TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

anthropics Archive

View 2 posts and 206 comments by anthropics 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)
1

The other 75% don't all have high body counts. If they do, then most average guys also do. The correlation between attractiveness and partner count is very low. For height, it's virtually nonexistent. Attractiveness is more related to the attractiveness of people's partners than how many they have. This 'slayer' meme is just an adolescent fantasy.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 05:55 AM
1

This is a highly deceptive propaganda piece. It shows the partner distribution for men while omitting the female distribution which is very similar. It leans heavily on Harper et al. (2017) as evidence for the most promiscuous men accruing more partners, as do his other papers, but the apparent trend didn't continue past the 2011-13 survey and in fact reversed. He also falsely claims there was a reduction in the lower percentiles when there wasn't. STD data also fails to show evidence of increas…
/r/BlackPillScience23/06/26 05:08 AM
1

This is a highly deceptive propaganda piece. It shows the partner distribution for men while omitting the female distribution which is very similar. It leans heavily on Harper et al. (2017) as evidence for the most promiscuous men accruing more partners, as do his other papers, but the apparent trend didn't continue past the 2011-13 survey and in fact reversed. He also falsely claims there was a reduction in the lower percentiles when there wasn't. STD data also fails to show evidence of increas…
/r/BlackPillScience23/06/26 05:07 AM
3

How are you defining average? Because physical attractiveness is only weakly predictive of being in a relationship, sex partner count, etc., there will be many men in the struggling camp who look average or even above. That's different from saying the 'average man' is struggling.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 01:56 AM
-3

There is virtually no correlation between extraversion or social anxiety and observer-rated attractiveness. The meme of better looking people becoming more confident due to 'positive reinforcement' and vice versa isn't supported by research. One longitudinal study found that if anything the effect goes in the other direction: Magson et al. (2023) conducted a longitudinal study of 528 adolescents. They replicated prior findings by showing negligible and mostly non-significant correlations between…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 03:59 PM
0

There is virtually no correlation between extraversion or social anxiety and observer-rated attractiveness, and extraversion is also more predictive of mating outcomes than is attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 03:53 PM
3

Research consistently shows that extraverted men have more sexual partners, earlier sexual debut, a higher likelihood of entering relationships, and more children. These effects are stronger than those seen for facial attractiveness, and far stronger than height's. Among the big five traits, extraversion is probably the closest proxy to 'confidence'. This could be for a number of reasons. One is that extraverts simply have more active social lives and approach more women, increasing their number…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 03:51 PM
1

There is virtually no difference in the sex partner distributions of young men and women. Promiscuity has been on the decline among both young men and women. This is a made up issue, and a projection of what they would rather be doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:59 AM
3

OnlyFans was founded in 2016. It's not surprising that subscriptions are higher now than they were in the early 2000s.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:46 AM
3

Average women run laps around average men for relationship count and experience. This is simply false. Young men and women's sex partner distributions are virtually identical. There has not been an increasing skew whereby the most promiscuous men are accruing higher partner counts over time. STD rates are similar between women and heterosexual men, and women's has not been rising disproportionately. Source The sexlessness trends are not gendered either. That was an outlier survey in 2018. The Pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:43 AM
2

By self-reports. They tend to align decently well with observer reports. Typically when 'average' is used in this context it's implicitly referring to physical traits and perhaps socioeconomic status, but there are distributions for psychological traits like extraversion similar to for height, and being above or below average in this trait matters quantifiably a lot more than it does for height. Part of this is because extraversion affects how likeable someone is, but a lot of it is in the kind …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 04:59 PM
1

I think a large reason why they're so resistant to the idea that the average male is doing alright is that they themselves actually do tend to be relatively average physically, so by their reductive view that dating outcomes are determined purely by physical traits this would mean they should be doing alright too. This forces them to create a mental scenario wherein being physically average isn't adequate. They'd rather do this than confront their nonphysical flaws.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 04:49 PM
3

Psychological traits like extraversion are at least somewhat measurable, and tend to predict outcomes a lot better than do physical traits.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 03:11 PM
3

I also wouldn't call the 'bottom' 20% 'incels' in a meaningful sense. For one thing, about half report voluntary reasons for abstaining from sex. For another, only 2% of men remain virgins at 30. The percentage is inflated considerably by those on the younger side of this very heterogeneous age group. I wouldn't even use the term 'bottom' to describe the incels, as what's typically implied by that is that they're short or ugly or poor, but psychological features like introversion and autism are …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 03:02 PM
2

1 in 3 men aged 18 and 30 are either virgin or didn't have sex for the past year. 7 years later and we're still seeing this meme stat regurgitated; incredible. What we never see is 1. the subsequent surveys that not only didn't show a continuation of that trend, but a reversal of it, or 2. another survey with a far higher sample size that never showed a large male rise to begin with, showing a 15% virginity rate in the same year. Source. It's also interesting how 27% became 1 in 3, even though i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 02:57 PM
-1

A cope fantasy that isn't supported by any data
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 05:53 AM
2

It's only 10% of men and 7% of women. It's also wrong. I've looked at this dataset. These are the unweighted percentages. The past year numbers are wrong too because virgin women were excluded from the question and this wasn't accounted for. There's no difference in the trends for men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/25 07:42 PM
2

Could be wrong but looks like you've used POSSLQY for this GSS analysis. I'll just note that there is also the question 'POSSLQ' that half of the sample receives and which is the same but slightly reworded. It's good to combine responses to these for better reliability; though your overall conclusion remains true.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/25 08:13 AM
1

It's also possible that they're confusing it with the Pew stat of 63% of 18-29 men being single. This survey was also anomalous, but mostly due to an anomalously low singleness rate among young women; other surveys show gaps in the range of 10-15%. As for the 25%, WaPo reported 28% of 18-30 men had no sex in the past year and 27% of 18-29 men (not sure why the age range slightly differed) were virgins. The latter stat was inflated due to the inclusion of homosexual men in the sample, as the ques…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/25 05:27 PM
0

There is a similar skew for both genders. The median man and woman has the same number of matches per day when you adjust for the gender ratio. The likes skew in Hinge was pretty similar too. All actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters show no gender imbalance. Extrapolating from swipes is flawed for reasons outlined here (also source for the data).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:57 AM
1

Why are you only talking about women messaging more desirable men? This and other online dating studies such Bruch & Newman (2018) show that both genders show similarly 'hypergamous' messaging behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:52 AM
1

That 'study' says exactly that; did you even read it? Here it's broken down by sex; no evidence of a growing gender gap among young adults either.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 10:38 AM
1

There is plenty of data showing differences in swipe rates, but when it comes to actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters, we don't see a gender imbalance. Also, the median match rate per day is the same for men and women after adjusting for the gender ratio - it's not far more skewed for men like the conventional narrative would predict. This can be largely explained by the skewed gender ratio and the different swiping dynamics this promotes. More info can be found at this Source.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/25 08:40 AM
-1

Conflating few extreme examples just shows that this person has mastered strawman argument. Around 63% of young adult male are single and only 14% females. I like how the gap keeps on increasing. The actual gap in the Pew survey was 29%, which isn't corroborated by any other source. Three GSS surveys between 2021-2024 show singleness gaps between young men and women show gaps between 2-11%. Surveys from The Survey Center on American Life show gaps around 10% as well, including one with a higher …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 05:59 PM
0

Most of them have been addressed in depth. 'Dating apps are funneling all the women to Chad' What the data says: actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters show no gender imbalance. Moreover, the median match rate is equal after adjusting for the skewed gender ratio. There's no good evidence that they have led to a rise in hook-ups either. Having a relationship motive is a better predictor of going on dates than having a casual sex motive, and relationships are at least as likely an out…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 09:55 AM
2

5'7 men are about as likely to be partnered or sexually active as tall men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 09:15 AM
3

There is virtually no difference in height between men who are or aren't in relationships. Even men 2 SDs below the average are about as likely to be partnered as tall men. Height also has a very minimal effect on celibacy status, and virtually no association with number of lifetime sex partners. I'm not here to give self-improvement advice, but if you were to work on something, working on becoming more extraverted/sociable would probably be a better bet.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 09:10 AM
4

There is no gender difference in sexual partner distributions for young men and women. This is also attested to by STD data. Regardless, the idea that a bunch of hook-ups and flings is what satisfies women is at best projection, but even for most men this isn't a desired lifestyle.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 07:40 AM
10

More and more young men will come to accept the controversial idea that success in relationships and dating is by and large determined by looks, not personality. There is nothing controversial about this idea whatsoever. Stop pretending you're some brave renegade that's dropping hard to swallow pills that are too shocking for the normies to handle. It's probably already the status quo belief. This is despite the fact that the data actually shows that looks have quite a minimal impact on dating e…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/25 07:33 AM
0

The real inconvenient facts which are ignored by everyone are the other sources which don't corroborate this meme survey but show singleness gender gaps in the range of 10-15%. Also, even in the outlier Pew survey, 3/4ths of the gap was driven by a higher cohabitation and marriage rate among young women, so you have to believe that they are engaging in literal polyamory and polygamy, with little room for 'soft harems'.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/25 12:10 AM
2

right now with situationship "soft harem" culture Reminder that this isn't a real thing. Young men and women's sex partner distributions remain virtually identical. There has not been an increasing skew over time whereby the 'top men' are accruing ever higher 'notch counts'. 20% of men and women account for a similar share of their gender's sexual encounters, and the ratio has remained relatively stable over time. We also do not see this dynamic playing out in the STD data per the US and EU CDC.…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/25 12:18 AM
–

Where did the idea come from that 'niceness' is the be all end all of personality? Some quotes that you're choosing to get defensive over because they seem like they moralize the issue? Research consistently shows that personality has a large effect on sexual and romantic outcomes, and larger than physical traits. Not 'niceness' though, but traits like extraversion. Nonverbal expressivity has a comparable effect to attractiveness on liking as well, even after controlling for attractiveness. Char…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/25 09:06 PM
2

What was the point in this comment? I know exactly what the Pew survey states. That's why I said other surveys show smaller gaps. They also show if anything a smaller gap in the more recent surveys rather than a growing one. One change among one gender among one age group across two surveys means virtually nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 09:15 PM
-1

You implied it in a way that wasn't subtle to anyone with a brain
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 09:09 PM
0

There is simply no evidence for this. Sexual activity rates are not moving differently for young men and women. There is no evidence for an increasing 'monopolization' by the most sexually promiscuous men in either the sexual behaviour data or the STD data which doesn't show a disproportionately rising STD rate among women. Even dating apps show no sign at all of a gender imbalance whereby there are more women than heterosexual men dating or having sexual encounters through them.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 09:04 PM
0

Let's go with your outlier survey for the sake of argument. Why is 3/4ths of the gap driven by a higher cohabitation and marriage rate among young women if women are 'dating the same guy' as you want to believe so badly for some reason?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 08:58 PM
3

This is based on the Pew survey, but other sources don't show the same singleness gender gap, and suggest that single young women were underrepresented in the Pew sample. The only reasons why the Pew survey report went so viral are that 1. the results were outliers, and 2. they fit a trendy narrative. Another problem is that 3/4ths of the gap even in this outlier survey is driven by higher cohabitation and marriage rates among young women. The trendy 'soft harem' meme can only 'realistically' op…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 08:55 PM
23

I don't think you even know the stats you're referring to. The stat is from a survey by the Survey Center on American Life which found that 54% of Gen Z men had dated before, while the overall rate for Gen Z was 56%, so there would only be a gap of about 4% which is easily explained not only by age gaps in relationships but the fact that there are more males in the younger population in general. You're probably referring to the famous GSS survey which appeared to show a rising sexlessness trend …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 08:49 PM
-2

There is virtually no difference. The stat is from a survey by the Survey Center on American Life which found that 54% of Gen Z men had dated before, while the overall rate for Gen Z was 56%, so there would only be a gap of about 4% which is easily explained not only by age gaps in relationships but the fact that there are more males in the younger population in general. The data doesn't support the meme that attractive men tend to be super promiscuous either. Physical attractiveness has very li…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 08:45 PM
4

This results in the most powerful men essentially having harems Yep, I knew it'd come back to this meme, it always does. There is absolutely no evidence for an increasing 'monopolization' by the 'top men'. Men and women's sex partner distributions remain more or less identical, with the 20% of men and women with the most sex partners accounting for a similar share of their gender's sexual encounters. This data on sexual behaviour is corroborated by STD data which shows no divergence in the STD r…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/25 08:32 PM
1

Not on its face, but the data doesn't support it if you look either at self-reported partners or STD data. 20% of heterosexual men and women account for a similar share of their gender's sexual encounters, with no increasing skew over time. STD rates are similar for heterosexual men and women, and there has been no divergence following the introduction of dating apps, either. Some people like to do a google search then point out Chlamydia. The rate for women is higher here because screening targ…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 03:43 PM
1

STD data easily disconfirms this. The rate is similar for heterosexual men and women, and there has been no divergence following the introduction of dating apps, either. Some people like to do a google search then point out Chlamydia. The rate for women is higher here because screening targets young women first and foremost due to the negative effects being thought to be more harsh for women (e.g. infertility). Regardless, the actual positivity rate when tested isn't higher for women, and we don…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/25 03:39 PM
1

There is no difference in the height of men who are partnered or not in the 20-29 age bracket. This remains true in recent years. There is a small difference of about 0.25 inches in the 30-39 age bracket. Height has virtually no relationship with men's number of sex partners, and this hasn't changed post-dating apps. Height also has very little effect on men's probability of being celibate. that seems to be the cut off for dating success in real life and especially dating apps What does 'dating …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 05:57 AM
0

The red pill has an explanation for this, called Alpha Fux/Beta Bux. That what is "working" is that the average man gets rejected by women when he is age 18-30, and then past age 30 he becomes a marriage prospect for women who have spent her 20s fucking hot guys who never committed to her. This 'explanation' is not grounded in reality. The partner distribution for men and women in the 18-29 age bracket is basically the same. There is not a big excess of men in this age bracket who are sexless, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 05:17 AM
-1

Looks has an very weak correlation with lifetime sex partners. Height has virtually none. Personality traits like extraversion actually have a stronger association. Does this mean that personality drives attraction to a higher degree than physical traits? Not necessarily, but it does mean that it's not necessary to be attractive to rack up a high body count, and that perhaps a lot of men who 'could' do this with more ease than less attractive men decide that it's not for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/25 05:06 AM
2

The data pretty clearly disproves the 80/20 meme. Not just going by reported sex partners, but also STD rates. A minority of both heterosexual men and women account for a similarly disproportionate share of their gender's sexual encounters, but promiscuity remains pretty rare in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/25 11:37 AM
1

The response rate was affected by desirability for both genders: The lower set of curves in the top panels shows the probability of receiving a reply to an initial message. The curves are higher for messages sent by women than for those sent by men—women are more likely than men to receive replies—but among both women and men, the probability of a reply is a decreasing function of desirability gap, more desirable partners replying at lower rates than less desirable ones. And to a similar extent …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 10:28 AM
3

Additionally, while women do get far more matches than men when you look at outcomes the 80/20 rule doesn't appear: Even this isn't quite true. The median daily match rate balances out after adjusting for the gender imbalance in users. Men don't have a wildly more skewed match distribution than women, with 'mid' women frequently matching with 'top 5%' men. It's more true to say they have more 'potential matches'. A lot of these are probably men who swiped without looking as well, which might exp…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 05:30 AM
1

This is supported by data from Bruch et al. (2016), which found that on dating apps, the top 20% of men receive 80% of the attention from women. The Pareto principle (80/20 rule) in action. What about another Bruch et al. study which showed that men and women went for people similarly more desirable than themselves on average? The result? High-value men may benefit short-term, but this dynamic destabilizes long-term pair bonding. Women end up settling later in life, often with resentment, and me…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 05:22 AM
3

Women consistently aim for partners with higher physical attractiveness than themselves. This is not a gendered phenomenon. In speed-dating studies and even in online dating, men are at least as influenced by attractiveness of prospective partners in their decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/24 05:15 AM
3

Instant access to sex Is it a 'privilege' if it has no value to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 11:36 AM
2

How are 80%+ of men between the ages of 18-29 able to have sex in the past year if the standards are that high to not be entirely excluded?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 10:18 AM
13

There is virtually no difference in the sex partner distributions of young men and women, and about 80% have either 0 or 1 partners in the span of a year.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 04:57 AM
5

Why are a supermajority of young men sexually active then? Why is there no difference in the sexual partner distributions of young men and women? You really think a 1% involuntary 'wizard' rate will realistically climb above 5% or so?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:50 AM
3

Even among the average population, the assumption doesn't represent the majority. I'm sure most of us have seen the viral stats from Washington post about how young male virginity is on the rise (https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/29/share-americans-not-having-sex-has-reached-record-high/). Which basically looks at number of men aged 18-30 who haven't had sex since they were 18, where in 2018 the number was 28% (pre covid, so probably higher now), whereas for women it was 18%. If th…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:43 AM
-1

This is not happening; you don't represent the average man. Men and women's sex partner distributions remain virtually identical. There is not an increasing skew whereby the 'top men' are hoarding an increasing share of the women. STD data doesn't show a growing divergence between heterosexual men and women, either. Relationship rates haven't changed all that much. It's always been the case that half or more of young men were single at any one time. It was never the case that the vast majority o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:35 AM
1

A rise of single parent households doesn't necessarily imply a monopolization by 'Chad/Tyrone'. Men and women's sex partner distributions remain virtually identical. There is not an increasing skew whereby the 'top men' are hoarding an increasing share of the women. STD data doesn't show a growing divergence between heterosexual men and women, either. There's also no good evidence that the most fertile men are in any way 'Chad-like'. They are not taller than average, for example. Like the most f…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:32 AM
1

Some of those things are why dating apps stopped publishing some stats. What is this referring to? The OKcupid ratings? This wasn't an app at the time, but regardless. There wasn't anything particularly damning about this in a gendered way at least, since the ratings didn't align with women's messaging behaviour in the same way as it did men's. Attractiveness similarly affected men and women's success. There is no evidence that dating apps are facilitating inequality in the form of 'a minority o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:17 AM
-2

This isn't happening. All actual outcomes through dating apps such as dates and sexual encounters show no gender imbalance. The most promiscuous men are not accruing higher partner counts following the introduction of dating apps. Men and women's sex partner distributions remain virtually identical. STD rates for heterosexual men and women have been moving in tandem. Moreover, looks and height have virtually nothing to do with men's sexual partner counts, so promiscuous men aren't even 'Chads' i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/24 02:08 AM
4

It's the same for women. There is no difference in men and women's sex partner distributions. STD rates have also moved in tandem.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/24 08:36 AM
0

Here's a Pew Research survey demonstrating that most young men are single and most young women are not. Like clockwork. It's always the same meme stats. This is contradicted by all other sources which show gaps in the range of 10-15%, easily explained by age gaps in relationships. These results just don't make headlines because they don't fit your narrative. A survey with a much higher sample size shows that single young women were underrepresented in the Pew survey. Other things to consider: 3/…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/24 07:01 AM
-9

Boring. There is at most a small difference in attractiveness among men and women in or not in relationships (it's not larger for men and it hasn't risen since what it was 60 years ago). A supermajority of young men are sexually active. Do women have varied enough taste to find 80%+ of men super good looking?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/24 01:25 AM
1

Yet looks barely correlate with men's sexual promiscuity whatsoever, meaning that by this definition male promiscuity is mostly orthogonal to 'value'.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/24 11:38 PM
3

How does your clown theory account for the fact that women are much more likely to orgasm in the context of a committed relationship (e.g. with 'billy beta' as you'd call it). Aren't they supposed to only able to be aroused by the 'chads' they hook up with?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 02:18 AM
1

Reminder that there is no evidence for your conspiracy theory, and in fact all the available data contradicts it, with young men and women's sex partner distributions remaining virtually identical, with no indication of an increasing skew in recent years among young men. The vast majority of young men remain sexually active.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 02:10 AM
6

Is 'Chad' in the room with us right now? It must be exhausting having this 'Chad' bogeyman tormenting you at every waking moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 02:05 AM
3

Thanks for sharing your cuck fantasy with us.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/24 02:03 AM
-1

'With the current app-based dating culture' This is highly exaggerated, especially among young people. The vast majority of young adults meet offline, more so than older adults due to still having intact friend groups and recently attending college.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/24 03:56 AM
2

Promiscuous people skew the means more than 'forever alones'. The distance from the median to high partner counts is greater than the distance from the median to 0.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/24 01:33 PM
9

There is no difference in the height of men in their 20s who are or aren't in a relationship. There wasn't 25 years ago, and there isn't now over 10 years post-dating apps. Height has virtually no association with male celibacy among young men. At most, there is a small difference of 1 cm on average. There is no evidence that men place less emphasis on attractiveness in potential partners than women, not 60 years ago and not now. Data still shows that men are at least as influenced by attractive…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 12:47 PM
8

Also, for highly attractive guys, situationships have never been easier for them to just grab a few handfuls of girls off of dating apps and just cycle through a roster. Yet there hasn't been an increase in the number of sex partners the most promiscuous men report following the introduction of dating apps. If anything, they are less promiscuous than they used to be. Dating app outcomes show no gender imbalance at all, whether it comes to having dated or had a sexual encounter before, or even th…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 12:40 PM
-3

What is the problem that affects most men? The same percentage of young men and women are sexually active, and there is virtually no difference in their sex distributions. There is no 'monopolizing' by the 'chad' bogeyman: The most promiscuous men are not reporting more sex partners than they were 10 or 20 years ago. The average man, and at least half of below average men (though I wouldn't use being sexually active as a metric for 'value', as it doesn't really correlate with traits that are typ…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 12:30 PM
12

When it comes to dating apps, extrapolations from swipes are flawed, as when you look at actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters, there is no gender imbalance at all. When you look at the median match rates per day for men and women, it's also completely balanced after adjusting for the gender ratio, meaning that 'mid' women probably aren't frequently matching with 'chads'. There has not been a reduction in relationship formation or an increase in relationship problems following the …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 12:24 PM
1

You identify as a 'red piller'. Isn't women being attracted to 'dark triad bad boys' a common talking point among RPers? Why then would you expect the kind goody two shoes to be the most successful with women? That is not 'by definition' the only personality which could be considered appealing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 08:04 AM
2

The data seems to indicate that they can, yes. A supermajority of young men are sexually active, and there is no difference whatsoever in the sex partner distributions between young men and women, i.e. there is no 'chadopoly' whereby the 'top men' are hoarding an increasing share of the women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/24 08:00 AM
2

Mostly just by not having a huge sample size after breaking it down into gender and age groups - especially among 18-29s - allowing for significant sampling error to creep in. Since the survey also employs a 'representative' online panel (which was initially randomly sampled, but the people who join these panels aren't random) rather than randomly sampling new people, this may have also biased the results. This is why you have to look at the holistic picture instead of an individual survey as if…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 03:42 PM
4

People were quick to point out that the other age categories don't allow room to explain the 29% gap though. The gaps among 30-49 and 50-64s remained the same as they were in the previous Pew survey, while the surplus of single 65+ women was actually reduced. These changes don't really make sense unless you assume it's due to random fluctuations. I don't think any rational person assumed that 'chads' were forming soft harems. The internet is not full of rational people. There are plenty of peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 03:34 PM
1

Here's where the dumb Pew survey gets cited again
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 03:09 PM
3

A supermajority of young men are sexually active within the past year. The vast majority of male college students in a recent survey had been in a relationship before. There's no good reason to think most young men are barred from romance. You do not represent the average male.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 02:53 PM
4

Very few women are having many casual sex experiences, so most of them probably don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 02:44 PM
4

Most young women aren't alone, most young men are. About 50% of young women are single. The Pew survey underestimated the percentage of single young women. The same percentage of young men and women are sexually inactive. You could argue this has different implications or is more of a choice for one party, but numerically there's not much difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/24 02:41 PM
5

Personality is at least as genetically fixed as looks, I'd argue more so actually. Maybe more of them would be willing to accept their issues are mostly nonphysical if they realized this, though I'm not sure how much it really matters in this case.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 01:38 PM
0

I don't even get why it's considered more virtuous to value psychological/behavioural characteristics over physical characteristics. If you get more satisfaction out of someone who is less attractive but has a better personality, why does this make you morally superior? If it's because of the idea that personality is more malleable and so you're not judging based on 'immutable characteristics', I'd challenge this premise.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/24 01:25 PM
5

There is actually very little evidence that dating apps have meaningfully impacted the dating landscape. Following the introduction of dating apps, the data shows no sign among young adults for an increase in promiscuity, singleness, or relationship problems, and relationships beginning on dating apps aren't associated with lower satisfaction or more break-ups. There is no evidence that they are 'funneling women to the top 5%'. All data relating to actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encoun…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 12:47 PM
0

The median daily match rate on Tinder for men is 1 and for women 2.75. Since the gender ratio of swipers is also about 2.75 men to 1 woman, we would expect women to get this many more matches. If 'mid' women were frequently matching with 'chads', the median woman would have a higher match number than the median man after adjusting for the gender ratio. When it comes to actual outcomes like dates and sexual encounters, we also see no gender imbalance whatsoever. The same proportion of men and wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 12:29 PM
-1

The reality is that very little has changed. At least in the ways that pillers claim it has. Sex partner distributions remain virtually identical among young men and women, and all available data on dating app outcomes shows no gender imbalance, so there is no evidence whatsoever they are facilitating 'chadopolies'. There was not an increase in relationship problems following its introduction, nor a reduction in committed relationship formation. There has also not been an increase in promiscuity…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 12:26 PM
0

guess what: those guys are actually matching with them! they're matching with countless of other girls too but it's not out in the open. The median daily match rate on Tinder for men is 1 and for women 2.75. Since the gender ratio of swipers is also about 2.75 men to 1 woman, we would expect women to get this many more matches. If 'mid' women were frequently matching with 'chads', the median woman would have a higher match number than the median man after adjusting for the gender ratio. When it …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/24 12:23 PM
2

Height has virtually no association with celibacy, so I doubt you know a lot whose issue is genuinely due to this.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/24 12:40 PM
5

Worthless data point on its own. Women had a similar desirability skew. Slightly less, but the gender ratio was also slightly skewed. Source
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/24 12:06 PM
2

The OKCupid data never validated your narrative. Men and women were similarly influenced by attractiveness. The Hinge data also showed a similar skew for men and women - partly higher for men, but the gender ratio was also skewed. When it comes to actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters, there is no gender imbalance whatsoever. Source
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/24 11:59 AM
4

Problems for your mindlessly regurgitated conspiracy theory: Young men and women's sex partner distributions are virtually identical. The most promiscuous men and women account for a similar share of their gender's sexual encounters. There is no evidence for an increasing skew over time, either. Your narrative would predict a divergence of STD rates between heterosexual men and women over time - we don't see this in the US or EU CDC data. STD rates are also very close overall. If you google STD …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/24 11:51 AM
8

There is nothing new about this whatsoever. The singleness rate for young men has bounced between 50-70% over the past 100+ years. There is no evidence it's recently shot up dramatically. The gender gap was also exaggerated in the Pew survey, other sources show it in the range of 10-15%. Source
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/24 11:17 AM
0

Not really true. Relationships are at least as likely as an outcome as hook-ups are, and reporting committed relationships as a motivation is a better predictor of going on a date than reporting casual sex as a motivation. It's also not clear that mid women are frequently matching with a bunch of 'chads', as the median match rate for women is the same as it is for men after adjusting for the gender ratio. There is not a markedly higher skew among men. When it comes to actual outcomes such as dat…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/24 01:29 PM
1

Agreed , it'll just make it much much much more likely to have that , just you have to learn who to choose among the plenty who are drooling over you Attractiveness has basically no connection to relationship satisfaction. 63% young men are single vs 34% young women Other sources show gaps in the range of 10-15%, easily explained by age gaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/24 05:24 AM
1

Young men and women have identical sex partner distributions. Your conspiracy theory isn't real.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 11:37 PM
1

Meanwhile as a guy you have to actively demonstrate social value, and your only way to be accepted into a social group is to demonstrate exceptional value in an in-demand trait by the group This is just laughably delusional. Do the vast majority of men have exceptional value in some area? The vast majority of men have friend circles growing up, and most remain reasonably socially active in adulthood. Why are you so afraid of just admitting you have autism?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 11:33 PM
2

There is no evidence for this meme narrative whatsoever. Partner counts remain virtually identical between young men and women. Height still has basically no association with men's sexual promiscuity. There is no evidence for a male-driven rise in virginity. Actual outcomes through dating apps such as dates and sexual encounters shows no gender imbalance.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 11:29 PM
2

Like this data of pew research center has been posted in the sub many times , just 37% young women were single whereas 63% young men were And the only reason this is posted so many times endlessly all over the internet is because of its anomalous results. Other sources show gaps closer to 10-15%. Moreover, even in this anomalous survey the gap was caused primarily by cohabitation and marriage, meaning it offers little evidence for the trendy narrative that women are 'sharing the same guys'. "A d…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/24 11:13 PM
–

Believe it or not, redpill ideas like "80% of women only date 20% of men" or "women only find 10% of men attractive" are so stupid that actual academics don't even bother to directly address them. Sadly this isn't quite true. A number of academics have been coming out of the woodwork to promote the manosphere narrative of 'soft polygyny' facilitated by dating apps. Credentials don't guarantee wisdom.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 06:08 AM
–

'Asbolutely fucking laughable' that you think linking a study showing a low correlation refutes the statement that there is a low correlation
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 05:59 AM
–

You constantly cite the Pew survey (which uses self-reports) to show that most young men are single. Of course, the singleness gender gap is much smaller in other sources which is why they get ignored, and there is nothing new at all about most young men being single at any one time. The real blue pill fantasy is the notion that most men are incels. If you didn't desperately want to believe this you would not reject the overwhelming evidence contradicting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/24 05:26 AM
1

women on average are just not statistically dating most men Since you are presumably basing this largely on scary headlines about 'most young men being single', this would have to be 'do not date' rather than 'are not dating', since there is nothing new whatsoever about this. Not being in a committed relationship doesn't mean you're not dating though. Some portion of the men are casually dating, some have recently left relationships, and most have been in a relationship at some point in their li…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:52 PM
1

Looks is about the one thing where it's NOT true. All of the data shows that men are at least as influenced by the attractiveness potential partners as women if not more.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:33 PM
1

There is no evidence for your trendy 'chadopoly' narrative. There is no difference whatsoever in the sex partner distributions of young men and women, and no sign of an increasing skew among men in recent years. All online dating outcome data shows complete gender parity.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:17 PM
-1

statistics show more women are dating than men by a good amount This meme is not supported by a more rigorous analysis of the data. All sources other than Pew show a singleness gap closer to 10-15%, which is easily explained by age gaps in relationships. There is not a substantial difference in the percentage of males and females who dated in their teens either, and the tiny probably not statistically significant difference can be explained in the same way. women are overwhelming selecting the p…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:14 PM
2

There is no difference whatsoever in the sex partner distributions of young men and women. Before you bring up the Pew survey, half of the gap in it was caused by sampling error, and even in that survey the gap was caused primarily by a higher cohabitation and marriage rate, which means you'd have to believe they are engaging in actual polyamory/polygamy to maintain the 'chad harem' narrative. In terms of 'quality', both men and women are equally influenced by the attractiveness or desirability …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:10 PM
1

Men and women are actually equally influenced by the attractiveness/desirability of each other even in the context of online dating. This in particular is a good study on it. There is also no evidence for the meme that dating apps are facilitating 'chad harems', all the data on actual outcomes such as dates or sexual encounters show no gender imbalance.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 08:03 PM
2

It may be 'harder', but not so much that more than 1% of men become 30 year old virgins involuntarily, so this is a poor argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 07:56 PM
2

A bitter truth that you won't want to accept is that the vast majority of people are happy with their relationships regardless of attractiveness. Among people in relationships, attractiveness as rated by outside observers has no effect on the relationship satisfaction of the man or woman, whether it's their own or their partner's attractiveness. They also view their partners as more attractive than do others, whether due to idiosyncratic taste or a pair-bonding mechanism.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 07:46 PM
2

We have the height measurements of tens of thousands of men, as well as their sex partner counts, and can determine from this that tall men aren't any more promiscuous than average height men. Studies which ask about extra-pair copulations also find no effect of height. It's more or less the same with facial attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 03:18 PM
0

There is no difference in height between single and partnered men in their 20s, with a tiny gap of 0.25 inches for men in their 30s. Physical attractiveness explains only a small percentage of the variance in men and women's dating experience, and there is very little difference in the attractiveness of single and partnered men. If these are all that matters, then it must be at least 90% down to luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 03:07 PM
4

The correlation between physical attractiveness or height and men's sex partner count is barely above 0, so we know that it's not true that they are 'reserved for attractive guys'. Men's promiscuity, just like women's, is determined primarily by traits such as sociosexuality (willingness and desire to have casual sex), extraversion, and risk tolerance.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 03:01 PM
5

The vast majority of young men are still sexually active. Most currently single young men have been in a relationship in the past as well. There has been a slight rise in sexual inactivity among adolescents, but it's not clear that this will carry over to their adult lives for most of them. It may be that maturation is being delayed, as we see the same thing for other milestones such as getting one's driver's license etc. as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 02:40 PM
-2

'Today's climate' There has not been a radical shift in the dating landscape though. For as long as such data has been collected between 50-70% of 18-29 men have been single at any one point. The singleness gap in the Pew survey is wrong too, it's closer to 10 or 15%, which again is nothing new. If anything it used to be larger due to wider age gaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/24 02:30 PM
1

The info comes from this article if you're interested in more reading.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:22 PM
2

Take a look at this graph, look what happens at women at 30 when they settle down more These are chlamydia rates. It was already explained how screening programs focus on young women. You don't see this for Gonorrhoea or Syphilis, and you also don't see a disproportionate rise in female STDs which you'd expect if you believe that this is an accelerating trend.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:22 PM
2

You can't just look at childlessness to determine whether there's a greater fertility skew. This would also predict more men with high numbers of children, but the data doesn't show this. Therefore it might be that men are underreporting. Many may not even be aware of some of their offspring. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:05 PM
1

The average woman doesn't have markedly more matches than the average man. In fact, it completely balances out after adjusting for the skewed gender ratio. The median man gets 1 a day while the median woman gets 2.75. The gender ratio is also about 2.75:1 male:female. When it comes to data on actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters, we see no gender imbalance there either, so it's not necessary to make these flimsy extrapolations.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 12:58 PM
1

Data from dating apps shows complete gender parity when it comes to actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters. Extrapolating from swipes is fallacious due to things like the gender ratio and different swiping strategies (more men mass-swiping and doing any necessary filtering afterwards) affecting them, as well as more men looking for casual sex, which if it becomes revealed the woman may unmatch. We also see similar skews between men and women when it comes to matches and hinge likes.…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 12:56 PM
2

If they're less insistent on the guy using protection if he's attractive, and attractive men have most of the casual sex (we know this isn't true for either facial attractiveness or height which have little to no correlation with men's body count), then this should predict an even greater discrepancy between heterosexual men and women's STD rates, which again, we do not see.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 12:46 PM
0

It's the gender ratio as well as, at least partially as a result, many men mass-swiping and doing any necessary filtering afterwards. When it comes to the matches the median man and woman ends up with, the number for women is 2.75x as high. This completely balances out after adjusting for the gender ratio, which should be done considering that all else equal women will earn 2.75x the matches per capita when there are 2.75x as many men. If the meme that dating apps are facilitating 'chad harems' …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 10:15 AM
3

Knew this misleading BS graph would be the top comment. The data in recent years is based on sample sizes under 20. Moreover, it was during covid when you'd expect a higher proportion to be meeting online. More reliable data shows that it's closer to 25% meeting online, with no sign of this massive exponential rise. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 09:49 AM
-5

It's not even true. It's an adolescent fantasy. Physical attractiveness has basically no relation to men's sex partner count. Height has none at all. Women aren't suddenly interested in casual sex just because a guy is hot. Even if it increases the likelihood, you're multiplying a likelihood close to 0%. The women who are open to it will usually be significantly below the guy in attractiveness, so he'd probably rather just date a woman closer to his level anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 09:42 AM
1

Speed-dating and online dating studies show that men are at least as influenced by attractiveness in their dating decisions as are women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 09:31 AM
1

Why only tall? Tall men aren't any more likely to be promiscuous than shorter men, so just as many manlets and average height men are 'alphas' by this definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 09:26 AM
5

Anyway, there’s like a pretty good amount of data on how much height has become a bigger issue Not when it comes to data covering actual outcomes such as relationship status or sex partners. Data from a large nationally representative survey shows that it remains the case in recent years that there is no difference in the height of men in their 20s who are or aren't in a relationship. This is of course the age group which is focused on most when it comes to these apparent issues. A 0.25 cm gap o…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 10:07 AM
7

Attractiveness doesn't meaningfully influence relationship satisfaction for either men or women, so it probably doesn't matter much in the long run regardless.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:49 AM
4

The implication of this stat being posted is that the ratings also represent actual dating and sexual behaviour. Since it didn't predict messaging behaviour the same for men and women, there's no reason to believe it predicts dating and sexual behaviour either. When it comes to actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters through online dating, there is no gender imbalance. What it probably shows is that women are less immediately stimulated by visual stimuli, which is probably for the pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:43 AM
10

It's not even true that women are diagnosed more when it comes to Gonorrhoea or Syphilis. It is when it comes to Chlamydia, but this is because young women are focused on more by screening programs as it's believed the adverse effects are worse for women. When it comes to positivity rates however, heterosexual men are at least as likely to have Chlamydia. Moreover, according to EU and US STD data, the STD rates for heterosexual men and women have moved in tandem, so there is no evidence that 'Ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:34 AM
10

All actual outcome data relating to dating apps shows no gender imbalance whatsoever. There's no evidence that more women than heterosexual men date or hook up through them. Even in the OKcupid blog post, messaging behaviour was predicted equally well by attractiveness for men and women, so it's not clear what 'even worse' even entails. Source There also has not been an increasing sexual skew among men since the introduction of dating apps; men and women's sex partner distributions remain more o…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:26 AM
4

Some more info you might be interested in: The STD thing isn't even true for Gonorrhoea or Syphilis, heterosexual men and women have virtually identical rates there. It's true for Chlamydia but this is mostly due to screening programs focusing on young women as it's believed the adverse effects affect women worse. For all three of these however, the rates have moved in parallel for men and women, which contradicts the 'Chadopoly' meme. Source The Pew gap is also false, other surveys show gaps cl…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:22 AM
3

Parallel to these statistics, women as a population are affected more than men by the spread of STD’s, a clear deduction being woman are “sharing” and have more sexual partners They have higher rates of chlamydia, but this is due to them being screened more due to it being believed that it affects them worse. There has NOT been a disproportionate rise in STDs among women relative to heterosexual men, whether this is Gonorrhoeic, Syphilis, or Chlamydia. There has also not been an increasing sexua…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/24 09:12 AM
–

It has always been the case that more young women have been in relationships than young men. This gap is close to 10-15% according to sources other than the anomalous Pew survey, and thus reasonably explained by age gaps. Nothing about this gap says anything about whether less young men or women are dating. It seems like there has been very little change among either though, unless you look at adolescents.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:30 AM
–

The vast majority of young men report being sexually active. No matter how desperate you are to believe otherwise you do not represent the average man. Men and women's sex partner distributions are also virtually identical, and there has not been an increasing skew among men. Men's sex partner provides an upper bound to how much promiscuity can be occurring as nobody claims that men underreport their sex partners, yet less than 5% of men report 5+ sex partners in the past year, so the vast major…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:27 AM
–

There is no evidence for your trendy conspiracy theory. Men and women's sex partner distributions remain virtually identical and there hasn't been an increasing sexual skew among men whatosever. STD rates also attest to this as women's have not risen disproportionately to heterosexual men's. The vast majority of young men report being sexually active.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:25 AM
–

There has not been an increasing sexual skew among men following the introduction of dating apps, men and women's sexual partner distributions remain virtually identical. The vast majority of young men remain sexually active. Additionally, all data relating to actual outcomes through dating apps such as dates and sexual encounters shows no sign of a gender imbalance whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:22 AM
–

The vast majority of young men disagree with you. Men and women's sex partner distributions are virtually identical, and there has not been an increasing skew in recent years. STD rates also contradict your conspiracy theory, as women's STD rates have not been increasing relative to heterosexual men's.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:17 AM
–

All dating app outcome data shows complete gender parity. There is also no difference in the median match rate for men and women after adjusting for the imbalanced gender ratio. There has not been an increasing sexual skew among young men following their introduction, and sex partner distributions remain virtually identical between young men and women. The vast majority of young men report being sexually active, no matter how desperate you are to believe you represent the average man.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:15 AM
–

There is nothing new whatsoever about most young men being single, this has been the case since data began being collected. It's also been the case that substantially fewer than this are sexless in the past year, and it's currently the case that the vast majority of young men are having sex. It makes no sense to say that 'even more' haven't had sex in a year or more, as you'd need a significant portion of young men in relationships to be in sexless relationships, but for this to not be counterac…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/24 11:11 AM
–

I agree, which is why I'd recommend you stop misusing that term. However, you asked for someone to 'disprove 80 20', which is the manosphere's interpretation of 'hypergamy' that you were defending.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 09:25 PM
–

I said you need to believe that men are underreporting too. You also have to believe that women are more ashamed of promiscuity in the past despite how 'sex-positive' the culture has become, at least if you think that women are a lot more promiscuous now than they were 10-40 years ago. Being hot doesn't make women suddenly a lot more open to casual sex, and if it does it's not typically a woman a hot guy would be interested in hooking up with over dating and forming relationships with women clos…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 09:22 PM
–

If he can then it shows he is capable of remarkable restraint. The correlations between physical attractiveness or height and sex partner counts is virtually zero. The 95th percentile of men in promiscuity report only 3-4 sex partners in the span of a year. I'll take nationally representative data over some guy online who says his chad bros totally banged the entire city. Even attractive PUAs back in the day had very low success rates. Also social media and dating apps have given women tools to …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 09:17 PM
–

Sex partner distributions among young men and women are virtually identical, this has been the case over decades of data collection with no sign of a shift following the introduction of dating apps. All actual outcomes through dating apps show complete gender parity. There is not a higher proportion of women who've dated or had sex through dating apps than men, and even the distribution of numbers of unique dates is virtually identical. There is no 29% gender gap in singleness among 18-29s. Othe…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 09:03 PM
–

That article has nothing to do with your delusional fantasies about women engaging in rampant hookups with 'chads'. All it's saying that women are less likely to date up in socioeconomic status (the actual definition of hypergamy which is always disingenuously equivocated) when there are more of them attaining higher socioeconomic status themselves, which might indicate that 'hypergamy' was mostly a just product of gender gaps in socioeconomic status. Your narrative would instead claim that they…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 08:57 PM
–

Men and women's sex partner distributions are virtually identical. This means to believe in your conspiracy theory you need to believe that men are also downplaying their promiscuity.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 08:39 PM
–

Once again, there is no evidence for your conspiracy theory. Sex partner distributions are virtually identical for young men and women with no sign of an increasing skew among men in recent years. Promiscuity remains low, with less than 5% of young men and women having sex with 5+ partners in the past year. Even if you claim that women are underreporting, nobody claims that men are, yet going by men's reports you also see a very low mean partner count. All actual outcomes regarding dating apps, …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 08:32 PM
6

a tendency to share a minority of guys. An endlessly regurgitated meme which is not supported by the data. Young men and women's sex partner distributions are virtually identical, and there is no sign of an increasing skew among men in recent years.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 08:22 PM
-1

For one thing it was casual dating, not casual sex, and for 18-29 single men it's about 40%, which is what it was in 2005. So this along with the singleness trend (50-70% of 18-29 men being single is nothing new) isn't real.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 08:18 AM
1

Neither US or EU CDC data shows this. Female and heterosexual male STD rates have been moving in tandem.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 02:19 AM
1

All other sources show smaller gaps closer to 10-15%. You would never take a single survey result as the be all end all gospel truth if you didn't like the results.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 12:25 AM
1

It's also simply not accurate data. Other sources show gaps closer to 10-15%.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 12:24 AM
1

It's not 'just' this; this wouldn't be enough to explain the gap. At least half of the gap is simply a result of sampling error/bias, as other sources including with higher sample sizes don't corroborate Pew.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 12:22 AM
1

Other sources don't corroborate the gender gap in the Pew survey but show one closer to 10%. Even in the Pew survey, the gap was caused primarily caused by a higher cohabitation and marriage rate among young women, leaving little room for this 'explanation'.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/24 12:18 AM
1

Why are you so desperate to believe this? Not all men are autistic, stop projecting.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 10:16 AM
1

It was never that high. In the GSS the rate dropped to 12% or so in the most recent survey. In a survey with a much higher sample size (NSFG) it was 15% in the same year it was 27% in the GSS (even then that figure was inflated due to homosexual men being left in the sample and some men having had sex before but not after age 18).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/24 10:15 AM
1

There is nothing new about this, and other sources show gaps closer to 10-15%. When it comes to sexlessness in the past year, the rate is closer to 20% for men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/24 02:09 AM
2

Please stop repeating this meme statistic: Other sources show gaps closer to 10-15%.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 01:04 PM
0

Most couples are not meeting online, this is a myth based on a tiny sample size outlier statistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/24 01:03 PM
1

Sex partner distributions between young men and women are still roughly equal, with no sign of an increasing skew in recent years. It's true that most young men are single, but this has always been the case, also other sources show gaps closer to 10-15%, about half of young women are also single at any one time. It doesn't mean that they were a few months ago, or that they're not casually dating, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 04:28 AM
1

I can tell you from experience that for every 20 matches with attractive women on dating apps, at least one will just hook up. And it’s no harder than it would be with an average woman. Match, message, meet. Not a chance. One study (Grøntvedt et al., 2020) found that it took 57 matches for a single meet up, and then only 1 in 5.4 of those led to a one-night stand. 1 in 5.1 led to a committed relationship, so it's at least as likely that a relationship comes from a match than a hook-up. The meme …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 04:40 PM
1

Actual outcomes through dating apps such as dates and sexual encounters show no gender imbalance. There also has not been an increasing sexual skew among men; the 80th/95th percentile in lifetime or past year sex partners aren't reporting more partners over time. There's no evidence dating apps have had a noteworthy effect on the dating landscape.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/24 04:30 PM
1

Sorry to break it to you but it's actually about 15% of 18-29 men who are virgins going by the most reliable data we have. 50-60% of 18-29 men have been single at any one time since such data has been collected. There is nothing unprecedented or unusual about this.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/24 04:10 PM
1

Scroll down. A survey with a much higher sample size showed a rate closer to 30% and no gender difference. In the latest GSS the rate dropped substantially. There were 20 people in the 2018 GSS sample for 18-20 men. Additionally, it's partners since 18 or in the past year, which would exclude sex partners encountered at 15-17.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/24 04:06 PM
1

You were originally talking about the proportion having no sex. Are women afraid to say they've had even one partner in the past year? That's all it takes to not be in that camp. Moreover, men who are having sex are also asked their sexual frequency in the GSS. Very few say only once or twice in the past year. Isn't that what you'd select if you were lying (on an anonymous survey for some reason), rather than lying more than you need to? Moreover, if men are inflating their partner counts, that …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/24 12:45 PM
3

This is a common myth, but the data shows that physical attractiveness as rated by others has little to no association with self-esteem, extraversion, etc., while self-rated attractiveness is moderately associated. This shows that variance in self-perceptions are largely unconnected to how you're perceived by others.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/24 08:48 AM
1

Something isn't 'well known' just because it's endlessly repeated. It's just a meme. Data shows that 20% of both men and women account for a similar share of their gender's sexual encounters, and there is no sign of an increasing skew among men over time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/24 08:44 AM
0

They already are extremely picky on looks Speed dating studies show that men are at least as selective based on physical attractiveness, maybe a bit more. Most men have very low standards. This is at most true for hook-ups, but these are very rare among heterosexuals anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 09:49 PM
1

Yet, women swipe left on 95% of men and still have a higher match rate. They're still chasing the Chads. They can't all be swiping on the same 5%, or else their match rate would be a lot lower, or 'chad' would have a higher proportion of the matches, leaving the median man with significantly less than women after adjusting for the gender ratio. Women just always get hundreds of likes, thus raising their ego. Surveys don't tend to find that online dating improves women's self-esteem or harms men'…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 09:43 PM
0

This needs to be repeated a billion times why? This isn't a new idea, anyone that isn't convinced by this by now isn't going to be by this thread. Also, not everything can be reduced to desirability. Extraversion correlates more than physical traits do with most outcomes such as sexual partners, being in a relationship, relationship satisfaction. Since both men and women place high value on looks, people end up being relatively evenly matched, and traits relevant to behaviour end up being better…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 09:25 PM
1

The original point wasn't that 'online dating is harder for men'. Most people would concede this, but it doesn't usually stop there. Still, this isn't entirely accurate: far more picky Online dating studies show that attractiveness and desirability has an equivalent effect for men and women when it comes to messages received and replied to. The skewed gender ratio and men overwhelmingly being the ones to send the initial message just as they are usually the ones to initiate dates irl might make …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 09:18 PM
1

Exchanging messages, a necessary stage before any tangible outcomes can occur doesn't mean anything, but ratings (in a site where a high rating would send a notification I'll add) can somehow be extrapolated from to actual sexual acts, huh? Good thing we don't have to rely on extrapolations from either as we have data on actual outcomes such as dates and sexual encounters which show no gender imbalance. There is no evidence that more women go on dates or have sex through dating apps than men. <i…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 08:01 PM
2

"all that matters is looks" thread #41894. Enthralling, thought-provoking stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 06:33 PM
2

Yea older men have sex because they get married or LTRs that’s the difference. This actually proves my point. The dating market for young people is casual sex, fwbs, etc… barely any men having sex. By the mid to late 20s it becomes more LTR marriage market more men have sex. The data shows that 70-80% of men aged 18-24 are having sex, and only a small minority of these only have sex once or twice in the past year. I wouldn't describe this group as 'barely having sex'. In a casual sex market ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 06:29 PM
16

What do you think this 15 year old graph implies? We've all seen it. Nothing about this says anything whatsoever about actual sexual behaviour. It's been repeated over and over that the messaging patterns told a different story. When it comes to actual outcomes such as dates or sexual encounters through online dating, the data shows no gender imbalance whatosever. The data also shows that a minority of men and women account for a similar proportion of their gender's share of the sexual encounter…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/24 01:19 AM
3

The 'current state of affairs' is not at all how you are framing it. There is no evidence for a male-driven rise in sexlessness, and only a minor one overall. It's more noticeable among adolescents, who are maturing later and socializing less in general. It's not a gendered trend. We have not transitioned into a 'casual sex marketplace', hook-ups remain rare among heterosexuals - less than 5% of young men and women have 5 or more sex partners in the span of a year and 80% have 0-1. There is not …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/24 09:14 PM
2

It's actually not clear that it's true for either gender. When looking at 18-29s, the percentage of singles who were uninteresting in dating was 38% in the 2005 Pew survey, while in the latest survey 41% of single men and 36% of single women in that age bracket were uninterested in dating. It also doesn't seem like there's been much of a change in singleness in this age bracket, though the latest Pew survey seems to have undersampled single young women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 01:59 PM
1

Aren't likes different from swipes? I don't know why it'd be so much different than Tinder otherwise (where the average man swipes about 50%). It's not a great measure to focus on anyway, as many men swipe on everything without looking and then do any necessary filtering afterwards. When it comes to actual matches though it seems like the median man and woman end up with the same number of matches after adjusting for the gender ratio (the median woman gets 2.75x more according to the source the …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/24 05:29 PM
2

A bogeyman which has been conjured out of sexual insecurity, the promiscuity/hook-up culture myth (all those hook-ups have to be going to someone right?) & fallacious extrapolations from swipe data, and a need to externalize - I don't have this thing, someone must have stolen it from me. Why 'Chad' isn't real: While 20% of men account for a disproportionate share of the sexual encounters (50-60%), the same is true for women; it doesn't represent a monopoly. Contrary to popular belief, there has …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/24 04:48 PM
2

An important caveat is that these numbers exclude those who weren't looking for anything, which was most single women. On the other hand I've looked into this dataset and the percentage of single women in the 18-29 bracket seeking neither is a lot lower - about 36% down from 65% of single women in toto.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/24 05:16 AM
0

https://nuancepill.substack.com/i/144327550/but-what-about-dating-apps
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 02:42 AM
1

This cope response is addressed. The correlation isn't any higher among young men in recent years.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 02:06 AM
7

There are tons more males who're incels who won't ever get anything About 2% of men are virgins at 30. It might be slightly lower for women (and more driven by asexuality), but that seems like an exaggeration. Intelligence greatly predicts physical attractiveness Simply untrue. In the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study for instance, attractiveness correlated at 0.03 for men and 0.11 for women. I think very attractive promiscuous people are screwing each other, skewing the numbers Promiscuity has very …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 02:01 AM
0

female promiscuity has very little correlation with physical attractiveness or general desirability. Same for men actually. Tall men aren't any more promiscuous than average or even perhaps below average height men. Physical attractiveness correlates at about .14 with men's lifetime sex partners, and probably even lower after adjusting for publication bias. Wealthier men also aren't more promiscuous as some people assume, though evo psych theory wouldn't necessarily predict this anyway as it's s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/24 01:17 AM
–

To be fair, this statistic covers people who met regardless of when, while the HCMST statistic that shows a sharp rise covers people who met on those particular years. However, due to this the sample sizes were very low for recent years - especially in the follow up survey showing that 60% or so met online during covid. For 2020 and 2021 the sample sizes were 17 each, and the percentage meeting online in 2018 and 2019 actually fell from the 2017 survey down to about 25%. The survey analyzed in t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 01:48 AM
–

Since this is mathematically impossible on the population level, either your sample is highly skewed, or women are all dating the same guy. I know the latter is a popular narrative, but it doesn't hold up.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 12:24 AM
1

Looking at the YouGov survey you linked, it seems like you might have misread it. It's asking not whether they wanted their partners to be more attractive than they were but how attractive would their ideal partner be, so more women choosing 5-7 would mean that less women would prefer their partner to be an 8-10 than men. Like you said, it's self-reported data so I wouldn't put much stock in it to be fair. “I’ve got nothing to loose by messaging this 10”, whereas in person people would be less l…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/24 12:19 AM
–

It might be slightly different for swipes, but they don't mean much if a good number of men are mass swiping and filtering out any undesired matches afterwards. This might be why women are actually less likely to receive a reply to their initial messages on dating apps. When it comes to Hinge likes though there is a similar skew for men and women, and I don't see any reason to think that the data on messaging behaviour from online dating websites wouldn't also apply to dating apps. Also, even if…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:48 PM
–

the same top 5% of men always being asked out while the rest of the guys sit on the sidelines like how it is now with OLD There is no gender difference at all in the proportion of men and women who have met up/dated or had a sexual encounter through online dating. Even the distribution of number of unique dates shows no gender imbalance.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:43 PM
–

they’d be just as discriminating as women They are when it comes to attractiveness (i.e. what this refers to 99% of the time). Men and women are equally influenced by attractiveness when it comes to online dating messaging for instance.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:40 PM
–

And most relationships today start on the apps. False. It's closer to 25%.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:34 PM
0

Online dating data shows that men and women are equally influenced by attractiveness/desirability. Both tend to go for people above their own desirability at first but who they actually end up getting replies from and going on dates with tends to be around their level.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:20 PM
4

What's this based on? US Census data shows that 70% of 18-29 men and 50% of 18-29 women were unmarried in 1900.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 06:26 AM
1

There wouldn't be such strong assortative mating for attractiveness if men were indiscriminate in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/24 04:41 AM
1

where hookups are the most common outcome from a date The most common outcome is either another date or no further contact. Even of the dates which do lead to something though, it doesn't seem like hook-ups are any more of a common outcome than a relationship: Grøntvedt et al. (2020) found among Tinder users a match to meet up ratio of 57:1, a meet up to one-night stand ratio of 5.4:1, and a meet up to forming a long-term relationship ratio of 5.1:1. This would mean that it takes on average arou…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/24 08:59 PM
–

The GSS doesn't have an adequate sample size for a reliable fine grained analysis. The NSFG survey with a sample size more than 10x as high for young adults shows basically complete equality between 18-24 men and women's sex partner distributions: https://nuancepill.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/18-24-NSFG-LSP.webp
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/24 06:53 AM
4

Within the 18-29 bracket. There doesn't tend to be one in 30-49s (women being pulled from 50+s cancelling the effect of 30-49s pulling from the 18-29 bracket) and it reverses past there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 11:55 AM
1

I don't think age caused the additional gap compared to the other sources, that was probably random error or maybe some difference in methodology, but 2 sources > 1.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 11:42 AM
-1

Because it clearly doesn't mean that, it points to the gap being explained by age gaps in relationships, unless you're in a mormon town or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 11:32 AM
0

The sample size for Pew was about 5k and that includes a 1k oversample of LGB. The sample size for 18-29s was closer to 900. Combining the 2021 and 2022 GSS surveys gives a higher sample size. The APS shows a similar sample size. You can see the breakdown of the different relationship categories in the APS here: https://www.americansurveycenter.org/research/from-swiping-to-sexting-the-enduring-gender-divide-in-american-dating-and-relationships/ The methodology shouldn't be too hard to find, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/24 11:25 AM
2

They're much finer without sex. Lower libido, orgasm gap, and worse feelings after hook ups means it's only a 'privilege' in a very loose sense of the term.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/24 02:34 AM
2

if you actually look at surveys men report a more positive experience using dating apps than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/23 07:13 AM
0

This guy sure must get around. Anyway even if it's true, the fact remains that only a small minority of women use the app and others like it and they are male dominated probably for the reason you stated, men having a much higher sex drive. It's not like they are hogging all the women because of tinder, as the top 20% of guys on it make up pretty much the equivalent of the whole female userbase. The idea then that these apps are causing a substantial effect on the 'sexual marketplace' seems ques…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/21 01:24 PM
-1

She can do it for sex i strongly doubt that. why would 'chad' settle for a '4/10' for when he has access to highly attractive women?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/21 11:47 AM
8

what they ignore is that the gender ratio on tinder is insanely skewed. they talk about the '80:20 rule' in effect on tinder, yet that makes perfect sense considering that's about the male:female ratio there: http://www.netimperative.com/2019/04/05/online-dating-trends-men-outnumber-women-on-tinder-by-9-to-1-while-grinder-wins-for-age-diversity/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/975925/us-tinder-user-ratio-gender/
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/21 11:43 AM
1

show me the raw data. it's BS cope manufactured by incels. it wasn't posted on a washington post article either.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/21 05:25 AM
1

who are the less attractive women dating then? are they just choosing not to date at all? there aren't an infinite supply of 'chads' for women to date. obviously some will have to settle for men in their league. in terms of tinder, the gender ratio skews heavily toward males with men making up around 80% of the userbase. obviously most men won't have any success there due to the competition. it's just men accepting the reality that in this generation looks dictate dating success. no, it's autist…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/21 05:23 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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