TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

TriplePlusBad Archive

View 1 post and 164 comments by TriplePlusBad on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

In my experience the logical conclusion of this train of thought is "you don't talk about men like that" to which the response is "TRP isn't about fucking men." Just saving everyone some time, maybe we can start from the end point?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/18 04:47 PM
1

A survey is a snapshot of time. So you can compare this with a snapshot of any given time at TRP. But that's not what we were talking about: why would someone continue to post on TRP if it didn't work for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 10:01 AM
1

Because you're equating the maintaining of an old lie with the creation of multiple new lies.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 09:54 AM
1

Sure - just like the woman has to say it doesn't count for a different reason. No, unlike that, unless she keeps having sex with new partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 09:52 AM
1

You have to keep saying that "X counts" to new things.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 09:33 AM
1

So are we just ignoring how you'd have to keep making up new things over time for this to be equivalent to women thinking that X doesn't count as a sexual partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 09:21 AM
1

"Oh, my trip to Europe doesn't count. Neither does that guy in Cleveland, I was super drunk."
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 09:05 AM
1

Just because something has a following and some "evidence" surrounding it does not mean that is it The TruthTM or The Best Way To LiveTM I'm just trying to get laid, man.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:59 AM
1

How do you deceive yourself into believing that you've gotten laid?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:47 AM
1

It is way easier to convince yourself that the earth is flat than it is to convince yourself that you've managed to get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:47 AM
2

It is vastly more work to read and post on TRP regularly than it is to take an anonymous survey once.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:42 AM
1

Why would people keep coming back to TRP if nothing on TRP works?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:37 AM
2

When there's societal pressure for men to remain virgins I will believe that incels are making it up.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 08:28 AM
40

self-reported
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/18 10:04 PM
1

Because the fisherman has experience in catching multiple fish, but the fish only know how they've individually been caught. I'd be interested in hearing from a lesbian on the subject though.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/18 06:38 PM
3

The kinds of things that women say they find attractive and the kinds of things that women show through action that they find attractive tend to make a venn diagram that resembles two distinct circles, in my experience. Moreover, it seems remarkably inefficient to change myself to suit one particular woman than it does to make myself the best version of myself and put myself out there so that women who are attracted to the best version of myself can make themselves known.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/18 06:28 PM
3

If you want to learn how to fish, ask a fisherman, not a fish.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/18 03:44 PM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3xKwQcDKM0
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 02:50 PM
1

In those cases, a man or woman should absolutely be able to punch their attacker to get them on the ground or make them back off. You're putting a lot of faith in your punching power. Personally I'd rather just shoot a takedown and sit on their chest until they calm the fuck down.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 02:37 PM
1

Such as? Secretarial work, hairdressing, human resources, social work. Check this list: https://www.businessinsider.com.au/pink-collar-jobs-dominated-by-women-2015-2?r=US&IR=T Yeah, that's why I specified instances where the woman starts it and the man only hits back to defend himself. Feminists typically don't think that anyone should be just hitting back. This is why this seems disingenuous to me. Either restrain her, or leave the situation. Wanting to hit her just seems like a revenge fantasy…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 12:48 PM
5

I was honestly thinking more around the lines of how men shouldn't be expected to pay for dates, they should be able to be SAHDs if their partner can afford it, they shouldn't be expected to put themselves in harm's way to protect a random woman Are you really sure that you haven't seen anything about the above ever? That seems really alien to me, honestly. I mean, if you haven't, you haven't, but that doesn't jive with my experiences at all. or be chastised for hitting a woman back if she start…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 12:23 PM
1

About?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 12:04 PM
6

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/aug/11/time-for-men-to-sign-up-to-female-dominated-caring-and-sharing-jobs Here's the first result I found on google for "getting men into women's jobs".
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:41 AM
4

Seems like semantics, given that we're not talking about non-traditional roles for men here. The reason that feminism has historically struggled to open non-traditional roles to men is that historically men have not wanted to engage in non-traditional roles unless they were well paid.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:13 AM
1

Okay, but that's not what we're talking about in the slightest. We're talking about why social programming is easier or harder to overcome. If it is reinforced by working, then it is harder to overcome. If it is not reinforced by working, then it is far easier to overcome. This isn't hard to grok.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:11 AM
2

Many men nowadays are passive chumps who believe in authority, are risk averse, submissive and good citizens. The social programming that men were given in your examples were completely useless for the purposes of getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:05 AM
6

This is feminism in action, folks. Bitches are allowed to want to not be homemakers; you are allowed to try and find one that wants to do homemakery shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:03 AM
1

About what? That women who are at all attractive will be approached by men at a rate that far outstrips the reverse?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 11:01 AM
2

The difference between men and women here is that the social programming taught to men was completely useless, and the social programming taught to women was reinforced by actually working.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 10:56 AM
3

In some individual cases I think woman should do the approaching if she complains "where are all the good men gone" etc. She should, but she's been taught her whole life that men will approach her, and she's not exactly wrong about that, is she? It's just no longer the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 10:42 AM
11

And the reason for that is that they haven't had to develop a thick skin from having had to approach and be rejected repeatedly. But the same is true of forever alone beta males. It's not about gender; anyone who is good at handling rejection has been rejected a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 08:07 AM
15

including in the fact that women will not approach men because they're so scared of rejection. Women don't approach men because they're socialised not to and because they just plain don't need to, not because they're more emotionally fragile than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 05:30 AM
3

But it never works, so it cannot be seen as manipulative is so bad as opposed to more deceptive means? A) Yes, it can. The fact that it doesn't work doesn't mean it isn't manipulative, it makes it a waste of time. B) it is deceptive. The niceness is understood on the receiving end to not have ulterior motives, rather than being a means to an end.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/18 01:22 AM
2

He is being nice because he likes her. The archetypal nice guy is being nice because he assumes that being nice to someone will eventually lead to something more than just friendship.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 02:20 PM
3

The point seems fairly obvious to me: You do think that people care, or you would think nothing of telling people about your past, and you justify not telling people about it by assuming that if people cared about it they would ask (despite there being a large number of reasons related to politeness and social norms that indicate such questioning is contra to the development of a positive relationship). If you genuinely thought that nobody would have negative feelings about your sexual past, you…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 02:01 PM
2

Nobody asking is distinct from nobody caring.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 01:57 PM
0

So what's the downside of sharing it?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 01:54 PM
0

So why don't you volunteer the information up front?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 01:52 PM
5

It's never stopped me from getting anything I wanted You've never wanted a dude who wouldn't have wanted you if he knew about your sexual past?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/18 01:51 PM
1

The point is that it's emblematic of how TRP users don't really care about the science behind human interaction nearly as much as if the conclusions fit their ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/18 11:37 PM
1

I've heard them used to describe primates more often. And if we were talking about things which aren't TRP, then that would be relevant. Within that context, the alpha-beta nomenclature derives from research about how wolves behave in captivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/18 10:24 AM
1

Not believing your contradictory statements != not reading your contradictory statements.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/18 02:01 AM
2

as if it's some kind of reward women give out No, as if it's some reward that you were giving out. Which I maintain is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 05:00 PM
2

What, you think that I'm being sex negative here?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 04:30 PM
2

Like I said, you can rationalise it however you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 03:42 PM
0

Right, I get that. I'm not sure that she does.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 02:34 PM
2

You can rationalise it however you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 02:11 PM
1

It's where the alpha-beta nomenclature derives from.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:45 AM
1

I don't play games, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:23 AM
0

Uhuh. So why do you intentionally wait with guys that you want a relationship with? The difference between a relationship and a ONS for me is that I have no intention of repeating the experience with the latter, not that I refuse to have sex on the first date with the former.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:21 AM
3

A relationship is not a single instance of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:12 AM
2

So why are you waiting?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:11 AM
3

You find the dudes that you fuck instantly more attractive than the guys that you make wait for some unspecified period of time. This is why you fuck them instantly.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 10:10 AM
5

You're the one treating it as transactional by reserving it as a reward for making it to exclusivity with guys you "really like".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 09:59 AM
3

They like sex with men they find attractive, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 09:55 AM
1

I value you more, therefore I'm not going to have sex with you like I would with someone I value less Yes, yes, of course you have a rational reason for not putting out.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 08:40 AM
1

One is fuelled by ideology. I'm not entirely sure how you can type this with a straight face.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/18 02:42 PM
1

Both are interpretations.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/18 02:26 PM
1

It's not an interpretation. It is, in fact, an interpretation. You are deriving a narrative from events by interpreting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 09:24 AM
1

You can't even define what you hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 09:18 AM
1

I was in the original threads, lad.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 05:43 AM
1

It is a fact that GG is not about hating women. You do understand that your interpretation of events is not a fact, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 05:43 AM
1

You lost, bud. Gamergate's name is mud.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 05:11 AM
1

You do understand that your interpretation of events is not a fact, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 05:08 AM
1

Yes, you are exceptionally butthurt.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/18 01:06 PM
1

I feel like you don't understand that maymay.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/18 12:17 PM
0

If that's the only way to trap a beta provider women will fuck anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 04:37 AM
1

Anything to justify why it's not your fault your life sucks, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 04:18 AM
1

It was entirely about a dude getting cucked, my guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 04:16 AM
3

I think this is the natural order. Condoms, the pill, and abortion are all unnatural, laddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 01:23 AM
1

Like I said, hilarious lunacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 04:50 PM
8

You should really talk to more women in real life rather than trying to get laid through online dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 04:13 PM
1

But enough about GamerGate.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 04:12 PM
1

Nothing they can do to you is as bad as what you're doing to yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 03:52 PM
1

That's certainly how people justified it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 03:46 PM
3

SJWs believe that GG is a small group of gamers who Co inspire to target women and minorities while pushing right wing beliefs... You can think that modern GamerGate is whatever the fuck you want my guy, it started as a way to attack specific women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 03:45 PM
4

look at how they reported GamerGate as some conspiracy against women (its not) I was in the original threads. GamerGate was about attacking specific women and degenerated into hilarious lunacy from there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 03:02 PM
2

I've never tried to get with a party girl. I don't enjoy that kind of social gathering, it seems like a waste of my time to aim for that kind of person.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 05:00 AM
23

Anyone who doesn't think that women are worried about rejecting men directly at least in part because they have no real way ahead of time to tell if this particular guy will get violent needs to talk to more women.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/18 06:55 PM
1

Reasons intrinsic to the person with whom you are in love. The contra to that is reasons that are extrinsic to said person; their status.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 04:17 AM
2

Your belief is unfalsifiable.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 01:22 AM
2

The Red Pill: Discussion of sexual strategy in a culture increasingly lacking a positive identity for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 01:12 AM
2

You don't go to a fly fishing board for advice on hunting elephants. It doesn't matter if they're people flaws. That's beside the point. They're flaws that women generally have, this is the important thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 12:58 AM
1

Do they? My understanding is that they think that men fall in love for essentially noble reasons while women fall in love for reasons related to status. Beyond that, they don't view men particularly highly.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 12:48 AM
3

...Yes, that's the point. TRP doesn't care about what idiosyncrasies men have, because TRP is about interacting with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/18 12:23 AM
1

CAPTAIN Deadpool.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/18 12:09 PM
47

Outrage porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/18 12:02 PM
16

Only one of them is synonymous with predator.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/18 02:26 AM
1

Even Hitler had self-esteem.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 02:29 PM
0

Parents and the community clearly aren't going to do it, so fuck it, let's go.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:31 AM
2

The problem with life is that for a lot of things you cannot run two sides of an experiment. Maybe she wouldn't have cheated if I hadn't kept myself attractive enough to have other options. Maybe she would have. Who knows?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 06:27 AM
3

and in order to appeal to the type of woman who you want to appeal to. How can you plan to appeal to a type of woman without being able to generalise about them to some degree?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 05:40 AM
3

That sounds like a lot of effort when I could just assume that she might be Like That and hedge my bets like someone rational would do anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 05:34 AM
2

"everyone is sufficiently different that you cannot strategise dating" is not sufficiently different from "no two people share any similarities" for my liking. I'm just taking that line of thought to its logical conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 05:13 PM
4

How am I supposed to know which women Are Like That and which women Are Not Like That ahead of time? You sound like someone with a million dollar idea if you've solved this riddle.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 05:12 PM
1

No. Yes. If you have fully internalised a set of propositions, you are no longer acting.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 05:03 PM
3

Using AWALT like "treat every gun like it's loaded" works out to little more than "don't put yourself in a position for the loss of any specific option to destroy you". You would ideally have a rich and full life outside of the realm of dating, yes?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 05:02 PM
5

The difference between an act and a personality is repetition.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 04:59 PM
2

More than enough people have written what amounts to "women are all different, you can't strategise dating" for me to spend three minutes writing the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 04:59 PM
2

Are you actually going to debate something I'm demonstrating that your OP is not really relevant to the thread. Yes, you'll drop our hypothetical guy. So what?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 04:53 PM
3

If a man assumes that not all women are the same No, the assumption is that No Women Are Like That. No woman has anything about her that is the same as any other woman. You cannot develop a strategy for dating, because all women are different.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 04:38 PM
6

One down, twenty thousand to go.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 04:34 PM
2

I want to know who wrote them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 03:56 PM
1

I linked the three tweets that accused him of misconduct. Negative, you just copied the text.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 03:49 PM
1

Wapo isn't loading for me, who said that Franco pulled out his dick?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 03:40 PM
0

the onus is on everyone let us focus on the men though at least be consistent
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 07:08 AM
2

Or former UFC LHW champion Jon Jones.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/18 06:57 AM
1

However, he is still extremely wealthy compared to the average income in his state, his comment about "white people don't know what it's like to be poor" is indeed hypocritical. Nobody made that reference before you. So anyone who doesn't like Bernie isn't a serious person? Anyone who thinks that Bernie is hypocritical for owning three houses while advocating for higher taxation is not a serious person, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 07:13 PM
2

No one claims people should be limited from accumulating any amount of wealth. But some people are claiming that Sanders is being hypocritical by claiming that there should be taxes on income over X (that do not currently exist), where X is an amount that would not preclude him from having been able to acquire the amount of wealth that he as managed to accumulate. It's not an argument made by serious people, so I don't really give a shit if you think that I'm making a trap.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 07:02 PM
2

Riddle me this, riddler: How did Charles II die childless?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:52 PM
1

You're essentially claiming that his end goal, and that of his movement I'm not claiming that he said anything. I'm narrowing the possible ranges of what he could have said.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:41 PM
2

There are many, many examples of him backing laws to heavily tax people earning 300k to 500k or more per year. That's in the top 1.3% to 0.6%. Which is, again, a very small subset of the possible amounts implied by the phrase "any amount". Your back tracking on semantics. I'm responding to what you're posting. You're the one backtracking.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:30 PM
1

Baby steps, Elie. Baby steps.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:05 PM
5

You are completely incapable of nuance. Sanders is not living in poverty. He is also not in the same galaxy of wealth as a billionaire. The worst thing you can say about him is that he owns three houses, which, at his age, only means that he is not completely incompetent.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 04:26 PM
2

you do realize incarcerated murderers still get laid, right? Yes. That's why I suggested using them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 04:25 PM
3

You'd be better off using incarcerated murderers for your example, is all I'm saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:41 PM
5

He specifically called out others for buying multiple cars when he owns multiple houses. He specifically called out billionaires. He's not a billionaire. He would need to have literally one thousand times the amount of wealth that he currently has in order to be a billionaire. You keep saying "he might not be a billionaire but he's not poor" like he's halfway between them. He is a thousand times closer to being poor than he is to being a billionaire.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:40 PM
2

Yes, Bernie has said multiple times banks and billionaires are accumulating too much wealth. "any amount" does not mean "amounts in excess of Y" where Y is more than the GDP of Guinea-Bissau.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:35 PM
5

If Bernie did he wouldn't spend his wealth on extravagantly buying three houses. Man, you are really, really stuck on this, huh. Three houses is not hard to achieve in the USA. I know a stripper with mortgages on five. If you think that Bernie's policies are bad, fine. If you think that he's an asshole, fine. But if you legitimately think that he's a hypocrite because he has a modest amount of wealth after decades as a high level politician then you are not being serious about this.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:33 PM
2

the men on the imorality axis (gang leaders, dictators, tyrants) are much more likely to get laid than the other end. Why are we ignoring the effects of status?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:29 PM
1

Okay, let's say that you know ahead of time that there is some flaw in her personality that renders her completely unsuitable for a relationship. You know that she wants a relationship and hopes that if you have sex with her that you will change your mind about a relationship. Do you refrain from telling her that you will never be in a relationship with her before you sleep with her and move on?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:28 PM
1

Agreed. I think that it's healthy for some level of emotional turbulence to exist as a result of things happening in the relationship that are being pursued for their own purposes, but if you're creating drama for the purpose of just creating drama, at that point you jump over to being an asshole. Unless you're doing it to create an excuse for emotionally turbulent sex, in which case you're probably still an asshole, but I can understand why you're doing it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:25 PM
4

Sanders has a net worth of $1m approx. That is approximately 0.1% of the net worth of a person who has the net worth of $1b. How can you stand there and act like a champion of the people and insult others for living a life of luxury while being a millionaire who owns three houses? I really don't see the logical disconnect between not being poor and being unable to champion the downtrodden. Sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:19 PM
2

It's just a fact of life that sometimes your attention will be unavailable and sometimes it will. But you can really turn up the volume, and make the relationship into a roller coaster of emotion that is almost addictive. Some red pillers would argue that this is what women actually want, as demonstrated by how women are clearly attracted to these kinds of situations and many refuse to leave them. I would submit that by this logic, what smokers who are trying to quit really want is to drink a bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:14 PM
4

It's blatant hypocrisy to lambast others for owning "too many" cars when you own three houses yeah You did notice that he was talking specifically about billionaires, right? Like it was one of the first words in the tweet.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 03:09 PM
3

I have hard time with concepts such as "treating your partner like complete shit". Put bluntly, that's because you're not emotionally broken. One of the ways that you can create a desire to maintain the relationship in your partner is to become a human skinner box. Randomnly, and this is important; you shouldn't be predictable, either lavish positive reinforcement onto your target, or be completely distant. Create artificial uncertainty; make her unsure of how to make you happy. The times when y…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:54 PM
2

It's blatant hypocrisy to think that billionaires have too much shit when you yourself are not a billionaire?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:43 PM
1

No, I didn't. If you have accumulated all of the money that you would need to cover your costs for the rest of your life, money is no longer a factor in your decision-making with regards to your job, correct?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:22 PM
6

And, again, so? Reproduction (either of your ideas or of your genetics) are things that you are capable of causing to happen. That doesn't mean that you are required to pursue them, it just means that they exist as a choice you can make. What makes it the correct choice?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:21 PM
1

Has Bernie ever said that nobody should be allowed to accumulate any amount of wealth?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:19 PM
2

Emotional blackmail such as? Again, this is just me extrapolating from an incredibly vague OP. Perhaps he means dread game at any level beyond "Simply make it clear that you are willing to leave", like, say, alternating between actively treating your partner like complete shit and treating her well so as to make her believe that you are the only person who could ever love her and thus much less likely to bail on the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:16 PM
2

Internal validation is matching your actions to reflect your values. That's how you build self esteem. That's the healthiest way to do it, yep. And that's what I'm suggesting as a reason to do good things: if you believe that good things are, well, good, doing good things makes you feel good. Not because other people are giving you thanks for it, but because you find value in the things you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:05 PM
9

Ever attended a philosophy class? The mere fact of a thing does not determine its purpose. You can have children. You could also kill people with a brick. Why is one the correct purpose of your existence and not the other?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 02:01 PM
8

The sole purpose of life is reproduction. Says who?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:57 PM
3

Sure, but this is distinct from using emotional blackmail to secure access to pussy, which I think is what the OP is kind of sort of referring to.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:54 PM
6

If your internal validation is completely independent of the things that you are doing, then you are, strictly speaking, delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:52 PM
10

If you were raping people and then shooting them to eliminate the witnesses, you'd be having sex. Would you feel good about it?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:45 PM
3

Why should a man value either of those things?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:44 PM
4

Sexual strategy is amoral in the same way that target practice is amoral. If I become very good at shooting, I can go up a skyscraper and kill dozens of people or I can go to the Olympics. The formulas and hours of practice I put in do not, on their own, have moral character.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:43 PM
23

How much value do you put on liking yourself as a person?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:40 PM
1

They declined. Then that's it. You can't fix them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:37 PM
1

I thought the reason men are insecure in their looks is because they never get compliments. I think that compliments or lack thereof don't have that much to do with it, honestly. Most men just don't have a good understanding of how to actually look good. While growing up, they're taught the bare minimum required to not be actively offensive, (mostly to do with hygiene). Without an internal metric by which to judge their own appearance, how can they feel secure about how they look? By whether or …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:33 PM
1

Did you not read the several previous posts?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 01:24 PM
1

Her telling him that she thinks he's attractive doesn't mean she actually finds him attractive, either. It is vastly more likely that she's just being nice. It costs her nothing to lie about his looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 12:39 PM
1

If money isn't a factor you have the ability to find a job you actually like.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 07:52 AM
1

Would you enjoy your job more if you could quit any time you liked and not have to worry about getting another?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 07:31 AM
1

should he choose to. Most people could. But they don't. The point is that money is just a way of buying time. If all you care about is literally the numbers in their bank accounts, then sure, McMansion guy is probably richer. If you care about being able to live a full and interesting life, the guy who can retire at 30 is probably the guy you want to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 07:16 AM
1

Let's say that the guy who can do what he likes is comfortable, owns his own home and a car and can travel much as he likes if he doesn't feel the need to stay in expensive hotels, while the other guy owns part of a McMansion somewhere with a lot of outgoings.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:32 AM
1

Some of the proposed solutions were that females fuck males with low self esteem to fix the problem. I assume that my response is one of those that you're reading that way, and that's because I mangled the OP. Just for clarity: but they won't believe you. Because if you really thought that they were attractive you'd be fucking them. Your actions speak louder than your words. This doesn't suggest that women should have sex with men that they don't find attractive, I think. I'm saying that because…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:27 AM
1

Some people have extra issues, yeah. Shit sucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:16 AM
3

...no? I'm saying that you can't make most dudes think they're attractive merely by telling them that they're attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:15 AM
2

Okay, but we're talking about a guy, so...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/18 06:12 AM
1

Ah, I realise what happened, I missed a quote to give context. That's what happens when I'm a filthy mobileposter. I'm talking about why the sadboi doesn't perceive her thoughts as genuine, not how she can fix his self-esteem issues.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 08:32 PM
1

Who is richer, the man who never has to work another day in his life, or the man who has to work 80 hours a week for the next two decades to afford his current standard of living until death?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 08:00 PM
8

It doesn't matter why you're not fucking him, it only matters that you aren't. Imagine if you were both single and you said the same things; he'd wonder why you weren't interested in him given that you've said that he's a great, attractive dude, and then give your words the appropriate weight. The underlying feelings don't change just because you have other reasons not to fuck him.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 07:51 PM
9

No shit. But they do fuck some of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 07:45 PM
24

but they won't believe you. Because if you really thought that they were attractive you'd be fucking them. Your actions speak louder than your words. e: edited for specificity
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 06:53 PM
4

The issue you have pinpointed is that some people are incapable of distinguishing between lust and love. Lust often disappears when satisfied. Love does not.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 06:34 PM
4

I still don't know what you mean by act out, honestly. When you initiate with a woman, you are putting her in a position where it is not possible for her to do literally nothing. If she rejects you, you are not required by the laws of physics to behave like an asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 06:30 PM
2

Nobody cares about the fact that you're angry, they care about whatever you meant by acting out (which I assumed was meant to represent some kind of generic outburst of violent action, but if you just meant being mad in your room then whatever).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 06:05 PM
1

Oh good, we're equating forcible association with refraining from association.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 05:46 PM
1

BP is half the sub. Yes, but most of them aren't this inane.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 04:36 PM
1

Why on earth are you paying attention to people who are clearly morons?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 03:08 PM
4

Because one involves a subset of people not doing things, and the other involves a subset of people doing unwanted things. Do you really think that these are equivalent?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/18 09:21 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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