TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Time4Red Archive

View 8 posts and 303 comments by Time4Red on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
19

This is clearly scripted, so I wouldn't read too much into it.
/r/PussyPassDenied15/05/21 12:26 PM
1

Having sex roughly once a week? That on its own is justification to reevaluate a marriage?
/r/PussyPassDenied31/08/20 04:06 AM
-1

It isn't on you, but after a certain period of time, legally, you have to live with the consequences. In another comment, I used the example of statutes of limitations. In the case of fraud lawsuits, you only have a few years after the fraudulent tort occurs to file a claim. If the statute of limitations expires, you're stuck with the consequences of that fraud. That doesn't mean it's suddenly your fault you were defrauded. The justice system weighs the consequences to all parties and society as…
/r/PussyPassDenied29/07/20 04:03 PM
-1

It's not his fault that he was defrauded, but absent of any timely action on his part, he's legally stuck with the consequences. As a proxy, I would point to statutes of limitations. In many states, the statute of limitations for fraud is as low as 3 or 4 years. The moral justification for preventing litigation or prosecution after a designated period of time should be obvious. In all but the most heinous crimes (rape, murder, ect), the amount of damage that can occur during untimely litigation …
/r/PussyPassDenied29/07/20 03:49 PM
-2

I'm sorry, but if he signed the birth certificate and raised her for three years, legally, it's his kid. There's no genetic requirement for guardianship. The onus is on people to notice the red flags before they make a long term commitment. If he had doubts from day one, he should have had the test done then.
/r/PussyPassDenied29/07/20 02:58 PM
2

Except she basically got canceled over this shit. I'd say that's punishment.
/r/PussyPassDenied26/07/20 01:41 AM
1

But they often go hand in hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/15 04:49 AM
1

Many left wing parties in Europe are anti-immigration. Nationalism isn't exclusive to conservatives.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/15 04:11 AM
1

Hollande's lack of popularity is largely due to disatisfaction within the SP. His pro business policies (tax breaks for businesses) have angered the left. His own party is actively fighting him. And you're right, far-right nationalist parties have gained ground, but they're gaining it mostly from center-right party abandoment. In most countries, they're still minority movements. They haven't experienced the same level of support as parties like Podemos. And reactionary nationalism is still way m…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 03:11 AM
2

At least it does in main europe, young people are pretty right wing here. The same Europe where radical left parties like Syriza and Podemos are taking over governments? The same Europe where center left parties have recently taken control of Sweden and Norway, and are poised to take control of the UK? The same Europe in which France elected a socialist president in 2012? I honestly don't see Europe changing that much right now. It's shifting back towards the center-left a bit, but nothing too d…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/15 01:40 AM
0

The gays are socially dysfunctional and have no large scale public appeal. People are born gay. People aren't born MGTOWs. One is a choice while the other isn't. That's the difference.
/r/MensRights25/02/15 04:04 AM
16

I'm over 10 years, myself. No issues so far.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/15 05:01 PM
3

If there is a logical cause and effect Cause and effect cannot be concluded without real scientific experimentation by professionals using blind and double blind techniques to minimize bias. operate under the assumption that it's true Actually it is. You can certainly make decisions, but those decisions are based on heuristics. Heuristics cannot yield definitively optimal solutions. Heuristics are merely placeholders for when exacting mechanisms are unavailable or impractical.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 10:14 PM
5

Yes, but those observations and conclusions are not rational fact as the OP presented them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 09:58 PM
4

Nearly all of the evolutionary psychology stuff and 90% of what they claim is "scientific evidence." The idea that women are more manipulative than men, the idea that women are more narcissistic than men, the idea that women are more Machiavellian than men, and all of their claims about "proven" genetic differences between men and women. Most of it is scientific fantasy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 05:25 PM
3

TRP draws in those with the pragmatic mindset. This is what non-TRP'ers just don't understand, because they are not pragmatists. TRP'ers want results, TRP provides methodology to obtain those results. The most common arguments levied at TRP'ers here and by feminists are ethical considerations; TRP'ers are not concerned with that. I disagree. Some aspects of TRP are utter logical bull shit. And as BP man, I can say that I dislike TRP not for ethical reasons, but because it doesn't make sense. It'…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/15 04:38 PM
1

Ok, but we are talking about todays social justice movement - sjw's are we not. You said: "initially it was communist subversion of capitalism" It wasn't. There have been and still ARE dozens of social justice movements. Social justice subjective, therefore there are many interpretations and many movements.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:38 AM
1

I suppose. I don't really comment their very often, not more than one a week. I would never defend /r/thebluepill because I think it's a shitty sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:36 AM
1

That is a shallow bizarre definition of social justice. You left out the distributive definition of justice considered by the term I used direct wording from wikipedia. Do you think the definition on wikipedia is inadequate?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:35 AM
1

The issue is that you're taking "social justice" as meaning what it says instead of what it means. Social justice is just a term, the people who use it are most certainly not concerned with justice in any form. No, I'm taking the definition of social justice right from wikipedia.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:33 AM
1

How would you justify the definition of a term which has no definition?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:32 AM
3

They discuss how women should be behave. That's enough to satisfy my definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/14 12:31 AM
1

I'd prefer not to rely on a biased blog. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Taparelli Luigi Taparelli D’Azeglio (1793–1862) was an Italian Catholic scholar of the Society of Jesus who coined the term social justice. He cofounded the journal Civiltà Cattolica in 1850 and wrote for it for twelve years. He was particularly concerned with the problems arising from the industrial revolution. He was a proponent of reviving the philosophical school of Thomism, and his social teachings influenced Pope L…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:30 PM
1

Criticism implies a desire for women to act differently. A desire for women to act differently implies an agenda or an ideology. Ideology regarding what is socially "right" or "just" is a social justice discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:23 PM
0

You have defined this down so far that it is meaningless. No, I created a set definition based on an academic definition of "social justice." Definitions, by default, are not meaningless. Definition's give meaning. In this case, SJW refers to individuals that are heavily involved in discussing and acting on issues which relate to social justice. You can say that renders the term "SJW" useless, but that's completely subjective. I was hoping that this thread would remain as objective as possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:20 PM
2

The opposite is true. Scientology claims they have hidden truths.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:17 PM
3

Definition of social justice: 'Social justice' is generally used to refer to a set of institutions which will enable people to lead a fulfilling life and be active contributors to their community. TRP says that implementing traditional gender roles "will enable people to lead a fulfilling life and be active contributors to their community." I don't know how I could make it more clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:16 PM
3

The problem is that you're taking the definition for "Social Justice" from wikipedia, which is very generic. The term SJW may derive from "social justice", but the extra word "warrior" adds considerably more connotation to the term that you're ignoring. Based on what? I had to define SJW myself because there are no official definitions of SJW. I'm don't really wish to argue about the definition. I'm happy with the definition I already outlined. What you're doing is analogous to someone innocentl…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:14 PM
1

Social justice is a code word for vote for liberal corporatism / fascism instead of republican corporatism / fascism. No it's not. I provided a definition from wikipedia in the post. Please read that before responding.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 07:10 PM
3

A platitude? No, it's a legitimate distinction that explains a lot of the disconnect between how redpillers and bluepillers regard the scope of TRP. If you legitimately believe that gender identity is of an equal concern to RP men as is banging sluts, then you have not been paying attention. Could you explain to me how the threads I've linked relate to sexual strategy?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:59 PM
1

All I see in these kinds of posts are venting or laughing. I don't see anyone talking about taking action of any kind. For me, discussing social issues in a polarized forum is "action." Recruiting individuals to that forum is "action."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:44 PM
3

This is just another platitude. It sounds like something a politician would say. I want something real. Give me something tangible. There is a difference between how boys and girls develop a gender identity as a result of social, cognitive, or evolutionary factors (the three main theoretical foundations) But the gender identity they develop is not the ideal, according to TRP. The fact that they promote an ideal suggests they have an ideology, which suggests they have a social agenda, which they …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:42 PM
1

I think there's much more to TRP than it just being a platform to churn out a different breed of SJW. We're the ones who acknowledge reality. We don't try to bring the mountaintop to where we stand, we learn the skills necessary, and put in the effort and training required to scale the mountain and conquer it. That sounds like any generic statement you might see from religious people or SJWs or any group really. Of course all groups claim they represent reality. Have you ever heard of a successf…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:35 PM
3

Where is the call to action in that post? Analysis isnt SJWing, activism is Discussing issues on a forum is a form of activism. Recruiting people to your cause is a form of activism. The MRA solution to the inequities in marriage is activism to change the laws, the RP solution is refrain from marriage and kids and let it all collapse. One is SJW thinking, the other is NOT I see this all the time, but I feel like many Red Pillers aren't getting the message.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:31 PM
3

Nope, SJW is a (pejorative) moniker ideologically tied to a specific group. It's not like for example "skinheads", "black bloc" members or autonomous groups which have historically been leftist subcultures that have also been coopted by right-wing extremists. Taking SJW as a description of someone's activity (waging war for social justice) misses the point; there are no conservative SJWs because the concept of "Social Justice" with upper case initials is alien to conservatism. No its not. Justic…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:29 PM
3

Many red pillers are deep in the anger phase and are just venting at the injustices they see in the world. The same exact thing could be said about many SJWs. I see very little difference. If anyone asks how they can change the world they are quickly pointed to mens rights. The red pill is just a sexual strategy. Then why are there so many posts criticizing the world? Changing the world seems way out of scope in trying to get laid don't you think? If /r/theredpill was only about getting laid, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:22 PM
1

In every group there is a disparity between the ideology and the actions of its adherents. This is not to lobster-bucket the issue, but to point out that while individual actions may be worthy of criticism, the core principles or ideals of the ideology remain unaffected. We can laugh at radfems or rail against religious extremists, but that should never be regarded as a credible refutation of the source feminism or religion. Same applies to those RP men who are more interested in criticizing wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:18 PM
3

All trp advice is geared only to changing yourself to succeed int he world as it is. How does a post like this fit that classification? http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/2lqyq0/erasing_dad_2014documentary_shows_how_the_legal/
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 04:09 PM
3

Just complaining about perceived injustice doesn't make you an SJW, what you try to DO about it does. SJWs want to achieve their goals by censoring and taking over everything in the world until their is total ideological conformity. They are totalitarian. That TRP is also complaining about "society" doesn't put them in the same camp, because of their solutions, which are individualistic and don.t involve legislation/censorship/gulags to enforce ideological conformity. I disagree on two accounts.…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 03:58 PM
2

TRP doesn't advocate trying to change society into not rewarding arseholes. TRP advocates being an arsehole (paraphrasing) so you'll get rewarded by the arsehole-rewarding society. In theory, but not always in practice. I mentioned it in my post here: In theory, TheRedPill is supposed to be about adapting to the world as it is, but often the threads on TheRedPill merely criticize the world as it is, and sometimes even suggest the way it should be. They are critical of the male provider role, sur…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 03:00 PM
7

As you've pointed out yourself, TRP would be about adapting to reality instead of changing it. Your observations are correct (there is loads of outrage porn and social critique on the main page of the sub), however, long-term members already called those who opened these threads out on it and told them to take that stuff to the MRA sub where it actually belongs. I see only a handful of people calling it out. If average people on TRP didn't want to discuss these issues, they wouldn't upvote the p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/14 02:56 PM
5

I disagree. I'd never go near a women with that level of crazy. Thats the type of chick that will cut your dick off.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/14 05:13 AM
8

Physical features are still numero uno for most women when talking sex. The difference is pretty small. Elliot Rogers was a lunatic, so no surprise women didn't like him.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/14 05:03 AM
10

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Honestly I've never known an attractive women to be lonely in the way that lonely guys are- spending all their time alone playing videos/trolling, having like one friend who lives far away, going through life never being noticed or complimented, etc. How is that different? The same applies to attractive men. Attractive men are rarely lonley in the way you describe. Attractive people are treated differently in our society.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/14 04:52 AM
1

I honestly don't understand. This is reddit. Aren't most people athiests on almost every sub?
/r/RedPillWomen04/10/14 11:17 AM
2

What if she just doesn't like girls? What if the guys around her are just looking for friendship. I'm a guy, and most of my friends are girls. Does that mean I'm a shitty person?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 05:14 PM
3

That's just assuming the worst. Couldn't you do that in literally every situation, man or women?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:44 PM
7

Why can't you stand that behavior?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/14 01:34 PM
3

Just, it feels weird how blue pillers try and cede ALL the responsibility on this one to men, when ordinarily, they are all about egalitarianism, equality, sharing responsibilites and power equally, etc. Yet in this, they are as meek and submissive as any good Islamic wife. Can you explain why this is weird? Why can't I be a BP man and dominant in bed? Why can't my partner be a BP women and submissive in the bedroom?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/14 03:36 PM
2

What she did is emotionally abusive as well. She used a threat (the guy who called her) to try to scare him into a relationship. That's emotionally abusive. Using any type of fear to exert any type of control is emotional abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/14 01:26 AM
0

Part of her problem. If you're an individualist and you believe that people can be held 100% responsible for their own actions, then yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 10:09 PM
0

"essentially", he was responding to her constant criticism of his lack of commitment. It was also an "honest" response. "Honesty is the best policy." If he honestly believes they have a chance at an LTR, then that's fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 10:07 PM
4

Maybe she should leave him. She should, but she won't. That's part of the problem. If she wants more, then she should leave him. If you assume that she's obviously not going to change, then I can fairly assume that he's not going to change either. She knows that, and still wanted to go back. She won't leave him because she likes him. He knows that, so he's using his stronger position to force the relationship along his own terms. A GNG would say, "I'm never going to date you long term." Then she…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 09:55 PM
3

No, he isn't. He set his terms for the relationship, and it's up to her to agree or leave. She tried a third option, to renegotiate through passive aggression, which he shut down. She won't leave him. He knows that and uses it to his advantage. Again, how is that emotional abuse? Because it fits the definition I posted.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 09:52 PM
1

What if he simply doesn't want to put up with childish, passive-aggressive behavior? Then he should leave her. She's clearly not going to change, and he knows that. He's happy with the current arrangement and she wants more. He strings her along, knowing that she likely isn't capable of ever meeting his standards for a long term relationship. What you call "emotional abuse," I call, enforcing boundaries. It would be if he was genuinely interested in an LTR at some point with this women. I don't …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 09:18 PM
0

Are ultimatums a form of abuse to you? If so, then I'd say that the definition of abuse is a bit too loose. I don't think a standard ultimatum would fit the definition I posted. What you're presenting now is a lot more sensitive and cautious of an attitude than what you tried to portray as a bp GNG in my last thread. How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 09:13 PM
5

It depends on your definition. I googled and found this one: Any act, including confinement, isolation, verbal assault, humiliation, intimidation, infantilization, or any other treatment which may diminish the sense of identity, dignity, and self-worth. He's definitely infantilizing her by trying to teach her a lesson, so this story fulfills part 1 of the definition. Could his behavior diminish her sense of identity, dignity, and self-worth? Probably. She clearly leaves her dignity at the door w…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 08:40 PM
3

They're both immature. Both are trying to manipulate and game each other. The guy is smarter, so he clearly has the upper hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 08:23 PM
1

I agree. As long as everyone is on the same page, it's fine. The problem with this story is that the women is not on the same page as the man.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 08:21 PM
-1

I believe /u/bijou88 meant emotional abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 08:17 PM
1

Also don't you find it a tad hypocritical to attribute boys faults to them being biologically inferior on a thread claiming any gap that harms women is due to sexism? If there was a demonstrable reason that women were getting paid less, then I'd listen. As of now, the wage gap is "unexplained." There are demonstrable reasons why boys might struggle in a traditional education setting. Maybe boys get more drive and determination overcoming their many many defects as you claim and thus are overrepr…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 06:17 PM
2

It has been proven that female teachers, so the average teacher, have a significant bias against boys with grades changing radically for the same work depending on the gender of who they believe is submitting it. Could you link to a study? Also if it is due solely to more boys being mentally challenged (it isn't) then shouldn't we change our teaching standards to account for that? Also wouldn't more boys then be brilliant to compensate (unless you're saying men are on average less intelligent th…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 03:34 PM
4

The gap isn't fictional. It's real. 5% is still a gap. ignoring the very real gaps in education and sentencing that have been proven to be due to discrimination. The gap in education isn't necessarily a gender issue. Significantly more men than women suffer from learning disabilities, so you'd expect less women to struggle academically. Dyslexia is especially concerning, considering the fact that it's 3 times more prevalent in men than women. If anything, we need to figure out how to educate tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/14 03:11 PM
4

This is that common denominator line that I've heard a million times. What was ignorant about his post is that I know from first hand experience that nice gets you literally nowhere with women. That like attracts like line sounds fucking amazing if it were true. When I said attract, I didn't mean sexual attraction. What I'm talking about is the scientifically proven principle that individuals tend to associate and "hang out" with groups of people that think similarly. You friends (male or female…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/14 05:36 PM
13

I never have a problem finding them. Like attracts like. Nice people tend to associate with other nice people. If you honestly internalize everything on /r/TheRedPill, maybe you really are destined to date selfish women. In that case, maybe you should stick to TRP, since it's probably the best way to go about fraternizing with manipulative and selfish women.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/14 11:24 PM
15

Then maybe they should learn to avoid women that mistreat them. Maybe they're terrible judges of character and thus easy targets for manipulative women.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/14 11:19 PM
3

Absolutely, thats another explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 10:20 PM
7

The data RP uses actually, often says the effect is less pronounced for male sluts. The data I provided showed the effect was more pronounced for male sluts. I don't openly shame sluts, I just avoid LTRs with them. I hold sexual strategy to be amoral. So women should start their own group advocating staying away from promiscuous men and men that advocate sexual male behavior...like TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 07:58 PM
7

but TRP is ultimately written from the male perspective. And it often advocates being a giant male slut, which is arguably ruining your ability to ever raise a family with a stable partner. And yet a lot of RPers seem to blame women for decreasing birth rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 07:55 PM
1

Why would the trend reverse so much in 8 years? Something is amiss. I need to see the raw data. It's in the OP. Men are not cheating so much more than women that it could get even close to producing the wide difference in divorce initiation. There must be other phenomena at work. It could be that men are more hesitant to initiate divorce when their wife cheats. Just one potential explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 07:54 PM
3

RP expends great effort exposing the scam of marriage. It recommends people not to marry. Why would we care about this risk affecting us? It was a response to the post from the other day, that asserted the trend doesn't exist for men. That's wrong. The same trend exists for men. Besides, I think living your life by the risk assessments of a study would make your life restrictive and boring quite fast. And yet a lot of RPers use this to prove their point that women shouldn't be promiscuous, while…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:35 PM
7

Yes, but there is a difference. That's from the 2002 survey. In the 2010 survey, the trend was reversed. The correlation was stronger for men. Further, women initiate two-thirds of divorces You're assuming that because women initiate divorce, they're at fault for the marriage ending. That's not a good assumption. If a man cheats on a women and the women initiates divorce, then it's really the man's fault. See what I mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:33 PM
7

The people who are predisposed to having lots of sex (as in the people who have lots of sex before getting married) are of course going to be more likely to continue wanting to have lots of sex after marriage. But that would mean that women should avoid promiscuous men, as they will likely engage in EMIs.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:26 PM
4

The issue with this thinking from a RP lens is that women don't want men with low partner counts. Do you have a source?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:25 PM
7

Why would that not also apply to women?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 05:23 PM
8

You're argument is entirely speculative. Do you have any evidence to back that up? All I did was post studies that show men that are virgins are more likely to have happier marriages and less likely to divorce. There's practically no sex difference with this correlation. On the other hand, you are speculating about the cause of this correlation with absolutely zero information to support your argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/14 03:13 PM
1

You said "brain structure." I asked for MRI studies, which the only way to show structural differences, but you provided studies about genetic expression. Furthermore, the third source you quoted said this: More than a third of Y-chromosomal genes appear to be involved in sex-based human brain differentiation. Some of the genetic activity in question is evident in the adult brain, while other of it only appears at earlier stages of brain development. It is yet unknown whether the differences in …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/14 01:43 AM
1

"Men and women are the same on every level and if you disagree it's because you're some RP sexist neckbeard!" Can you find someone saying that on this sub? They always come back to trying to explain away any and all differences between the sexes as a social construct. This is different. Most BPers view social constructs as a possible explanation for many differences. Possible is the key word. It's merely a proposed explanation, not a definitive one. RPers generally assert that genetics are the c…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 07:45 PM
5

As for "going with the flow" and "not fighting reality", I'm going to assume it's a roundabout way saying that he's pragmatic. I agree pragmatism is great, but it often doesn't coincide with "genuine niceness". I guess when I saw you talking about honesty, I assumed that meant honesty with yourself as well. Pragmatism is kinda similar. I had this convo before, so I can accept this. So that decouples sexual objectification from this nebulous concept of "shallowness" that gets bashed. From what yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 06:24 PM
5

A GNG that is looking to build a long term and meaningful relationship would still seek mutual sexual/physical attraction. No shit. Most GNG aren't really out looking for one night stands Maybe not, but they could be. There's a lot of other factors that play into it too. Even getting aroused/hard, without some kind of emotional connection, can become an issue. I disagree. Anyone can get aroused without an emotional connection. GNG would be at a disadvantage when it comes to this given that they …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 04:20 PM
7

Women are attracted to status because to her instincts You cannot possibly prove this is genetic. Which genes are responsible? A well-respected man has better genes as well. Is that really true? Men with higher testosterone tend to be more attractive to women. However in our society, men with higher testosterone tend to have slightly lower incomes than men with lower testosterone. Also, men with high testosterone are less likely to have high IQs. So our society rewards men that are "less manly" …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 03:29 PM
13

People defended Michael Jackson. People defend serial killers. People defend all types of reprehensible behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 03:19 PM
4

How does that explain brain structure differences that exist at birth I'm not aware of any MRI studies that compare male/female brain structure at birth. developmental differences that predate being able to speak? Are you claiming speech is the only way we learn and internalize data? There may or may not be born differences, but I don't see the need to speculate until there is proof either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 03:07 PM
6

Or are you saying that because you believe in the ol' BP-ish belief that "men are just hairy women, we're all 100% the same, and any difference at all is just a social construct"? No one believes this.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 02:55 PM
5

Being honest about one's thoughts and feelings doesn't grant one carte blanche to act on them. In my worst days, I've wished everyone would die alongside me. Doesn't mean I even remotely acted on that. But a GNG isn't just honest, he's also empathetic. He inherently doesn't wish harm on others unless perhaps they've done something truly reprehensible. The fact that you "wished everyone would die alongside" you means you weren't a GNG. Part of being a GNG is a sense of overall optimism. A lot of …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 02:53 PM
16

I disagree with these points: Judging a woman purely by how physically attractive she is is shameful. GNG is a bit shamed of himself. A GNG is most importantly honest with himself, others around him, and the world in front of him. Judging a women for sex based purely on attraction is something a GNG is perfectly capable of. A GNG, like most men and women, is primarily interested in physical features for one night stands. Denying this would be lying to one's self, and those around him. Honesty is…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/14 01:30 AM
-1

It's either is or isn't logical. Something can be logical and still be erroneous. Which parts are you arguing are anti-logical? Nothing specific. There are individual aspects of TRP. Some may be logical, while others aren't. Your argument requires the entirety of TRP theory (every aspect) to be logical and serve a logical purpose. It's possible that SOME aspects are illogical or serve no logical purpose, in which case you're line of reasoning is illogical.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 01:53 AM
-1

How do you see TRP as illogical? I don't. However you're argument requires me to assume that it is logical. I'm not willing to make that assumption. Well, RP is based on results and heavily binary. In other words if you aren't fucking do more RP things. If that does doesn't work picking up another strat. That's very different from the other theories on reddit, as it is ruthlessly logical. Aspects of it may be logical, however you argument requires me to assume that the entirety of TRP theory is …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/14 01:10 AM
3

I'm pretty sure the desire for paternal investment is biological. I don't think you understand the science of the subject all that well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_investment
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 10:49 PM
6

But men do things that there's no biological reason for. So men are inherently solipsistic as well. Men paint. There's no biological reason to paint, people just do it. Some men actively and willingly engage in swingers clubs, allowing or encouraging their wife to have sex with other men. There's no biological reason for this.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 10:47 PM
-1

It can't be fear, since the point of TRP is to go after women. That's based on the assumption that TRP is inherently logical, and that it functionally serves a logical purpose. How do you know that is the case?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 10:42 PM
0

Are children or adults more useful to society? Which one provides more value added?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 10:41 PM
3

Uhh...yeah it does. How about investing in your offspring? Your offspring will have a better chance at success if you can help raise them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 10:39 PM
2

Not quite. PUAhate was created by guys that felt like they had been scammed by sketchy PUAs. The users very much bought into all the stuff that TRP says about women. Large sections of PUAhate were focused on PUA techniques. One of the sections that Elliot posted in was very much like TRP. Success stories, tips about dating women, mostly the same lingo, content about the nature of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 12:13 AM
1

I don't see why every question needs a speculative answer. If there isn't enough information to definitively answer the question, why not just leave it unanswered?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/14 12:11 AM
2

Elliot Roger posted on a subforum called "Red Pill" on PUA hate. I think that's why people associate him with TRP. I'm not sure how much the content overlapped.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/14 02:45 PM
6

Women don't have any respect for men other than dark triad alphas though. I disagree. Women respect characters like super heros, and they don't have dark triad traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 07:40 PM
1

I gave an example of the fat acceptance movement. Many fat acceptance bloggers are also self described "feminists." Is it real feminism? No, but they call themselves feminists. For the record, I think that men AND women are spoiled have have a "you can have it all without the work" attitude. Too many men feel entitled to sex (see /r/TheRedPill) and too many women feel entitled to a perfect guy. People need to be more realistic. No one is entitled to anything, except maybe air, water, food, shelt…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 07:35 PM
5

"You can have it all!" and "Explore your sexuality!" I agree with this part. They forgot to mention that you have to work your ass off to have it all. It doesn't just come naturally. This generation of men and women is spoiled when it comes to relationships and relationship expectations. I don't think men and women need to adhere to any sort of order to have a good relationship. They just need two three things. Attraction, understanding, and respect. You can't just neglect the attraction thing. …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 07:27 PM
2

I don't know when some (emphasis added) feminists started going down this path, but I think it's dragged the entire movement through the mud. It's really unfortunate, because women are still disadvantaged in many ways. But you have fat acceptance bloggers who also happen to be "feminists" preaching that overweight women have a right to be overweight, while also having a right to date guys that look like this. There's this "you can have it all" attitude that completely fails to mention that you n…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 07:16 PM
9

I would argue that before the 1960s/1970s when the divorce rate went up to around 50%, it wasn't "attraction" holding marriages together. What held marriages together wasn't the traditional gender roles, but societal and family expectations. Divorce was not an acceptable solution. You worked through your problems. It didn't matter how attracted you were to your mate, you made it work. Now, divorce is easy. Divorce is acceptable. People say that if you're not happy, then you shouldn't stay togeth…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 06:48 PM
4

I have studies that show women are more attracted to dark triad traits (psychopathy, narcissism, machiavellianism), do you want me to give those to you? Studies have revealed the same thing about men, to be fiar. People with dark triad traits also tend to be significantly more physically appealing because they spend more time on their appearance. Women with dark triad traits spend more time working out, doing their makeup, doing their hair, selecting their wardrobe. Ditto for dark triad men, min…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/14 06:34 PM
1

I took a look at the link; I stand corrected. Understandable misunderstanding. So many of the groups that sort through the data (like the heritage foundation) have a vested interest in showing women act a certain way. They're social conservatives, so they present the data in a way that supports their views. The traditional view was that it was OK for men to have premarital sex, but not women. It's borderline difficult to find a study that even mentions that the correlation holds for men as well.…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/14 12:44 PM
5

Are RPers sluts? Serious question. You have a few MGTOWs and a few guys in long relationships, but otherwise it's mostly guys spinning plates. That would make RPers sluts. So RPers are terrible relationship material. It's not really surprising, but it's certainly worth saying. By spinning so many plates, RPers are destroying their ability to be a good partner and a good father.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 06:42 PM
1

Obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/14 04:07 PM
6

Well in the intro, RPS does say that TRP is a reaction to feminism. Reactions tend to be equal and opposite. It's just physics, I know, but I feel like it can be applied metaphorically to life as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/14 03:56 PM
2

No. I think you missed my point. Both parties have veto power. If you really don't want to do something, you don't do it. If your partner does it anyway and it bothers you, and she does it over and over, you find a new partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 01:16 AM
3

Tell the guys that post batshit insane shit on TRP to stop doing that. There are crazies in every litter.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/14 01:13 AM
2

we'll do something else That's called flexibility. You want to watch the movie, but you sacrifice what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 11:27 PM
4

Because censorship is lame? You don't just censor stuff you disagree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 09:59 PM
3

Actually, its really easy. There's no games. If they don't make me happy, they're done. I don't keep people in my life who don't add value. Yes, but my point is that very few people on the planet have the same exact terms. If everyone, men and women, were completely unwilling to change their terms, then people wouldn't get along very well. Part of interpersonal relationships is being flexible. So you're not willing to alter your terms. They're static. If every women you met had the same attitude…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 09:57 PM
6

How is that sexist? I would call Cosmo very sexist. I would call Fifty Shades sexist as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 09:48 PM
3

I know several no ones who would disagree. If every man and women on the planet had completely rigid terms for their relationships, you would have to find someone with the exact same terms as you. That would be pretty damn hard. So you're saying anyone who uses a throwaway account is lying and deceiving their SO? If they hide it from their SO, yes. There are cases where I think lying is acceptable, for example to protect yourself from someone. I don't volunteer information Would you feel comfort…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 08:35 PM
6

I know that I won't accept a relationship that's not on my own terms. If everyone was this inflexible, no one would be in a relationship. 50/50 implies you hand over half the power to your SO. I don't want to give anyone power over me or my relationships and I won't compromise that. I don't see how you're handing over any power. You always have the freedom to leave. Occasionally you'll have to make sacrifices if you choose to maintain a relationship, but so will she. If you're not willing to mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 07:51 PM
9

If you can never proceed without her approval, then she is making the decisions, not you. But she can never proceed without your approval. If she does, then she's violating the bounds of the 50-50 agreement. If you're dating a women that isn't selfish, spoiled, or really insecure You're dating a man. Says who? My girlfriend isn't selfish, she isn't spoiled, and she isn't really insecure. Show me a study that says women are more selfish or self-interested than men? Last time I checked, virtually …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:39 PM
2

The fact that Congress can punish him makes him accountable to congress. They have ultimate veto power. Besides, a 2/3 vote over-rules a veto by the President.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:34 PM
4

Which man is that? A President can't veto his own impeachment proceedings.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:29 PM
10

This is just a dolled up way to say your girl makes the decisions. No, because you both have ultimate veto power. If she doesn't accede, then you are at a dead stop. This kind of pedestalization causes resentment in women, not respect. Yes, you're at a dead stop. And you don't proceed until the issue is resolved and you both agree on the solution. It's not pedestrianization, it's mutual respect. She HAS to have the same attitude towards you or else it does't work. If she cannot grant you the sam…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:27 PM
7

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:18 PM
7

Most public companies operate with a board of directors. There's a reason for that. The people that own the business, the stockholders, don't trust a single man to make all the big decisions. Thus the CEO is accountable to the board of directors. It's a basic demonstration of the concept "two heads are better than one." Even in the military, a group of people is ultimately in charge. A Colonel is accountable to a Brigadier General, who is accountable to a Major General, who is accountable to a L…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 05:12 PM
10

If it's some bullshit reason, then yeah, her opinion is noted and overruled. In the 50-50 model, she has veto power. It doesn't matter if you think her opinion is bullshit or not, you don't proceed with a decision until you have the consent of both parties. If you feel that she repeatedly and unfairly takes advantage of that veto power, then you confront her about it. You say "I think you're taking advantage and overpowering me, and it's not OK." If she continues to take advantage, then you hone…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 04:50 PM
15

It's nothing like the captain first mate model. Let me ask you this. If you wanted to do something and your girlfriend refused (aka tried to veto the decision), would you still go ahead and do it? In the captain first mate model, you would. The captain takes his first mate's opinion into consideration, but the captain has the final say. In the 100 percent consent model, you wouldn't, because you can only proceed when both partners agree to proceed. Each partner has veto power.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 04:32 PM
11

I agree with everything you said. It wasn't something I was conscious of our planned. I didn't even know male relationship strategy was a thing prior to TRP. I thought the norm was for the woman to wear the pants. Where did you get that idea? The problem I see with TRP is it flips the table rather than balancing the table. In the past, you were the low-power end of an unfair occasionally abusive relationship, so you resolve to be the high-power end of an unfair occasionally abusive relationship.…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 04:29 PM
12

Who concedes when doesn't really matter. It's not about keeping score. What matters is that both partners have a voice and both partners ultimately consent to every decision. Sometimes, one partner will be more opinionated than the other. The less opinionated person may concede more often, but as long as they consent to every decision and do so happily, there's not problem. A problem arises when one person doesn't feel like they have a voice. If the more opinionated person steamrolls the other i…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 04:17 PM
17

No, sometimes you have to make a sacrifice for the other person. The compromise is that the other person occasionally makes sacrifices for you. You both make sacrifices for each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 04:04 PM
9

I assumed if I kept her happy and have her whatever she wanted she'd return the favor by giving me some sex. Didn't work out that way. I know a lot of marriages with this exact dynamic. Guy paranoid about keeping her happy so she may put out and/or won't nag. That's unhealthy. You should make your partner happy because you want to make them happy, not because you expect something in return. That type of attitude is a guaranteed way to loose the respect of a women. It reminds me of that south par…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 03:02 PM
14

As I said to robesta, I prefer the 100 percent consent model, not 50-50. 100 percent consent means that both parties agree 100% and approve each group decision. Obviously sometimes there are differences of opinion. In those cases both partners present their arguments and resolve the dispute with reasoning. Some people might say this leads to fights, but it doesn't have to. Part of a healthy relationship is knowing which partner feels more strongly or has more expertise in certain areas. Partner-…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 02:17 PM
10

That sounds u healthy. Not sure what's blue pill about that arangement. I think 50-50 is a bad description as well. It should be 100-100 or "complete consensus." By that I mean that both parties should agree on everything they do. There may be disagreements on a course of action here or there, but ultimately any decision should be made with unwavering consent by both partners. Both partners are equally responsible for any decisions they make together.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/14 01:52 PM
1

You're using the word more..."more emotional lives." Wheres the evidence for this? What does that statement even mean? Yes, women have longer emotional memory and better emotional intelligence. How does this translate to "more emotional lives?"
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/14 03:58 AM
1

You said women are more emotional, not that they have longer emotional memories. The latter would mean that certain stimuli would trigger memories that cause the emotion to come "flooding back." If someone is "more emotional," to me that means they have stronger emotional responses. That doesn't seem to be the case with women and men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 10:35 PM
1

Furthermore, women do have some pretty profound neurological differences. Ones that make them more empathic, but also more emotional (positively and negatively). Is that really true? People post studies here all the time that show women are more emotionally intelligent, but not necessarily more empathetic. Also, I'm not sure women are more emotional than men. I doubt that very much. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/fathers-day-2014-study-shows-men-are-more-emotionally-sensitive-tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 10:06 PM
2

These are comments from the author: Most of the red pill stuff is based on bad science in my opinion. I actually used to agree with most of the standard evolutionary psychology narratives about “biological imperatives” and whatnot. Then I dug into the research for six months and came out disagreeing with most of it. Men and women ARE biologically different. But outside of testosterone/estrogen, which primarily affect sexuality and physical performance, the innate behavioral differences drop to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 08:01 PM
2

OK, well let me ask you this: Do you think women are more narcissistic than men, in general?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 07:50 PM
2

More than "a few" execs make the regular assumption that sexist themes and ideas targeted against men are quite acceptable - and for the most part, they are correct. Here's a few great examples of that in action[1] . Really? What about all those sexist themes against women? Ditsy girls, dumb blondes, ect. Sexism goes both ways. You're original comment was: The only type of people who will even bother to say anything about that societal double standard are MRAs I presented evidence otherwise. Tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 04:13 PM
6

The fact that BBC invested time and money in to creating a show like that and believed it would be appealing to audiences in the first place speaks volumes about society. So a couple of execs made a mistake. That outweighs the thousands of people that complained? The opinions of a handful of people that thought it was a good idea to make the show are more important than the opinions of the thousands that responded negatively? That math doesn't add up.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 03:30 PM
9

This is bad because if you are submissive (as a man), you are not attractive to women. The same holds true for dominance. Too much of any side is a bad thing. The key is finding balance (1/5.) Source me! Sure, more women like being sexually submissive, but submissive in real life? I doubt it. Your average women doesn't want to be told what to do or trained. Because nobody else does. Not true. BBC had to formally apologize after airing a show that advocated training your man like a dog, and recei…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 03:28 PM
4

In 2005, the BBC aired a series called Bring Your Husband to Heel, which involved a dog trainer sharing her techniques with wives. BBC received so many complaints about sexism, that they had to make a formal apology.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 03:22 PM
12

Flip this around to: Understanding a woman's body language Understanding women for what they say Basic obedience for your wife Wife activities Let's flip it one more time Understanding a man's body language Understanding men for what they say Basic obedience for your husband Husband activities Now does it really sound so bad? Whenever there's a TV show or some other media talking about "training your man," TRP and MRA goes apeshit. I tend to agree. No spouse should be obedient to the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 01:53 PM
10

That's just as bad, and just as sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 01:51 PM
1

I posted this a few days ago, got practically no RP responses. http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2bk6n0/be_proud_youre_a_man_not_a_woman_a_response/
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/14 01:47 PM
3

This is a quote from him that explains his view point on the subject. Most of the red pill stuff is based on bad science in my opinion. I actually used to agree with most of the standard evolutionary psychology narratives about “biological imperatives” and whatnot. Then I dug into the research for six months and came out disagreeing with most of it. Men and women ARE biologically different. But outside of testosterone/estrogen, which primarily affect sexuality and physical performance, the innat…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 09:17 PM
2

All fair. Also forgot to include his comments on red pill stuff. Most of the red pill stuff is based on bad science in my opinion. I actually used to agree with most of the standard evolutionary psychology narratives about “biological imperatives” and whatnot. Then I dug into the research for six months and came out disagreeing with most of it. Men and women ARE biologically different. But outside of testosterone/estrogen, which primarily affect sexuality and physical performance, the innate beh…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 09:09 PM
2

I'm aware, but I question if they understand what they're reading. http://markmanson.net/butchering-the-alpha-male The problem is that Alpha Male theory, while beneficial in the short-run in helping guys take action, does not reflect actual reality. It’s a means to an end. But once that end is met, once the neophyte gains that confidence and self-assurance and asserts himself, the Alpha Male ideal is not only inaccurate but can become harmful. ... The Alpha/Beta worldview leads to misogynistic t…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 07:16 PM
0

Quotes are not straw men. But insinuating that I argued something that I didn't is a straw man. If you think my calling you unreasonable is a personal attack, report the comment and let a moderator decide. I think the characterization is fair. It would be one thing if you called my opinion unreasonable. However you called ME unreasonable. If it were applicable to others you could short circuit TRP in its entirety by publishing it. Since you haven't done that, readers can draw their own conclusio…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 01:14 AM
0

In this case you want to compare it to scientology as a smear. Then when pressed you resort to the most tenuous logic possible to defend the comparison. Don't strawman me. Thanks. It isn't what a reasonable person would do, but it is what you do. Rule 2. No personal attacks. In other words you don't trust anonymous reviews. Since you can't tell what their interests are. I don't know who is behind the keyboard. It could be a troll. It could be someone selling something. It could be a delusional i…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 12:32 AM
0

Such comparisons illustrate nothing. Like the comparison you made. Any comparison can be used to demonstrate something. I'm not saying it's exactly like Scientology. I just compared a few aspects to Scientology to demonstrate a larger point. Ok, so that idea of yours is out. Not really. I don't trust anonymous reviews from people that may have a vested interest in selling something. That's perfectly fair. OK, what is the most useful male sexual strategy that you've found using your logic? It's n…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/14 12:19 AM
0

For the same reason that reddit, the USPS, and your local farmer's market can't reasonably be compared to the church of scientology. Most things can be compared on some level. Nearly all groups have some similarities. Plenty of anti-vaccination people use their real names. Plenty of Scientologists use their real names. Do you trust them? No. But that just brings up another point. Even when people use their real names, reviews can be untrustworthy. Can you give me an example of "logic" as a succe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 11:50 PM
0

The difference in degree does in fact matter. Why? If you have a guy selling his produce at a farmers market, and some other guy selling expensive artwork, both could have the tendency to exaggerate to make a sale. It doesn't matter how much money they stand to make, they both want to sell their product. So what criteria do you have for evaluating a proper male sexual strategy? Non-anonymous reviews. Absent of that, logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 11:02 PM
1

The difference in degree equates to a difference in kind. Scientology can't be reasonably compared to some guy with a ten dollar e-book. It doesn't matter. Both have an interest in selling something. You think that TRP is based on "a couple of stories"? It doesn't matter how many stories there are. All of them are anonymous, and none of them can be fact checked.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 10:49 PM
2

It seems more oriented towards building relationships, not getting laid. Definitely not anything like typical PUA.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 10:22 PM
7

When will you guys get it- nobody on TRP cares how it looks. I'm not even subscribed to ex-red. I just saw it in the sidebar and took a look. I mean really, you'd think people could just walk away or not give a shit about things they disagree with. Nope, gotta make a subreddit dedicated to people who didn't understand red pill and want to make it look like they left so it looks bad. Do you really think that it exists to make TRP look bad? That view point is crazy narcissistic. No one cares that …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 10:19 PM
2

I didn't write the review.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 09:04 PM
1

become more attractive through working on yourself by improving your physical appearance, wardrobe, career, and by generally allowing yourself to be selfish. One could almost say it's an expanded formulation of "be yourself" to "be your best self. I rarely see any of that on /r/TheRedPill. Maybe /r/BecomeAMan and /r/AskTRP has that type of content. More importantly, all that stuff you just listed... you can find it elsewhere. You can find communities of men that advocate improving your appearanc…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 07:12 PM
0

I was going with the angle of "why do people always seem to join when someone calls it out as a horrible horrible misanthropic place?" It really shouldn't be a good recruiting mechanism. Though I guess the Book of Mormon is another example of that "working." "all publicity is good publicity" You also have to keep in mind that some people subscribe to TRP just to read it and laugh. Screw it, I'll take a case of special pleading. TRP differs from religion by nominally drawing its ideas from observ…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 06:02 PM
0

True, although the Manosphere is absolutely a profitable industry. TRP links to other blogs and sites all the time. Those that are on the money making end of that industry have a vested interest in increasing the size of the overall community and increasing their own exposure. Even without that aspect of the community, the popularity and the stories are not indicators of TRP success. The anti-vaccination movement wasn't a moneymaker, but plenty of people had stories to share that seemed to suppo…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 05:53 PM
1

How about the fact that a large number of men report success from TRP practices? Scientology preaches success stories, so what? Those success stories cannot be verified. TRP's stories also can't be verified because it's an anonymous community. You can't just trust everything you read on the internet
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 05:12 PM
1

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/genders-cant-see-eye-to-eye-over-height-8498247.html men are most satisfied when they are closer to their ideal partner, and look for someone who is only three inches shorter. The average American man is 5'10. So the average ideal American women would be 5'7. The average American women is 5'4. The most satisfying height for a man is 6ft 3in; for a woman, it's 5ft 9in. Women undoubtedly prefer taller men. Most women will say they prefer a man over 6 feet …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 05:06 PM
1

I didn't say it's not worth pursuing, only that it's speculative rather than factual. All science involved a degree of speculation and uncertainty, but evopsych is about as uncertain and speculative as you can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 05:01 PM
2

Examples?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 05:00 PM
1

I suppose philosophy is broader, like guiding principles. Treat other people how you want to be treated. What's the purpose of life? That type of stuff. Ideology is more specific. A doctrine, a movement, a group of individuals advocating something specific. So maybe Traditionalism would be a life philosophy. Right-libertarianism would be more like an ideology. The former advocates a general respect for traditional principles and ways of life. The latter is a specific group of ideas that could be…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 04:58 PM
3

This is a logical fallacy, right? The popularity of a group is not an indication of it's usefulness or the accuracy of it's ideology. Scientology is a pretty large group of people, but no ones saying "there must be something to it because so many people are joining." You could say the same think about Christianity and most religions. There is a massively popular movement that advocates against vaccinating kids. "So many people are doing it, there must be something to it." Hopefully you can see w…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 04:51 PM
1

Most men like tall women, just like most women like tall men. TRP is supposed to talk about averages, because PUA is a numbers game. On average, men prefer tall women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 02:58 PM
2

Psychology and sociology are actually testable. A psychologist can theorize that humans will react a certain way to some event, then perform an experiment to prove his theory is true or false. An evolutionary psychologist can theorize why humans have certain behaviors, but he or she cannot go back in time to test his or her theories. Evolutionary psychology is an academic discipline, but it's only partially a science.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 02:56 PM
1

And yet it's completely not testable.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 02:53 PM
3

All good qualities and I agree with each and every one of them 100%. These qualities are essential if she wants to be a high quality woman that can attract a high quality man, which will be important because chances are she will want to marry a high quality man. What if she's a lesbian? What if her priority in life isn't getting married? People should try as much as possible not to project their ideology on their children. Philosophies? Fine, but not ideologies.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 02:51 PM
1

Evolutionary psychology is interesting, but it's not fact. A lot of it isn't testable, so some don't even call it science. There could be half a dozen answers to your question. I could come up with a few I suppose, but I don't see the point. One potential answer: many women are introverted, and introverted women possibly prefer introverted men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/14 01:41 AM
2

You can change that to "high status is more attractive to females, of course this is generally speaking and doesnt mean inherently all females that may be outliers." I'm talking about women, on average. No one has ever proven that women, on average, are inherently attracted to high status.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 04:08 PM
2

Earning potential has already long been established as a factor more important to women that I dont see a male McDonald's worker here (even if he could take care of himself from that job) SMV not taking a hit as opposed to a female McD worker. Perhaps, but I deliberate choose not to associate with people that think their partner should earn more than them. Maybe there are women like that, but I certainly don't see or talk to them ever. I cant fault them for that natural inclination You ventured …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 02:35 PM
1

Statistics don't inherently offer suggestions for actions/behaviour. Heuristics based on statistics do. Heuristics is not the same as deductive reasoning. College educated women are less likely to divorce. If I choose a random college educated women, the chance of divorce will be significantly less than if I choose a random HS dropout. That's a statistical fact, not a heuristic. Heuristics are experience-based techniques. Making a deduction from statistics is an empirically-based technique. Stil…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 02:02 PM
0

It was posted a few days ago. A RPer posted an article about how most women prefer men over 6 feet. They said it was unfair because most men are less than 6 feet. Of course the same article said men prefer women over 5'7". Makes sense, if you ask me, especially for marriage. If you're having children with someone, you want to have tall children.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 01:59 PM
1

/r/watchitfortheplot Come on, now... if you take the blatant sexual/romantic overtones out of the Twilight series, do you really think it would have the following it has with middle-aged women? Do you really think they're watching those movies because they have an engaging plot and story line? How is this a double standard?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 01:57 PM
1

Once your over 18, you have to be prepared to make your own choices, make mistakes. You're parents are there to guide you as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 01:55 PM
4

So shorties, basically. Isn't the average height of a women around 5'4"? Whereas women frequently have the barriers up on the standards of a male's job, education, and/or earning potential early on. I think TRP overstates this effect. Most women don't want you to have mega-earning potential. If you're reasonably smart, and you can take care of yourself financially, that's really all that matters, especially for a women that already financially supports herself. Sure, there are shallow women that…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 03:23 AM
0

I thought it was only rpers who made snap decisions based on heuristics? Not heuristics. That's statistics. It's entirely possible that an otherwise intelligent individual missed her opportunity for college education due to lack of finances... in which case, she'd be pretty lucky to have found me! In which case you make an exception. What do you mean by "stupid" anyway? Stubborn? Evil? Undereducated? If we're talking about an LTR, I'd probably have the time to figure this stuff out before hand. …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 03:18 AM
2

It depends. Many countries have laws stating that if a women/man under 18 or 16 complains, then a women/man over the age of 21 can be convicted of a sexual charge. I know that if you're over 21 in Germany, for example, it's best to stay away from girls/boys that aren't 18+, despite the age of consent technically being 14. If they file a complaint, you can end up in jail.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 03:16 AM
8

The families of the deceased.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 03:11 AM
1

Also a double-standard, too... look at how many middle-aged women lined up to the theaters for the premieres of all those Twilight movies and no one batted an eye. Middle aged men show up to movies with young attractive women all the time. There are young attractive women in almost every movie, and they're not just for the 20 year old audience members.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/14 03:10 AM
3

Men don't care as much about height. As much? Maybe not, but they definitely care a lot. The study someone linked about women liking tall men also said that 54% of men prefer to date women over 5'7." That's the only major issue for a lot of guys. Bullshit. Men only care about attraction when they're getting married? No fucking way. This is the person you're spending the rest of your life with. Sounds like a go-getter to me! Not to me. This is marriage. Female college grads are significantly less…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/14 10:49 PM
4

who doesnt love short girls and gives two shits about a hs dropout that looks like an 8 Me? Most men? Statistically most men prefer women in the 5'7 to 5'10 range. Furthermore, we're talking about marriage. Female college grads are less likely to get divorced than any education level below them. So I'd definitely want to marry a college grad.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/14 10:44 PM
11

What is the point of this post? I doubt most women would marry that guy. It's no secret that women like tall men (men like tall women as well). And no one wants to date and produce offspring with an idiot. How many men would date a women that was 4'7, with a potbelly, high school dropout, and works at McDonalds?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/14 09:05 PM
5

It doesn't, as long as the girl is 18 or older.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/14 07:39 PM
7

You're correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/14 04:26 AM
31

Homosexuality isn't OK because "it's not a choice." homosexuality is OK because it doesn't hurt anyone. People who use the "not a choice" defense don't understand what they're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/14 11:39 PM
1

No. Why would you have to meet up? I like to use this definition: http://andynaselli.com/sociological-characteristics-of-cults
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/14 02:58 AM
1

There was no link to the study. How could I possibly see it?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/14 02:55 AM
-2

Spoken like a true cult member :P
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/14 11:17 PM
1

but when measured objectively men are few points ahead of women. No, IQ, the concept, is designed so that there's no gender difference. IQ is NOT an objective measure of intelligence. It's just one way of measuring intelligence, and the test and scores are actually adapted to the population and changes over time. 100 should always the average, and 15 is always the SD. Men and women always are supposed to average 100. There are intelligence tests that find differences between men and women. Some …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/14 10:42 PM
1

Why do men cheat on women? Why do people cheat on people? Because they loose interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/14 01:08 AM
9

The study found that a women's libido drops. It's not that she's not attracted to her husband. She's not attracted to any men. Her general interest in sex with any parties decreases. This could be for any number of reasons, but I don't see how it supports any RP ideas. The problem doesn't seem to be a woman's attraction to husband. The problem seems to be a general disinterest in sexual activity. Also, this seems to disprove aspects of TRP theory: The study also revealed tenderness was important…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 07:06 PM
6

Emotionally: Women experience greater intensity of emotions in general on both sides of the spectrum(i.e both fear and joy), are more prone to emotional contagion(where you "tune in" your emotions with those of surrounding people), adult women cry four times more than adult men, and all that without taking into account the emotional rollercoaster every month. Is this even true? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/fathers-day-2014-study-shows-men-are-more-emotionally-sensitive-than-wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 07:00 PM
1

Oh I know, but that doesn't make what you do right. I guess I just think you should know better and hold yourself to a higher standard of posting. Certainly /u/bluepillschool agreed the other night.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 05:47 PM
3

really think people in general, not just RP-ers need to think more critically about what they're reading This. It took me 15 minutes to do some basic research and make my post that addressed each item point by point. That's the problem with an ideological sub. There's no one to police the content and make sure it stands up to reality. Some of those guys need a reality check.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 05:45 PM
3

I'm going to warn you now, don't bother. Why do you have to be so antagonistic? No offense, but sometimes it seems like you're just trying to stir shit. This is a sub for debate and discussion, and I really don't think you contribute much. I don't expect to move mountains or change minds, but I hope for a discussion subreddit that is free of snark. I don't think it's too much to ask, especially when TRP and TBP exist for both sides to snark it up as much as they want and get it out of their syst…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 04:18 PM
7

In some regions of the western world, the rate of which children and "fathers" are unknowingly and improperly paired is as high as 30%. This is the actual quote. "Actual figures range from 1 percent in high-status areas of the United States and Switzerland, to 5 to 6 percent for moderate-status males in the United States and Great Britain, to 10 to 30 percent for lower-status males in the United States, Great Britain and France" Not surprising at all. Something like 75% of low income children in…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 03:41 PM
3

I think in areas where men and women differ in behavior, they tend to have behaviors and tendencies that compliment each-other. Thus I'd say the best leadership possible would be a group of 50% men and 50% women. That way you have the mercy of women and the strictness of men. Men are also inherently better athletes, and men's sports are more entertaining, for me. Men are better suited to military or security roles where their size and athleticism is needed. Other than that, their personal accomp…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 01:59 PM
3

Go ahead.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 03:13 AM
2

There's no need to even acknowledge the differences in every day life. Just let the chips fall where they may. Preaching that "men with be men and women will be women" is not letting the chips fall. It's reinforcing gender roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 02:23 AM
1

It's assumed patriarchy exists because of the necessary division of labor that occurred at the advent of agriculture. It's impossible to deductively reason the real answer because it was before written history. Or What will the future be like without patriarchy? No one knows. But regardless of what the future looks like, it's better that people have the freedom to choose. In general, we should implement policies that allow freedom of choice, unless there is solid evidence that those choices will…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/14 12:49 AM
2

Men also do, but they are condemned for doing so, while women are encouraged. I agree, we are aqualy horrible, but one side gets critised far more often and there is a double standard in regards to female assholes when they raise the feminist banner. ...where is this magical place you speak of? Last time I checked, men and women get equally criticized for cheating. Don't get me wrong, there is a bit of a "pussy-pass" effect in our society. Women get shorter sentences for similar crimes, and *pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 08:03 PM
2

Did you even read my post? Funny, I meer more women assholes than men. But men are condemned for being assholes, women are empowered feminists when they do it. That's good for you, but your experiences are anecdotal. They're not representative of the population as a whole. Maybe you meet more female narcissists than male narcissists, but a random sample of the population will yield more male narcissists than female narcissists. This "mold" you've constructed where women only seek to please thems…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 07:37 PM
3

I'm not, I am saying I don't need to force anything, when shit like this happens it fits the mold perfectly without any effort. What mold? I agree, but that is not the point of my post, even if she made it up this women prides herself on cheating. That is my point. That's shitty of her, but I've seen guys that prided themselves on cheating as well. In fact, I've met more guys that prided themselves on cheating than girls. Considering the narcissistic nature of this kind of behavior, it's not sur…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 07:06 PM
4

How is that inductive reasoning?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 05:39 PM
3

Yes it is, I don't have to force anything, if AFBB is very common. And for women that have a lack of self-control, unavoidable. Let's not pretend that this single story proves or even suggests that AFBB is true. This is just one story, an anecdote. How many guys have cheated on their GFs with a hotter chick, and then claimed they just needed to explore hookup culture? It happens all the time both ways. These people are narcissists. That's really all you can take from a story like this, assuming …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 05:38 PM
3

I don't believe it's possible to interact with others without making use of induction. I wouldn't disagree I don't believe most TRP inductions are sound. I agree. The problem with TRP is they make an induction and take it as fact. Then they make another induction based on the previous induction and some other information. Then they make another induction based on the two previous inductions. They build a pyramid of these inductions, one on top of the other. If you have 5 inductions, all built on…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 02:54 PM
3

We could list a plethora of likely inductions. Doesn't make them true in every case! But they will be likely in many cases, and while I don't like TRP verbatim, some far less misogynistic stereotyping of women I can't deny as having some truth to it. But TRPers design their life around this inductive reasoning. It's one thing to make little decisions here and there, like avoiding someone that looks dangerous. It's another thing to systematically use inductive reasoning to plan your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 02:32 PM
4

I think was /u/EvilFuckingSociopath is saying isn't necessarily that RPers believe that it's men versus women (as in a battle of the sexes), but rather that TRP occasionally separates the genders unnecessarily, basically this: It precisely because men are X and women are Y. TRP epitomizes a traditional gender role for women and a traditional gender role for men. If you ask them if you can reverse or adapt those roles to fit a certain relationship or certain individuals, most will tell you that i…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 02:27 PM
4

I really don't get your point. How is suggesting patriarchy exits or has existed inductive reasoning? Here's the wiki definition: Patriarchy is a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupy roles of political leadership, moral authority and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. By definition, that's the system that used to exist in western society. I don't see how that's inductive reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/14 02:20 PM
1

Did you even read what I wrote? The same exact thing applies the opposite way. If a man tells his girlfriend that her hair looks like shit, then that's not emotional abuse. It's just an insult. If he tells her girlfriend that her hair looks like shit on one day, then tells her that her makeup looks like shit on the next day, then tells her that her clothing looks like shit on the third day, while suggesting he could leaver her and date a more desirable women, then that's emotional abuse. Emotion…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/14 02:35 PM
1

Emotional abuse is not the act of hurting someone's feelings. If my girlfriend makes me sad, that's not emotional abuse. If my girlfriend consistently makes me sad in an attempt to get me to behave a certain way, then that is emotional abuse. If a women withholds sex to get her way, then that's emotional abuse. If she doesn't have sex with her husband because she legitimately doesn't want to, then that's not emotional abuse. Her husband may feel hurt, but that doesn't make it emotional abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/14 02:17 AM
1

Emotional abuse, by definition, has to be intentional. At the very least, it has to have the overall intent to control. Abuse is any behavior that is designed to control and subjugate another human being through the use of fear, humiliation, and verbal or physical assaults. http://www.counselingcenter.illinois.edu/self-help-brochures/relationship-problems/emotional-abuse/ Unintentionally withholding sex does not fall under that definition of emotional abuse. It's also not a required part of the …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/14 12:53 AM
1

Talking about finding is fine, but you need the data to back it up. I'm asking for the data. Scientists are great at advertising their work, but the real value is in the data they collect and statistical analysis they perform. That's what I'm asking for because that's the evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 08:19 PM
0

No, I'm just not going to change my opinion based on hearsay. That's perfectly reasonable.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 08:10 PM
4

Borderline personality disorder is different than narcissistic personality disorder. More men than women are diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18557663/ http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borderline_personality_disorder
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 02:26 PM
3

I'm talking about things that TRP advocates that are clearly false. The idea the women are more narcissistic and machiavellian than men is clearly false. Men are more narcissistic and machiavellian than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 01:53 PM
1

Fine, then replace "proof" with evidence. A scientists talking about his work is not ecidence. A study is evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 01:49 PM
2

Scientists talking off-hand about studies is terrible proof. Scientists live/die by their ability to sell their work and seek additional funding. I want to see studies, not sales pitches.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 01:23 PM
5

Then why does TRP advocate things that are not true?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:58 PM
3

Already seen that. Its not proof, its a doccumentary. I'm looking for academic citations. Very little has been proven to be a result of genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:57 PM
7

A couple things Its impossible to know whos posting and voting. That allows a certain freedom of expression, but it also allows brigading. It's not a given that any type of attraction is instinctual, especially in women. Statistically, women have a larger range of what they find attractive than men. None of what they said is surprising at all. Go to /r/sex and read what women like. "Tall dark and handsome" has been a saying for a long time now. They like sex partners that are traditionally manly…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:53 PM
3

"Gender" is a social construct. That doesn't mean all sex differences are a social constuct. Gender =/= sex. Sex describes biological differences. Gender describes any diferences between men/women that cannot yet be explained by biology alone. A person can be a biological man, but a gender female. That means they have male genetalia but associate with the female gender. Theres a number of reasson this type of thing can happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:27 PM
1

There's been a billion studies about nature/nurture. Most of our behaviors are genetic, but they can be altered with conditioning. I guess that they haven't done studies on every single specific behavior or trait, but it's not like we just have no idea. Source?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:24 PM
8

In that case, then everyone on TBP is a red piller in that respect. 100% of blue pillers would say that looks are implrtant, perhaps even more implrtant than anything else. Also, some RPers I've talked with have said "game" is more important than looks. Based on my experience, I would comfortably guess that blue pillers think looks are more important than RPers in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 12:20 PM
2

I think you misunderstand. The more common feminist view is that we don't know whther differences are innate or conditioned, and there is no point in speculating. There isn't much conclusive evidence either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/14 01:54 AM
1

I don't really believe that's true.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/14 03:08 AM
1

Using the word cult may endear you to people of similar thinking when attempting to villify the opposition. But in debate, attempting such a topical analogy is poor discourse at best, dishonest at worst. Not when I clearly stated that I'm not saying TRP is a cult.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 03:26 PM
0

You did not need to use the word cult. Why not? Analogies are used to draw parallels and better clarify a statement. They're perfectly legitimate in debate. Unless you're the analogy police, I really don't see the big deal.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 02:24 PM
3

There is massive amount of evidence for sexist bias in the court system. This link you provided suggests that the bias is mostly against women, not men. http://amptoons.com/blog/files/Massachusetts_Gender_Bias_Study.htm Then why aren't the self-proclaimed warriors for equality fighting it? Oh right, they only care when women are disadvantaged. But hey, as long as they also call every group that is trying to combat male discrimination "misogynists", they're showing their support, right? That's an…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 02:33 AM
1

You've failed to understand my argument. Cults have the same appeal as TRP, that doesn't mean TRP is a cult. It's just a statement as to why I wouldn't be interested. Cults and TRP both attract individuals looking for answer. I already have my answers, so I'm not attracted to TRP. There's no fallacy here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 02:23 AM
1

I was making an analogy. I'm not poisoning the well. I'm saying cults often have the same appeal as TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 01:38 AM
1

Wait, where did I say TRP is a cult?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/14 12:21 AM
3

Men lose the vast majority of child custody cases. They are still forced to pay child support to the mother, who is allowed to use the money for herself and not for the child. That certainly could be the case without being unfair. It could be true that men deserve to lose those cases more than women, because the women are legitimately more fit mothers. That might not always be the case, but it's difficult to know unless you have some statistical evidence that those women don't deserve to win tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 08:07 PM
2

Fair enough. It should be mentioned that this line... The one thing that is beautiful about trp is that the practices can be implemented in everyday life, and noticeable results can be garnered. So to answer your question, the only thing that will inform you of trps veracity is to experience the results first hand. Is one often used by cults. "You can't know until you try it." Personally, I like to know something works before I try it. I have that luxury because I'm not desperate or "damaged."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 07:57 PM
2

Isn't the nature of progressivism progress? Progress towards new ideas, new science, new technology.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 05:20 PM
1

How did they establish a misandrist society and legal system? To my knowledge, they haven't changed much at all. Affirmative action is the only example I can think of.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 05:19 PM
3

Don't really need TRP. Never have never will. It's not appealing to me because I'm not "damaged" or "hurt."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 05:15 PM
6

"Feeling" being the important word there. In truth, it's an illusion. It's a faux realization.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 05:10 PM
13

/r/becomeaman is the real RP self improvement subreddit. It's what TRP was supposed to be. Of course it's not all that popular because most people don't really want self improvement, they want someone to blame for their problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 01:53 PM
6

Then why have feminists only ever fought for achieved female privilege or female supremacy and not equality? http://m.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/the-now-president-who-became-a-mens-rights-activist/372742/ DeCrow, by then a lawyer in private practice in Syracuse, New York, endorsed Serpico’s argument on feminist grounds. “Just as the Supreme Court has said that women have the right to choose whether or not to be parents, men should also have that right,” she told The New York Times,…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 01:49 PM
5

Most people come to viewpoints like trp, libertarianism or dark enlightenment ideas AFTER they have already been steeped in and rejected the "other viewpoints". They arent worldviews common in the culture nor are people usually raised in them like a religion. Counter point: The same exact thing could be said for cults and alternative religions. That's not to imply TRP is a cult, however the same logic applies in this instance. The people attracted to cults are those that are unhappy with their l…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/14 01:44 PM
2

*Citation needed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation "A number of twin studies have attempted to compare the relative importance of genetics and environment in the determination of sexual orientation. In a 1991 study, Bailey and Pillard found that 52% of monozygotic (MZ) brothers and 22% of the dizygotic (DZ) twins were concordant for homosexuality.[4] 'MZ' indicates identical twins with the same sets of genes and 'DZ' indicates fraternal twins where genes are mixed to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/14 10:08 PM
3

Hell maybe we should try it with a couple clones in artifical identical wombs, just to be sure, right? Did you read my answer? Even when two individuals have identical DNA, it's common for one to be gay and one to be straight.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/14 09:36 PM
3

In some cases, we've isolated the specific genes, however epigenetics clouds everything and adds a massive layer of complication. Every part of the human body is influenced by genes, but every part of the human body is also influenced by the environment and epigenetics. It's difficult to know how that equation balances. Do you really need to stuff 2 babies in separate empty cages for years to establish that the sexes are fundamentally different? No, but it's difficult to say what those psycholog…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/14 09:10 PM
3

You don't need a degree in biology to see significant physical difference between the sexes, as well as behavioral differences emerging from an extremely early age. Both of which are effected by our environment. We don't know what role biology plays and what role the environment plays. We do know that the environment plays a massive role in shaping not only our brain, but also our appearance. We assume that our DNA accounts for whatever differences can't be explained by the environment. I have n…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/14 04:28 AM
5

The best baseline for studying innate behavioral differences between sexes is probably in our relatives (chimps/monkeys). Looking at Chimps and Bonobos gives us more questions than answers. Bonobos are completely matrilineal and arguably matriarchal. Chimps are heavily patriarchal. After that we can look at ourselves and observe what is similar and different and how our evolution has lead to different appearance and behaviors. Our understanding of genetics and the human brain is too primitive to…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/14 12:46 AM
7

OK, then dread game is a great example of similar behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/14 11:20 PM
3

A man who has a good enough wife will not leave for a better one And then what you get from this is that most women only want 20% of guys. Do you have a source for either of those claims? Just curious.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/14 11:19 PM
7

Unfortunately, there's a segment of red pillers that would advocate exactly what she describes of her SO's behavior. Some men take the strategy of lowering a women's self esteem, and obviously there are different levels of self-esteem-lowering. Maybe some guys are just negging, but some advocate going much further. It seems like most guys on /r/TheRedPill are insecure these days. The alt subs like /r/BecomeAMan are a different story.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/14 07:33 PM
1

Drugs are pleasurable. Do people do drugs because it's logical? Sex is an impulse. Impulses and intuition and feelings are not logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/14 06:15 PM
5

A and a 20 year old dating a 60 year old is what exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/14 06:13 PM
1

I'm sorry, wanting sex for pleasure is illogical.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/14 05:16 PM
2

Having sex while simultaneously using birth control is illogical. It literally serves no purpose other than fulfilling sex drive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 06:27 PM
2

When you act on instincts, you're not acting on logic. Instincts are baser, while logic is more advanced. The instinct may serve a logical purpose, but the mechanism through which the instinct acts is not logic-based. In this case, sex drive just isn't logical. It's instinctual. You're not procreating, you're just having sex. There's no logical reason for you to want sex that doesn't lead to conception, you just want it. I don't know how you could frame that desire as logical. Sex drive is an em…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 06:01 PM
1

By definition, instincts are not logical. They serve a logical purpose, but they aren't logical themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 03:07 PM
1

The red pill isn't about sex for progeny. The red pill is about sex for the sake of fulfilling sex drive. It's a reasoned attempt to fulfill an emotional need.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/14 02:29 PM
14

In group projects women never pull their weight. Literally ever project the women tries to get away with as little as possible. What's worse is the blue pill males don't expect her to do work and cover for her laziness. I've had the exact opposite experience in engineering. In almost every group project, the women I've worked with have pulled their own weight while the men were lazy and unresponsive. Ontop of this tjey aren't funny, and extremely self-centered, makimg for a very poor frienship c…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/14 02:51 PM
6

When did we establish which way it works in the US?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/14 08:42 PM
8

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2438150/More-female-bosses-mean-profits-Companies-boards-women-make-42-cent-more.html More female bosses mean more profits: Companies whose boards are made up of at least a third women make 42 per cent more
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/14 07:39 PM
3

But 1200 calories a day is just too little, even for a diet. A young 5'5 women weighing 160 pounds on a fat loss diet should consume 1650 calories a day along with exercising 20 minutes 4 times a week. Even if she's not exercising, it should be 1400 calories a week. To get down to 1200 pounds for maintaining weight, you'd have to be 4'8" and 85 pounds living a sedentary lifestyle.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/14 01:36 PM
12

Eating 800 to 1200 calories a day isn't "getting in shape." I like women to be physically fit, and you can't be physically fit on that type of diet.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/14 11:49 PM
4

I know that's the stance. I'm just always shocked every time I see that bull crap on ROK. Eating 800 to 1200 calories a day isn't healthy for a women, especially if they're working out and lifting. Where is this crap coming from?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/14 11:48 PM
9

I will say that I've picked up women at bars for sex for one night stands, but it takes a while to build comfort. The comfort factor is important. If a women was bigger and stronger than me, I'm not sure I'd just agree to go home with her for sex. I think it's fair to say that if I was a women, even if I found a guy irresistible and I wanted to have sex with him, I wouldn't just go home with him.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/14 08:24 PM
11

Has it changed? Yes. It's attracted more of the extreme MRA types. It used to actually be about sexual strategy. Now it's just field reports and complaining. I think it will continue to get more political and more extreme as times goes on. I don't think /u/RedPillSchool really cares what direction it goes, as long as it increases in popularity and influence. Angry people tend to be the most vocal and active, so I think that's the direction it will go.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/14 02:52 PM
2

The only reason I can see it being a preference for RPM is if they were interested in a LTR or marriage. Women who have less partners before marriage are usually less likely to cheat and those marriages have a higher success rate. The same is true for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/14 01:31 PM
19

Women (and many men) don't like being boiled down to statistics and SMVs and equations. They want you to think about them as a human, and value them for who they are. Your attitude might not be conducive to LTRs. Obviously, in Red Pill theory, high partner-count promiscuous women are good lays, but bad long term partners. I think women view dating in a similar way. There are men good for sex, and there are men good for partnership. To be good for partnerships you have to be a bit more sentimenta…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/14 02:52 PM
3

Huh? Sex drive is more hormonal than emotional, akin to a drug addiction. Hormones and emotions are inextricably linked. Hormones essentially regulate functions within the body. They are just one way for our brain to communicate with our other organs. Emotions exist only within the brain, but they also dictate when hormones are released. In turn, hormones can influence our emotions. Emotions are essentially instinctual. You can think of them as an alternative to logic. I wouldn't call sex drive …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/14 06:18 PM
4

RP men try to suppress this by maintaining frame. But the goal is still emotional. Hypergamy in women is more than just marrying up, its about the impulse to cheat and leave when something better does come along. That's not hypergamy. Hypergamy is the actual act of marrying up. Very true. But what I am looking for is a way to display those other valuable traits, without walking up to a man. You can't, which is why you need to meet men in a setting where conversation is possible and where other w…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/14 01:44 AM
6

I often see you guys discussing feminine traits in a negative way, such as being emotional, hypergaming, prudence (unless you happen to be "the one"), and other things. Not only that, but these are all traits men possess. Men are emotional. Sex drive is driven by emotion rather than logic and TRP is hyper-focused on sex. By definition, TRP is a logical pursuit of an emotional goal. Men are hypergamous. Most men want to date women that are more attractive than they are. That is no more or less va…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/14 01:02 AM
0

I used to like 4 months ago. Now it's just a giant circlejerk.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/14 10:07 PM
11

Definitely. There were just as many failed marriages 70 years ago. The difference is that people stayed in those marriages rather than seeking divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/14 04:38 PM
15

TRP says they put the blame solely back on the man. Fixed. I hate to be snarky, but it's true. /r/BecomeAMan puts the blame on men. /r/TheRedPill isn't want it claims to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/14 04:36 PM
1

Unfortunately, I have a sneaky feeling that a small chunk of those that don't deserve to be there also post here in purple pill. The nature of purple pill is that it's going to attract the extreme MRAs. Most of the guys talking about actual self improvement are not going to care for debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/14 01:17 PM
2

but the tone is becoming less constructive and more whining as it grew. And yet TRP is by far the most popular sub. The whole situation tells me that most men that are dealing with these problems would rather moan about women than actually work towards attracting them. My reaction to half the posts there is "who the hell cares?" I don't even want to answer that question here. I have an idea what the answer might be, and I think it will just piss off any TRP regulars.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 11:16 PM
2

Different types of people. The people on TRP aren't there for self improvement, they're there to "vent." There's very little crossover between the subs. At this point, I almost want to say that TRP is becoming the polar opposite of radfems. It's not what it used to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 08:51 PM
2

The trend was for long term relationships, not short term relationships. Short term relationships would indicate sexual attraction. No significant effect of self-rated attractiveness was found for masculinity preference for short-term relationships. The trend existed for long term relationships only. For me, that indicates something other than pure attraction is a play here. Maybe the less attractive women want more feminine and more empathetic looking long term mates, for whatever reason. That'…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 08:48 PM
2

Yeah, I know there was disagreement on that issue and that users were banned. That's why I like becomeaman. Less focus on shit like that and more focus on self improvement. Still, it's on the main TRP sub. It received lots of upvotes. I think the community, on average, supported that method. I don't think becomeaman would support it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 08:09 PM
2

I doubt it. Most of us agree that the ideal girl would be really good looking and feminine. Including those of us who don't consider ourselves particularly attractive. It didn't suggest that less attractive women are attracted to feminine faces. It suggested that less attractive women are willing to settle for those men with feminine faces, while more attractive women have higher standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 08:05 PM
1

I don't think the masculine thing to do is to get girls drunk in order for them to have sex with me. Not RP. I used to think so to, as a becomeaman contributor. But on the main TRP subreddit? http://www.reddit.com/r/TheRedPill/comments/20zn9h/trp_has_inspired_me_to_draw_a_simple_dating/
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 06:47 PM
4

If you think you're attractive
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 04:11 PM
9

Isn't that just suggesting that attractive people prefer attractive people? If you think you're attractive, you're going to want to date other attractive people. I think you would find the same exact thing with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 03:51 PM
5

More an idea than an argument, but I have noticed that women with very unicorn like traits who end up with the Nice Guy, tend to have in fact very low self-esteem for whatever reason (could be due to mentla illness etc, some of these women are very good looking) and the women who end up with badboys tend to be very over-confident and I wondered about people's thoughts on this are, considering the mantra that TRP only works on women with low-confidence I would amend your idea because self esteem …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/14 03:46 PM
1

Where?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/14 01:09 AM
2

Not really. I would never say anything is certain. There's probably a subset of women where red pill doesn't work. Do you agree or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/14 12:53 AM
3

The red pill doesn't claim this. It claims that if you apply red pill to your life, you will improve your sexual situation. Part of that is the numbers game. Not every women will be receptive, but that's besides the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/14 12:33 AM
2

He's saying you could be right, not you are right. You're not saying the same thing he is. I'm saying that there's probably a subset of women that TRP does't apply to. That's what he said. Do you agree with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/14 12:30 AM
2

You just made my point. Your point that he disagrees with you, while he agrees with me? So do you agree with mmmstarchy and myself that there's probably a subset of women on which the red pill doesn't work? So you don't know if they want to dominate a man in a romantic relationship the same way they would in a sexual relationship. Fair enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/14 12:06 AM
4

It looks like he's saying it is possible there exist some who don't like TRP tactics. You're saying there are absolutely women who don't like TRP tactics. Do you see the difference? He's saying there's "probably" a subset of women that don't mesh with the red pill. You're saying "I think all women are receptive to RedPill tactics." See the difference? You're question about dominate women is pretty irrelevant given my earlier posts. Are you assuming these kind of women are only aroused by this be…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 11:44 PM
4

http://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/22ddph/are_women_who_are_receptive_to_redpill_traits/cglq484 Ask him yourself. This was his post. I often wonder if behaving "redpill" only turns on a subset of women Few women indeed are going to affirm "Yes, a guy who practices what /r/TheRedPill preaches would turn me on". Yet, men who have put those preachings into practice report increased sexual and relationship success. Even the blue pill types on this subreddit are quick to downplay many …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 10:56 PM
5

Agree with you about what? That not all women are susceptible to TRP: [Women susceptible to TRP] is probably is technically a subset but it probably isn't a small subset. Do you want me to link to the post? This question demonstrates a profound lack of understanding on the subject at hand and the English language. Elaborate, please. How do you explain women that are sexually aroused by the physical and emotional domination of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 10:52 PM
9

That's all you have to say? Well we'll see how it plays out. So far we've got mmmstarchy agreeing with me: It probably is technically a subset but it probably isn't a small subset. I think there is a spectrum of women responding positively to red pill behaviors, not just ones that "can't control themselves around cocky arrogant men". Much like I think there's a spectrum of men that respond positively to makeup, not just ones that can't control themselves around a pretty face. And what about this…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 10:01 PM
13

All women? Really? I think most red pills would disagree. The Red Pill is a numbers game. It accepts failure in an attempt to maximize success. Those failures are the ones that aren't as susceptible to game. Also, how would you explain hetero female doms?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 09:43 PM
2

World English Dictionary: conclusive (kənˈkluːsɪv) — adj putting an end to doubt; decisive; final approaching or involving an end or conclusion
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 04:08 AM
6

A conclusion? No. To me, conclusion is conclusive, final. It's an absolute word and what you're describing in a mere possibility, the furthest thing from absolute. What you're proposing a hypothesis. Your hypothesis doesn't have any evidence to support it, or at the very least you haven't presented any evidence yet. Like I said, a hypothesis without any evidence isn't much use to anyone. If you were following the scientific method, you'd be on step three. You asked a question, you did some backg…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 03:13 AM
3

I don't have to provide alternatives to argue that your explanation is just that, a potential explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 03:06 AM
2

Sorry, I edited my post: Again, the evidence is above. And no, the data we are talking about is not evidence to support your theory. Your theory is a untested possible explanation of the data in question. You'd need to devise a different test or experiment to begin proving your theory has grounds in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 02:44 AM
3

What's the scientific community say about that? A theory is useless if there's no evidence to support it. And no, the data we are talking about is not evidence to support your theory. Your theory is a untested possible explanation of the data in question. You'd need to devise a different test or experiment to begin proving your theory has grounds in reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 02:40 AM
1

Your "dark arts" are absolutely used to propose theories and hypotheses, but your "white arts" are required to prove those theories right or wrong. So what you're saying is that TRP is a theory with nothing to support it yet, which highlights exactly the OPs complaint that there's no hard evidence to support it. Also, this dynamic with "dark arts" and "white arts" has existed for literally hundreds of years, so I'm not sure what postmodernism (a late 20th century movement) has to do with any of …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 02:26 AM
6

If a theory fits the data, that doesn't mean the theory is correct. At least, that's the common line of thinking in the scientific community.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 02:25 AM
8

OK. I suppose I disagree with your conclusion, then. I don't see how one person is a trend. Maybe you're conclusion is correct, but you haven't provided any evidence to suggest it is correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/14 12:35 AM
6

I thought this forum would be more "debatey" and less "I have this friend that says this." I don't get how we're supposed to debate things your friend said. It seems off topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 11:28 PM
2

Actually, it absolutely could be a coincidence. Why not? You could suggest theirs a link, but you'd need to actually test that hypothesis before you conclude it exists. That's how science works, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 09:40 PM
9

There could be several explanations that fit here. It could have to do with differences in income, education... I've seen this brought up a few times here over a few days. It seems like a case of drawing causation from correlation.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 09:21 PM
3

That was hardly an anecdote. It was definitely an anecdote. Why not just post the logic behind your position? Besides, you failed to address the meat of my comment: Your "dark arts" are absolutely used to propose theories and hypotheses, but your "white arts" are required to prove those theories right or wrong. So what you're saying is that TRP is a theory with nothing to support it yet, which highlights exactly the OPs complaint that there's no hard evidence to support it. Also, this dynamic wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 04:45 PM
3

I don't see why you needed to post that entire story. Considering a complaint of blue pillers is that anecdotes aren't evidence, I don't think you're going to convince anyone with an anecdote. It also doesn't help that you're wrong. Your "dark arts" are absolutely used to propose theories and hypotheses, but your "white arts" are required to prove those theories right or wrong. So what you're saying is that TRP is a theory with nothing to support it yet, which highlights exactly the OPs complain…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/14 03:30 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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