unlikely to be. The average for having sex '1 or 2' times in the past year is 10%, and it'll be even lower for the past 5 years if that was a variable you could analyze. Remember that number of sex partners refers to unique individuals and not number of sexual encounters per se. "Another suprising point in this study is that contrarily to what some belief, slightly more women than men are actually having sex with a…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 03:52 PM
0

I did that calculation before and it was 20% of men having about 65% of the partners. The number was similar for women though but closer to 50%. They'd probably be even closer if you accounted for misreportings. Regardless, the narrative I'm questioning holds that a small minority is increasingly monopolizing the sex. The fact that a minority has a disproportionate amount of the sex isn't in question. It's about the trend over time. Also let's not forget that it's usually implied that the rest o…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 02:34 PM
2

Before 2012: No partners: 9.3%, 1 partner: 24.9%, 2 partners, 12.1%, 3 partners: 10.8%, 4 partners: 8.5%, 5-10 partners, 18.7%, 11-20 partners: 8.8%, 21-100 partners: 5.3%, more than 100: .6% 1 or more (unspecified): 1% 2012-2022: No partners: 14.1%, 1 partner: 26.7%, 2 partners: 8.2%, 3 partners: 8.3%, 4 partners: 8.9%, 5-10 partners: 16.2%, 11-20 partners: 8%, 21-100 partners: 4.7%, more than 100 partners: .7% 1 or more (unspecified): 4.2% None: 52% increase, 1 partner: 7% increase, 2 partners…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 01:37 PM
2

Yeah just realized you were talking about that graph The problem is you're ignoring the last category of '1 or more (unspecified)' which is unlikely to be above 100 in reality. I guess I can go calculate the numbers on this graph and see how it pans out.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 01:21 PM
1

"The 80-100% highest N color shifts to higher N very dramatically." No it doesn't. What are you looking at? I already did the calculations anyway. The numbers clearly show that each category in the top 20% have lowered in the past decade relative to the prior average. Actually with the exception of the lowest of those categories, which is 4 partners and slightly increased. The real 'chad' numbers above that don't go up. In terms of the 'lowest N' I think I acknowledged that already. Edit: just r…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 01:10 PM
0

I thought I spelled it out in the post. Did you only read the title or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 12:08 PM
1

It's an incredibly overblown issue. In terms of who is meeting through tinder for example it's about 1/5th of millennials of both genders, if not slightly more men. Of course fewer still will go any further than that. They aren't facilitating 'chad harems' like RPers etc. like to claim. In an environment where men outnumber women 4-1 on a good day obviously most men aren't going to win. That's all that needs to be realized really, so men can stop wasting their time or even money with them. The v…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 10:58 AM
1

But to say women don’t care about looks is delusional. Ridiculous strawman. At least try and argue in good faith. The original statement was "men are not judged on their appearance as much as women". How do you possibly get "women don't care about looks at all" out of that?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 10:29 AM
1

Also there is data that shows that women care more about bios, not just in their declared preferences but they are much less likely to swipe on profiles with no bios relative to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 10:27 AM
1

Tinder data demonstrates that women aren't interested in an app where you have little to go off of other than a 2D picture and which has a 'hookup' stigma around it, which is why it has a highly skewed gender ratio which reaches up to 9-1 in some cities.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/22 10:25 AM
2

Like he said, try not to confuse the term 'genetics' with 'appearance'. Black pillers use it as a synonym for that but in reality half of human genes are expressed in the brain. The blank slate theory that we are purely a result of our environment and experiences has been thoroughly discounted by now. When it comes to assholes, they would probably fall into what's commonly referred to as the 'dark triad' personality type. Far from being almost universally a detriment like being socially anxious,…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/22 11:07 AM
1

He can't be that shy if he's going to clubs and music festivals. Also if you're autistic enough even being approached won't save you, I have first hand experience there.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/22 10:30 AM
2

Is this news to anyone? "Honestly, I don't really have a solution, it's the dating dynamic, but it truly must suck for 90% of men out there." No, it's the dating app dynamic. The majority of guys are doing fine outside of dating apps which barely any women use to begin with. The extrapolation from them onto the 'dating market' in general is folly. The only way in which they represent society is that they show what everyone already knew, that much more men are interested in casual hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/22 09:52 AM
2

If anything that just feeds into the 'dark triad theory'. Research has shown that men with dark triad traits are considered more attractive by women even while holding appearance constant. How do you explain even guys like Charles Manson receiving love letters? He almost got married to a young woman who'd been visiting him, while he was 80 years old so hardly a prime physical specimen. Even school shooters like Nikolas Cruz have been showered with love letters. How about Pete Davison, he looks l…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/22 11:42 PM
2

even 5'2 oompa loompas have far more success sexually than the average autist: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283199925_Height_and_Body_Mass_on_the_Mating_Market_Associations_With_Number_of_Sex_Partners_and_Extra-Pair_Sex_Among_Heterosexual_Men_and_Women_Aged_18-65 compared to: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5789215/ so miss me with that BS.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/22 01:28 AM
3

none of which are remotely comparable in their effect to autism. I've looked into data relating to facial attractiveness and reproductive/sexual success, height and bodyweight and reproductive/sexual success.. even 5'2 guys have much more success than the typical autist, the bottom quartile of attractive men have 13% less children overall which is nothing compared to the effect of autism on fertility. maybe if you were in the bottom few percentile in multiple of these traits you'd start to come …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/22 01:07 AM
2

Can you show one at least? Is this what you were referring to? It showed a surprising number of autistic men (70%) had had sex, though that still leaves 3x more virgins than NT men. On the other hand it also says this in the study, which seems like conflicting information? The results from Adjusted Model 1 suggest that autistic females were 38% and autistic males were 22% as likely to report ever having engaged in sexual activity compared to sex-matched peers; however, the group differences decr…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/22 12:44 AM
3

it's a lot easier for a woman to say that when there's as many as 4x as many autistic men than women. if autists were limited to dating other autists then 80% of autistic men would still be missing out.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/22 11:43 PM
2

and that pattern already exists in a less extreme form between men and women, so maybe that lends credence to the 'extreme male brain' theory
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/22 11:36 PM
2

well obviously some do. ironically, it's mostly 'black pillers', who are also some of the most likely to be negatively affected by it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/22 11:28 PM
1

demonstrably wrong: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1474704915608744 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24394032_An_Evolutionary_Perspective_on_Humor_Sexual_Selection_or_Interest_Indication https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251512898_Humor_ability_reveals_intelligence_predicts_mating_success_and_is_higher_in_males https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225821618_Women%27s_Fertility_across_the_Life_Cycle_Increases_the_Short-Term_Attractiveness_of_Creative_Intelligence http…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 06:30 PM
1

'bad personality' is a bad way to frame it to begin with. it doesn't have to be 'bad', just inadequate in some way. i mean does autism give you a 'bad' personality? i'd say it just makes you less compatible socially with people. either way it predicts terrible outcomes, so you'd have to say that autistic people are far less attractive on average which isn't really the case. elliot rodger, alek minassian, and jake davison were all diagnosed with autism and none of them were ugly. "How you perceiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 06:25 PM
2

"80% of women are having casual sex with 20% of men" literally no evidence for this meme. it's more like 20% of women having casual sex with 20% of men, most women aren't interested in casual sex to begin with. sure if you limit it to casual sex you have to stand out if you want to experience it more than maybe a few times a year b ut the vast majority of guys do fine if they focus on relationships instead.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 06:20 PM
6

The average woman is already monogamous before they hit 30 though. It's only a minority of both genders that are promiscuous because most women don't even like casual hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/22 06:09 PM
–

It's pretty easy to refute this as the data shows that men with bios get far more matches, and it seems to have a higher impact on whether women will match with a profile than men. https://medium.com/yulyas-blog/what-real-statistics-tells-about-tinder-and-how-to-get-more-matches-according-to-it-8e984b822813 go to "2. Write a bio, and not super short one (proven by data)" to see the data.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/22 09:09 AM
1

Why is charisma just being casually left out of the equation? Yes, women are generally more attracted to funny, confident, charismatic guys. Something literally everyone that hasn't been hoodwinked by 'black pill' memes takes for granted, and which if necessary can be demonstrated with numerous studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 04:28 AM
6

"From what I've seen in the FA/Virgin forums, around 25-30% of them are on the spectrum" It may be even higher than this on incel forums, from what I've seen there I would be surprised if it wasn't. "One large incel forum conducts periodic polls of its members. In a poll this past March, 71.5 per cent said they were on the autism spectrum." https://nationalpost.com/news/inside-the-minds-of-incels-experts-seek-to-short-circuit-the-spiral-from-loneliness-to-loathing-to-violence "in comparison to 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 04:07 AM
5

"Neither of these things really determine your sex appeal that much in the end tho." For one thing that's simply not true if you're going by sexual/reproductive success. Personality factors such as humour ability and extroversion correlate just as much with sexual/reproductive success as physical traits if not more from what I've seen. There's also no shortage of studies that show that women desire charisma/humour ability more than looks. One also showed that not only did they declare that they …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 03:28 AM
3

"genes will always be more important than personality". I'm getting real tired of this false dichotomy. Do you think personality is completely undetermined by genes? Half of human genes are expressed in the brain. All psychological traits are highly heritable. OP mentioned autism, a disorder which is generally genetic in origin. Where does this idea come from that genes is a synonym for your physical appearance and everything that exists in your brain is infinitely malleable?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 03:11 AM
17

"but instead of developing this to help them achieve the results they want most men focus on things they can’t control" I don't agree with the idea that personality/social skills/psychological traits in general are so much more malleable than physical appearance. There's a reason why some men waste thousands on PUA courses. It is a lot harder than it sounds to become more charismatic, and the reason it is attractive to women to begin with is likely that it's an honest signal of underlying herita…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 09:53 AM
0

Your framing implies that men are the passive ones that wait for women to be attracted and initiate when that's almost never how it goes. Women are the ones who draw in men by being as pretty as they can.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 09:43 AM
0

Every single one of them was diagnosed with autism. It's unlikely they were just a symptom of society, and if it does only cause autistic men to go on rampages it'll never be a large enough issue to be civilization threatening, unless I guess they get their hands on bioweapons or nuclear bombs.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 09:33 AM
2

I don't think there's any good evidence for that narrative. If anything it's the reverse, with polygamy being practiced due to a surplus of women after men were culled in war. This is what we see in modern times for instance in Syria where the polygamy rate shot up from 5% to 30% following the civil war which left many women in need of a provider. "Fewer than 1% of Muslim men live with more than one spouse in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Iran and Egypt – all countries where the practice is…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 09:09 AM
4

There are more sexually inactive women than men according to the last GSS survey. It's still way too early to jump to the conclusions you're presenting when the only significant gap of 10% was in 2018 and possibly a statistical anomaly.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/22 09:02 AM
3

Of course there is, but the fact that the rate dropped substantially despite the effects of COVID I think casts more doubt on the 2018 data point than anything. The fact that it's self-reported shouldn't affect the direction of the data unless there's a reason to think that there's also a trend in the accuracy of self-reports.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 08:20 AM
1

Usually what is meant by it is that 80% of the women in general go to the top 20% of guys, not just 80% of the more specific demographic of women interested in casual hookups. And he didn't say it was only guaranteed to apply to marketplaces. But alright. I'd also add the caveat that women's sexual attraction isn't as limited to the physical domain as men's. Charisma and humour ability (what RPers call 'game' I guess) are highly desired even in the context of STR/ONS. Possibly even slightly more…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 08:10 AM
5

From a speed dating study where the participants rated their partners: "There is however one very important difference: the average of the ratings that men gave women was ~6.5, and the average of the ratings that women gave men was ~5.9. The standard deviations were the (interestingly) same in both cases, and in terms of standard deviations, women were rated 0.5 SD higher than men were." https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X3jz5mriJeWi2uLdF/how-subjective-is-attractiveness ​ From 'Attractiveness and…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 07:39 AM
5

The question doesn't really make sense because the reason they favour women is mostly BECAUSE men disproportionately use them, so it's not contradictory at all. Nonetheless it's still an interesting question why. The main one I think is simply going to boil down to men having a higher sex drive than women and thus many more seeking out hookups at any one time than women. Additional reasons may be men being afraid of rejections irl and see the apps as a possible way of bypassing that pain. Men ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 07:07 AM
1

'More confusing', sure. Doesn't necessarily mean what pillers are selling is the true explanation though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 06:50 AM
3

This is just one of many things the GSS survey collects data on. They don't publish studies about sex themselves, publications use their data to publish their own studies. "Also if the 72% “study” was meant to show increased sexlessness, why the hell do bluepillers only bring it out to suggest the opposite?" I'm not sure that they do. The vast majority of cases in which the Washington post graph showing the 28% figure is cited it's by a red/black piller as evidence for their male-driven sexlessn…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 06:31 AM
2

The point of the original study showing 72% of men having sex in the past year (and this one) wasn't to show how well men were doing though, it was actually to demonstrate the opposite, that there was a growing trend of sexlessness. And again when it comes to having sex only 1-2 times a year, it's a small minority. If you want to see for yourself then change 'partners(0)' to 'sexfreq' and change the chart type to bar chart. When comparing genders, more women than men report only having had a sin…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:50 AM
2

The physical part is rarely emphasized. I see this study cited most often in support of the 80/20 rule whereby women are said to only be attracted to the top 20% of men regardless of the dimension. I agree that it's more damning to the specifically black pill narrative but there's a lot of overlap. "Also the whole “they still messaged the men anyways” is deceptive bullshit because a message = / = hookup." It's still worth a lot more than a subjective rating. The deceptive part is leaving this fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:40 AM
1

But he also says: 'There is however one very important difference: the average of the ratings that men gave women was ~6.5, and the average of the ratings that women gave men was ~5.9. The standard deviations were the (interestingly) same in both cases, and in terms of standard deviations, women were rated 0.5 SD higher than men were.' I mean I can go find another source if you want. The OKC results are highly anomalous.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:29 AM
1

Understood, I edited it out.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:26 AM
4

"And? That statistic doesn't matter." Why do red/black pillers make such a big deal out of it then? Suddenly it doesn't matter when it doesn't fit the narrative or? "Women can get sex whenever they want, that's the difference. They aren't having sex by choice." Okay? The point of presenting this data isn't to show that women have just as much of a challenge in finding someone to have sex with, it's to challenge the notion of a specifically male-driven trend resulting from a supposedly increasing…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:18 AM
1

Even when I explained why?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 05:02 AM
1

1/5 = 20% no vaccine 1/5 = 20% who have 80% of jabs 80% of 182 jabs = 145 jabs, or slightly more than 7 each (I doubt there were that many gigavaxxers) that leaves 37 jabs to be shared between the remaining 60%. so whatever the ratio is it's not going to be that skewed.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:59 AM
2

Pareto for use in quantitative calculation of number of jabs percentage of population is inappropriate use of the tool. Why? I don't see how it's any different from your examples like the amount of symphonies produced or the amount of traffic roads experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:42 AM
2

Also is it really “raw data” when the numbers are scrunched together in a way that says whatever you want it to say? I don't know what you're even implying here, what variable do you think I inserted to confirm a preconceived bias? I put in the exact same ones that the Washington post graph did to supposedly demonstrate a male driven trend in sexlessness.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:38 AM
1

Even when it comes to physical attractiveness though there's a few studies that show that men who are initially rated low are rated higher when they are funny. So I think the threshold is more flexible than you're implying and certain men at least can compensate for their physical inadequacies with attractive personality traits (or status). The 'halo effect' goes both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:29 AM
4

If you have a point then feel free to present your data that you think supports whatever point you think you have. I'm not going to put in 100 different variables and post all the results, besides the sample size gets too small if you continuously narrow it down further. "Btw the reason why the okcupid was interesting while being a self report case is because the rating made a almost perfect bell curve as it should." Only the ratings given by men. With other attractiveness studies however women'…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:18 AM
2

That's not lost on me. The important fact is the messages sent proportional to the attractiveness ratings given. Women didn't disproportionately send messages to those as rated attractive relative to men. If the study was to have the implication that RPers claim it does then they would. The point isn't that women prefer guys who are actually below average or have markedly lower standards, it's that those ratings don't amount to much in practice.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 04:05 AM
2

Except this data literally shows that you can't. At least not in the way in which it's usually implied. You can make a case that a minority have a disproportionate amount of sex (though still not 80%), but not that most of the rest therefore miss out entirely. You can also make that case for both genders btw. Also let me just come up with something random on the spot. Covid vaccines. Do you think 20% of people had 80% of the jabs? Am I allowed to just state that they did without any data to back…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 03:59 AM
1

Well said. I myself am about as much of a failure in this regard as you can get, but since I'm diagnosed with autism and since it has the implications that it does, I guess I've never felt the need to project these issues onto society. Even when it comes to that 18%, I'd add that many of them as the IFS study points out are likely voluntarily abstaining for religious reasons. Something like half. While delayed (or just no) marriage is still an issue, I wouldn't lump them in with the group that h…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 03:52 AM
5

They also ignore other studies that show a much closer bell curve for both genders in terms of mean rating and also distribution. For instance this speed dating study: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X3jz5mriJeWi2uLdF/how-subjective-is-attractiveness To the extent that the gap remains it's probably just representative of how women are less visually oriented in their attraction than men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 03:38 AM
8

Nope, you can look at it by partner counts above 1 too and there are more monogamous women than men. "It's also self reported." That wasn't an issue before was it? It's also not relevant to the fact that the supposed trend reversed unless you think patterns of anonymously lying suddenly changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 02:02 AM
11

The notion that you can just apply it to anything you want without having to justify it is a meme.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:59 AM
1

"It's gone up for women as well, but not nearly to the same degree." Wrong. The GSS data of 2021 showed that women's sexual inactivity actually surpassed men's whose dropped to around 20%.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:53 AM
1

"We can be the shoulder to cry on, the good conversation piece, the one that makes her laugh till she pisses herself, none of that is innate like height or facial structure. It can be learned and easily." BS. The reason humour is attractive to women to begin with is probably that it signals underlying heritable psychological traits that are beneficial to the offspring's survival. It's especially BS if you're autistic like me and have inherently impaired communicative abilities. If it was that ea…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:46 AM
1

Men are clearly more visual in their attraction. It's the same reason erotica is consumed mostly by women but visual porn is consumed mostly by men. It's the reason men are more sex focused than women while women are more relationship focused, and why the orgasm gap shrinks dramatically in the context of relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:41 AM
1

You literally have autism in your name yet you're trying to downplay the importance of communication? You should know better than anyone how important it is and how screwed you are in society if you're impaired in it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 01:23 AM
1

The data is already out there, the rate rose for women but actually dropped for men. Basically a reverse of the 2018 data.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 12:44 AM
1

Nope, I checked and even more women in the 18-30 range were sexually inactive relative to men. It was basically a reversal of the 2018 data.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/22 12:42 AM
1

'the studies' like what? I've seen one that showed 39% met online, but that's a plurality not a majority. moreover, starting 'online' doesn't have to mean dating apps OR sites. It could also include meeting through social media like FB or instagram. Do any of the studies specify that they met through online DATING or just 'online' which is incredibly vague?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/22 01:08 AM
1

I think it's based on survey data, not published by the company itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/22 01:32 AM
3

A woman who holds out for chad in most of these examples that are discussed among black pillers still has casual sex and simply doesn't "commit" except for chad. Except there is a significant number of women who are not having sex, and the go-to explanation for them would be that their standards are too high. if an "incel" doesn't want to sink to the low of hiring a prostitute or dating a 1/10 beach whale, then they're no longer involuntarily celibate. Just celibate. I'm glad you agree then.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 01:28 PM
1

I appreciate the effort, but with all due respect I'm not sure you read the OP properly the data were taking into account other things while excluding specific factors or group of people (if you link the paper will be better) I explicitly stated that these numbers were specifically the number of men who viewed premarital sex as acceptable who didn't have sex in the last year. This is because I think it's an important distinction, as the rise in sexlessness is generally assumed to be of 'involunt…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 01:22 PM
1

Can you link this data please? It's the same data source that the article you posted is based on. The rate of sexlessness for men and women basically switched, with men going from 28% to 18%, and women going from 18% to 29%. If you average it out of course the rates would be about the same. Prior to the 2018 data point the gap was very minimal. I'll admit that covid may have had more of an effect on women though seeing as they are more risk averse. Here is one article that analyses the recent GS…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 01:04 PM
1

I'm highly dubious of that figure, but regardless, doesn't that take the 'involuntary' part out of the equation? By that definition a woman who a black piller would say is holding out for 'chad' would be an incel. I wouldn't include prostitutes in it either.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 10:38 AM
0

I realize that, but at the same time if he were to drop his moral values he would likely join the vast majority of guys who don't hold them who are having sex at least once a year. Therefore it's still an issue, but it's a different issue as it does come down to choice at the end of the day (for most of them at least).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 10:23 AM
1

True but I think there's still a social expectation for men to be providers and also women are attracted to ambition, status, and wealth in men in a way that's probably connected to biology given how persistently these things have been important for men historically.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 09:41 AM
7

I'm going by the same definition as 'sexlessness', so no sex in the past year. I think that fits with the general definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 09:33 AM
2

I don't think men have ever gotten the quantity of sex that they 'want' unless they were someone like genghis khan. I don't see too much reason to frame this as a gender specific issue though aside from the fact that men generally put more value on sex and tend to have less choice in abstaining. I mean I guess that's a decent enough reason, but just like in Japan sexlessness has risen for both genders. According to the 2021 GSS data there were actually more sexless women than men. So the issue I…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 09:32 AM
3

Maybe not 'get laid' but it may be easier for find a relationship when they have something going for themselves. Virginity does drop off significantly after the college years so obviously it doesn't get harder for everyone. Her survey sample was weird for being early to mid twenties in a college dorm too. Generally the inhabitants are 18-22.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 09:13 AM
1

I should've mentioned the ages in the GSS sample aren't evenly distributed, there are more older than younger respondents. When it comes to 18-21 y/o men there are 46 respondents while for 27-30 there are 74. For the former half were virgins in 2021 up from 43% in 2018, while for the latter 8% were. When it comes to the age group she's talking about (20-26 I guess? idk) there were 120, with 20% reporting being virgins. Her sample is weird for being in the middle(ish) if they're in a college dorm…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 08:56 AM
-3

I mean maybe you're right (although I doubt it's that high overall and I'd need more rigorous data), but you're talking specifically about a younger demographic. The age range in question was 18-30, they probably just need some time to figure things out.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 08:39 AM
0

The sample size isn't exactly huge, especially when you narrow it down further like this. That's the issue with making so much of the 2018 figure, it was too early to make solid conclusions based off of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 08:23 AM
1

Maybe not regularly, but not at least once a year? I don't know how you can infer that. And again this is specifically about 'involuntarily' sexless men. My second point was that much of the number is made up of men who are morally opposed to premarital sex, so their problem is finding a marriage partner, not getting laid per se.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 08:19 AM
13

I actually looked into that too and according to the GSS data dry marriages in this age range are exceptionally rare, with most years the rate being 0%.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/22 07:45 AM
1

I don't think something has to be a physical trait to indicate 'genetic quality', for instance it's been shown that charismatic/funny men have more sexual partners on average and one proposed explanation is that it was sexually selected in men as it acted as a proxy for intelligence which in turn acted as a proxy for the capacity to acquire resources.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/22 04:43 AM
1

"Apparently 1/3 of young men these are celibate." The 2018 GSS survey that data is based on had it at 27% (rounded up from 26.4%), which is a lot closer to 1/4, and then the 2021 GSS data had it at 20%, which is 1/5. This is also ignoring the fact that about half of them view premarital sex as wrong, and the figures in the past decade when controlling for that factor is between 7-14%, so about 1/10 on average. So the actual amount of 'incels' is likely substantially lower than 1/3. "Surely the i…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 11:13 PM
2

"Even think you know what that means" Why do girls have an easier time getting laid? Because they're girls of course! That's the definition of a circular argument, cope more. "They are usually taking a bigger risk with sex so therefore they choose." Not just this but they have proven to have lower sex drives and also they get less out of casual hookups as men are about 3x more likely to orgasm from casual sex while the orgasm gap is far smaller when it comes to sex in committed relationships. "T…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 11:04 PM
2

"Any data I don't like is bullshit by definition". Alright so now that you've made that clear I won't press you on anything data related as I know it won't be fruitful. "Because they are girls." Sorry but that's not an explanation, it's circular reasoning. It has already been established that they are girls and that it's easier for them to get laid. "It doesn't matter. They have more opportunities to act like on it. That's not the bottleneck" Another circular argument. Why do they have more oppo…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 10:16 PM
1

It's literally right there in the OP, that's what I meant by 'the same study'. Guess I should've added a comma after study
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:56 PM
10

The GSS data shows that women have overtaken men in sexlessness as of 2021. The same source the graph everyone was making a fuss about in 2018 was based on. "It's just a given" is the furthest possible thing from an argument. Why do you think it's so much easier for them to get laid to begin with? They have less of a desire for it. That's the bottleneck. Most data I see shows little if any gap between male and female sexual inactivity. Usually the average age of virginity loss is actually lower …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:46 PM
3

That's based on the same study which showed the overall rate of singlehood is equal by gender, meaning the disparity in the younger cohort is due to women dating older men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:35 PM
1

What do their supposed standards have to do with whether or not they want to date? Even if they only wanted to date 'chad' like you're implying, they still 'want to date'.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:31 PM
0

To be fair it's not only consistent with that notion, but if anything it could even reinforce it because they're having so much fun riding the 'cock carousel' that they don't want to hop off and settle down.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:27 PM
1

It's actually the one above, under the header "Share of adults who are single varies by race, age, education and sexual orientation"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 09:16 PM
6

True, I just looked at some data on that actually and the gap between 40+ men and women who have reproduced is quite minimal, about 3% on average over the last 50 years. Still, they would argue that this is because the culture has maintained monogamous norms and that this may be shifting in recent times.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/22 01:16 AM
2

I agree with the obvious fact that many men died in conflict before they could reproduce, and also the women were often raped as spoils of war, but that's different from saying society was intentionally set up in a way where the vast majority of men in it were celibate. I think when polygamy was practiced it was more often out of necessity after a bunch of males were killed off which caused an excess of women, which is why in Syria the polygamy rate went from 5% to 25% after the recent war there…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/22 01:08 AM
1

we also have data on how many people have actually met or hooked up through the app and the numbers are roughly equal for both genders, if not slightly more men, which invalidates the 'chad harem' meme which implies that a disproportionate number of women are going to a small number of men. also, do you realize that you're assuming that the man usually stays on the app while the woman doesn't? i'm not saying it's impossible, but it seems like a pretty haphazard assumption unless you have data to…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/22 03:17 AM
1

isn't your meme that the app facilitates their high standards by allowing them to conveniently hook up with men far above their 'SMV' instead of being limited to men in their local proximity? why aren't more of them hopping on this opportunity? if their standards were so high more of them should be using the app for 'chad hunting'.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/22 03:07 AM
1

except you're conveniently ignoring that in your very link it shows that about 20% of both genders have met through it, slightly more men even.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/22 02:58 AM
1

even bumble has almost 70% men. the extrapolation from OKC is not valid because the actual messaging trends show that they were most likely to message men rated 'below average', and men were the ones punching above their weight the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 10:25 PM
1

according to a survey they're actually about twice as likely to be looking for a relationship as they are ONS, while for men it was about equal for both.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 09:43 PM
1

to be fair i think the data is based on surveys which i doubt many bots are responding to. the gender ratio is however even more skewed in some locations such as the UK. in regards to the casual hookup dynamics, i think that there is a promiscuous minority of women who spread their legs for a lot of guys just like the 'chads' get a lot of women to spread their legs, which kind of balances it out. that's why 20% of BOTH genders have most of the sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 09:35 PM
1

even bumble has a highly skewed gender ratio, albeit a bit less than tinder, with 67.4% of the userbase being male according to: https://www.statista.com/statistics/975984/us-bumble-user-ratio-gender/
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 09:29 PM
1

pretty sure it's survey data and i doubt many bots are responding to surveys
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 09:27 PM
0

who said they would? what are you even responding to? i mean technically they do get some, but the whole point is that by the nature of the gender ratio most men aren't going to succeed. according to your link you'll notice that it shows that 20% of women and slightly more men have met through the app, not 80% of women. that's because the bottleneck is the gender ratio. according to recent GSS data, a bit over 80% of men had sex in the last year as opposed to less than 80% of women, so it defini…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/22 09:24 PM
8

If you look at the simpetexting source, it shows that 33.5% of men said that the photo is the most important aspect of a profile while for women it was 20.6%. On the other hand the bio was the most important for 19.2% of men but 30.6% of women. This is also corroborated by the fact that men with bios get far more matches, and especially with women relative to other men: https://medium.com/yulyas-blog/what-real-statistics-tells-about-tinder-and-how-to-get-more-matches-according-to-it-8e984b822813…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 10:55 AM
4

The gender ratio also affects the swiping dynamics which exacerbates the issue. Since most swipes by women will result in a match they will be more selective, while men won't bother and will often just shoot first and ask questions later because it's a waste of time to be selective in any capacity in an environment with such a skewed gender ratio. Regardless, as I showed the actual outcomes are equal which implies that the bottleneck is the gender ratio.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 10:47 AM
6

when was the reality that it's more difficult for the average male questioned? In fact it was acknowledged. The point was that that disparity is mainly the outcome of the skewed gender ratio. Feel free to post any surveys which contradict mine though, I posted multiple and haven't came across any that disagree with them. Or are you just going to completely reject the validity of them because they don't agree with your narrative?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 10:43 AM
10

That sounds like a moving of the goalposts to me. The way I've usually seen it expressed is without question the former. Even if it was about attraction though, what kind of attraction, purely physical? Generally this idea stems from the OKC study, wherein 50% or men rated women above average whereas only 20% of men were rated above average (therefore wouldn't the correct inference be a '50/20' rule?), but it's essentially common knowledge that women are less visual than men, which would explain…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 07:57 AM
2

that would explain why my first few were deleted, but i left that out of the last one. i have a feeling it's because i made an explicit claim in the title. weird rule but ok. hopefully it'll get through with a more open-ended title.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 07:26 AM
3

why does everything i post get removed? the long list of necessary conditions for a thread to be valid here is far too convoluted and annoying. i'd at least like an explanation given so i know what to change next time.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 07:05 AM
1

all of them? except the graph in the OP you casually ignored you mean? and what is your preferred source which demonstrates the trend you're describing?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 09:54 PM
1

"The issue is that if 20% of men are in monogamous relationships" good thing that's not even close to accurate so i guess it's not an issue then. why would you assume this when easily accessible data shows that about half of men under 30 and 70% over 30 are? "As time goes on with OLD, we're seeing the "top 20%" shrink closer to 5%." yet the actual outcomes show that roughly an equal number of both genders meet through the app. even on OLD there isn't evidence of a 'chad harem effect' and the dif…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 09:46 PM
1

female tinder users represent a promiscuous minority. there are between 3-9 males on the app for every female depending on the location. but like you said your mind is already made up, you're not interested in the facts, i understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 07:26 AM
25

I don't care. I don't base my value on society's superficial 'success' metrics anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 05:41 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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