TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

artietx Archive

View 0 posts and 3,272 comments by artietx on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 3,272 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

For this to be true you'd have to simply not talk to her at all. Even if you're not well read in personality psychology at all, you can still very quickly assess if a woman is trusting or distrusting, direct or vague, compassionate or cold (Agreeableness) has a plan for her life or doesn't care, is very committed to her obligations or has a loose attachment to them, is a quitter or is very concerned with finishing, plans things or does things on impulse (conscientousness). Demonstrably not true.…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/18 07:00 PM
1

Yeah, no. To her - maybe. That's not what the conversation was about , so the point holds: she will get his sexual best, he won't get hers.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/18 06:55 PM
1

Ehh this is just a story about cheating/not being over an ex. Tons of those with both sexes. It has nothing about her finding out he's had wild sex with the ex but not with her.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/18 10:54 PM
1

I don't see much detail here, it's more about emotions than about sex or so it seems. But ok, that's at least something. However, it's not what the thread was about. I was talking about things you can physically do, that ability doesn't go away so if you don't do it with a new partner -it's on you. Here, you can't really force yourself to feel a certain way even if you want to. The conversation (and thread) started with how men don't want to get subpar sex. They don't really get that butthurt th…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/18 10:53 PM
1

She might be lying about her number of partners as well, so that argument can apply to anything. Absolutely. And you might find out the actual number before you find out she possesses those traits. That's why this argument can apply. She'd have to be an oscar winning actor in order to achieve this. And the argument above still applies. Absolutely not. There are multiple examples of how she changes later and does things you never knew she'd be capable of. You don't think all men expected to be di…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/18 10:25 PM
1

You're missing the point. You will experience these traits long before you ever find of how many guys a woman has slept with. That's why it doesn't matter unless you're in a highly unrealistic situation where you can choose a woman from her N count alone and you're stuck with her for life. I'm not missing your point. I just disagree that you will necessarily experience those traits first. She might be hiding them, she might have potential to develop them in the future etc. Surely you're not sugg…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/18 06:00 PM
1

The research I'm showing suggests that a multitude of factors predict short-term mating, including extraversion. Which again implies that - as I mentioned earlier - a high N count can be the result of many things, one of them being traits that are part of extraversion. No, it shows that short term mating is correlated with extraversion, as well as with other traits that are bad for relationships/marriages. And no, those traits don't predict anything. They correlate with high count. Big differenc…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/18 10:21 PM
1

... What does that have to do with whether or not guys care about women's N count when their own N count rises? It has to do with what your argument is based on compared to another thing that I said and you didn't believe. Most of this discussion is purely anecdotal, including your view on women and N count. Oh no, it's not my view. It's an answer to your question and why people might care about the count. Like, what they feel about it. The question I originally asked was whether you'd care abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 09:55 PM
1

And I'm saying after you've had some experience yourself, I think for most people the thought that any woman you've been with has been with other men doesn't really bother you anymore. Even if you find dicks disgusting. As long as it's lower than your own number, it doesn't really seem like a lot. The key word is "think". You think so. It's just your opinion of how things should be. Whereas the correlation of that number for women with things that aren't very desirable for a relationship is real…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 08:08 PM
1

No one is confused, you are being ridiculous. Give typical numbers for some age ranges, or post a link to your source where he can see all possible numbers. So far it looks like you have no idea what you're talking about and he cornered you :)
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 06:44 PM
1

The logic is that once you start having some sexual experience, you stop thinking of sex as a big deal. This applies to pretty much everything else in life - people get used to things they do often. You can investigate this on your own simply by asking men who have some experience with multiple partners. No one says it's a big deal. Other dicks are disgusting, that's all. It's probably tiresome because you don't seem to read what I actually write. Like, literally in this quote you ignore the que…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 06:34 PM
1

I don't think a low count makes someone a loser. The argument is that once you have some experience having sex with many different girls, your view of sex changes. Which again brings me to the logic I've explained way too many times. Which again, is just your opinion, there is no other logic behind it. Hm ok so let me get this straight... Am I correct in my interpretation that you think your gut feeling can tell you that you're at risk of getting an STD at the same time as you're not consciously…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 05:36 PM
1

what.the.fuck. are you talking about? I named multiple women from your list who he didn't sleep with? The list is titled as "The following are the women that Ted Mosby was shown to have dated one or more times or had a serious romantic relationship with." Read your own freaking link. At this point, I believe you are just trolling. He has NOT slept with all these women. Click their names in the list and see for yourself. For example: Marissa Heller, was the former resident of The Apartment before…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/18 05:33 PM
1

No, it's not. Or prove that it is. You haven't even clicked half of the links in that list, have you? Just stop. It's obvious you don't know what you are talking about. Lots of these women are the ones he went on 1 date with and nothing happened.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/18 10:02 PM
1

I don't think so and can't see why - you'd have to be repulsed by yourself if that was the case, or a giant hypocrite. But we're obviously not going to agree on this. It would only make me a hypocrite if I was sleeping with men myself. Or if I was disgusted by girls sleeping with women. But no. There's no hypocrisy here whatsoever. No double standards or special treatment. Both them and I "aren't allowed" to sleep with men. Also, hypocrisy is barely applicable here, we're talking about emotions …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/18 09:40 PM
1

Yes, and I understand how that thought process can apply if you have been with fewer partners yourself. I don't understand how it can apply if you've been with as many yourself, since I assume you wouldn't really consider sex to be such a big deal in that case. Of course I accept it if you have a high partner count and find high partner counts in others repulsive, I just can't understand how you could feel that way. I'm simply expressing my opinion as is usual in a discussion. Whether you it cha…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/18 09:09 PM
1

Well again if she's your number 3 I can see how that would feel a bit weird. If she's your number 45 I don't really see why you would care. Well, I told you roughly the thought process here. If you don't see why anyone would care - there's nothing else I can do. You don't see why YOU would care, and it's fine and up to you, but you aren't even trying to understand the position of others, in which case it's unclear why you even asked? To try and change how someone feels about it? To be able to sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/18 06:52 PM
1

So you're saying what you want hasn't changed since you were a child? Mine sure have. I didn't know shit as a child. No, I'm saying that it didn't change completely. Also, explained why people care about what number they are for their partner to begin with. Wait, are we talking about women now? I thought we were talking about men. I'm confused. What? Why are you confused. We are talking about men not wanting to be with women who wouldn't even look at those men when they were in their prime, but …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/18 11:47 PM
6

What cracks me up about all this is men were the ones trying to keep women out of workplace, exclude them from high paying careers, and/or severely underpay them until like 1975, and now you all are mad that there are consequences for that. You can’t just skip off and leave your ex wife destitute after prohibiting women, en masse, from making money to support a family. I just don’t see how most of you are victims. The dumbest thing I've read today, the day have just started though... What conseq…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/18 06:33 PM
1

No, not in general. I said I got 0 matches in a specific city where it's supposed to be easier. And got no sex from tinder is not the same as getting no sex. If I'm a 1% bottom man, then you sure confirm my point about not seeing anyone who's under top 20%. I would even show the pics I used back then. For me to be a 1% bottom men on pics - I need to be absolutely hideous, as in with deformities, super short and fat etc etc. I'm not. And how would it matter if you said it's easy even for ugly men…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/18 09:36 PM
1

That's the thing - no, I'm not. And not a bottom man myself either. But then again, you're just proving all those trp points. Men that are below top 20% are bottom and/or invisible for you. And that's why you're saying it's easy for all men, cause others don't exist for you. And even if I was looking at bottom men, didn't you state that it's easy even for ugly men? Yes, yes you did.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/18 08:35 PM
1

You're telling me something that makes no sense, though. That it's easy for men, when you aren't one. And how is your sentence about "top women" makes any sense, too? I'm not looking at top women or women at all in this discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/18 08:29 PM
1

It's not. You choose to keep your eyes closed, I guess. I'm not talking about far below average men. And it happened to be so that I had 0 matches in a city that is considered to be bad for dating if you're a girl (cause of gender imbalance that benefits men). I recommend you stop being closed-minded and try to go past looking only at top men (apex fallacy) and your social circles(confirmation bias). Listen to others if you care to know the truth. A few guys are telling you here, but you refuse …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/18 06:56 PM
1

In which case it can't be stated that it's ridiculously easy. But it wasn't about you, was it. And no, I don't think a girl would have to compromise as much for casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/18 06:45 PM
1

it's not easy even to get a date with a girl they truly like without compromising much. But there are such women. And there are men who get that casual sex. Women aren't on tinder and such to look for husbands. And yes, as you said, if it's 10% women vs 100% men - that only proves my point that it's not easy for men to be those men who get as much as sex with as many women as they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/18 08:09 PM
1

studied that, too, and not just a bachelor's degree. What you said is false according to my observations. Yes, they aren't virgins (not all of them at least), but it's very far from getting sex easily. Most can only get it in LTR, and even then - not all acts they'd want. But they can't move on because that will mean another loooong drought. Had an experience of getting 0 matches on tinder when traveled for about a week to a big east cost city for a conference, too. So yeah, I don't think you kn…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 07:38 PM
1

Yes you did, right here: Wut? In that quote there's no word "out" or "break up". Divorce? That's a part of a sarcastic "quote" of how you're acting. What specifically about other people? Hm? The whole thing - it's not about you not loving your husband anymore. For all we know you still do and everything is well. Re-read what you replied to - people in general expect things that aren't their needs from relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/17 09:33 PM
1

No, that's a bit different. At that point you aren't doing anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/17 09:30 PM
1

Um yeah. You say this like it's a bad thing. But the whole point of marriage is to make it inconvenient to break up. If you want an easy out, don't get married. Um no, I never said anything about "out" though. Or breaking up. Interesting POV, usually it's the opposite, men saying sex is a need and women saying it's not. But I'm going to defer to Maslow's hierarchy of needs on this, which has sex listed as a base level need. Giga-anal with unlimited partners is not. No, you won't die if you don't…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 09:01 PM
1

Lie by omission is still lie, so yes. But you are free to ignore it and hamster whatever you want haha. Either way, in most cases you won't know what they imagined, so then you can't correct it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 08:58 PM
1

None. There you go. As I said... So no reason is good enough, you're just like "gotcha, you made a vow, I'm not gonna adapt to any changes, follow your vow. Or divorce and pay". Talking about sex, a want is a need. Cause if you want to be technical, no one needs any sex at all, the absence of it won't kill you. Sex is a want. Also, you don't need flowers or his support and understanding, but if he claims he loves you, he usually provides those. And again, this wasn't about you in particular. It …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 08:14 PM
1

Yep, as long as you don't let them believe something that's not true, as in you know they believe something and just let them (hamster it). Then it's a lie by omission which is also a lie. Otherwise, as I agreed multiple times, sure you aren't doing anything wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 08:09 PM
1

No surprise, ons is ons. Few men can afford to be picky for those.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 08:07 PM
1

I'm neither, I'm simply aware that, if a male is persistant to find out my number, it has got to be a red flag. Sure sure. As long as you're not lying/letting them believe it's much lower than it is. For me, it's always been "I dont kiss and tell". Males can take it or leave it, idc. Same thing - for a lot of them it's a red flag. And similarly they ask and you can answer/take it or leave it
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 07:20 PM
1

It's not. You haven't clarified. Idk, pretty sure I understood that other guy even though he replied with one emoji. You don't seem to understand men all that well to talk about mutual understanding, huh? (mostly just playing, but think about it) He isn't living his life without ever... He is living that life right now. Not right now, but from now on. And that's what I meant - that he won't even experience these things (again?). Idk why it needs to be clarified to you, that it's about present an…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 07:18 PM
1

so? it's a red flag anyway, so why not just tell him or break up. Idk, women I talked to don't see it as a red flag and kinda want to know their partner's past too, sometimes. It's kinda like you want to know where you invest your time - smart women understand it AND want to know such stuff, too. But it's hard to get any representative sample like that, so neither you nor I know if the majority of women see it as a red flag. So far it seems to me, that only women who see it as a red flag and/or …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 07:10 PM
1

Idk why you're reading it as that. I thought it was pretty obvious. Wifely duties? Sounds like borderline deadbedroom kinda thing. He could have reasons, e.g. your wifely duties aren't frequent or enthusiastic because, you know, you aren't attracted, but there might be women who are. js.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 07:03 PM
1

No. I am attracted to him right now and he is getting that type of sex so at the very least he has experienced the joy that comes with that at least at one time. However, if you look at marriage from a realistic stand point, people get old and gross, they get busy and distracted. Kids, bills, bad knees, grey hair. I can only do so much (and god-willing I'll keep trying as long as I can). But marriage then is not solely about the sex, it becomes about the familial love and respect of the family u…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 06:27 PM
1

lol so you claim you understand him when you say he should live his life without ever being with people sexually attracted to him and having that type of sex? Are you sure it's mutual understanding and respect? :) jw
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/17 05:59 PM
1

No, you can't. You think it's universal, doesn't mean it is technically. Sorry dude. Old guys are gross to young women. To some of them, yes. Either way, whether they are or not, there is nothing wrong with them , which is what you're saying. Lol at you saying sluts are gross while at the same time desperate to sleep with them. Huh? Don't assume, I'm not trying anything. I'm here to call out people on bs when I have nothing to do. And you are full of it. And it's not me saying that. It's fairly …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/17 10:42 PM
1

No, you can't. Just because you think you can or feel you can - you can't. You have absolutely nothing to base it on except for your own opinion. It's entertaining to see how blatant your double standards are, that's why. What you're doing right now is shaming people for expressing their sexuality and I'd bet money you're not ok with slut-shaming. But that's pretty much what you're doing. But when men say sluts are gross - you'll shame them for shaming XD hilarious. But then again, maybe I shoul…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/17 08:51 PM
0

No, you can't. Not until you tell the number(and source) that proves what you're saying. Otherwise, take your double standards elsewhere. Can you believe /u/JezebeltheQueen5656 that people are still shamed for expressing their sexuality in the 21st century?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/17 08:36 PM
1

No you can't. "Most" doesn't represent the whole group. 51% is most. But if 49% don't think older guys are gross, you can't say that the whole group does. Who cares about rule? Exceptions are enough in this scenario. If there are women who are sleeping with older dudes - then it makes sense for older dudes to approach and find those women. You will be perceived as such by those who think they are gross. Not by others. Pretty sure men are okay with being perceived as gross by women they wouldn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/17 09:42 PM
1

Never said "most". But some do, and therefore you can't say they are disgusting to all young women as a group. Wanting to be happy doesn't make anyone gross. Facts of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/17 06:00 PM
1

So no example, no acknowledgement of the dictionary definition, no acknowledgement that male partners and female partners are two different sorts of partners. Just a weak attempt to insult. The only thing I don't understand is what is that in such people's heads that lets them convince themselves to just ignore logic completely. But that's a rhetorical question, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/17 05:18 PM
1

Nope, if they were, no older men would get to bang younger women and you would see no couples with such age difference (which btw would lead to them never hitting on younger women, because demand creates supply and in this case there would be no demand... but there is demand). But they do and they do. You are a meme and cliche. Older men do get younger women. Facts of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/17 05:07 PM
1

And nope again. There is no point here. For you to have a point here, you need to define creeping/creepy first AND that definition had to be more or less objective. Because so far creepy simply means a girl didn't like that particular guy and if another guy did the same thing but was hotter, she wouldn't find it creepy. Facts of life - they are disgusting to you, not to younger women as a group. Facts of life - there are plenty of men banging younger women. Nothing you can do about it. That's ju…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 07:20 PM
1

Yeah I am. To anyone who's still reading - definitely. To you, if you aren't completely ignorant, too. Funny, you were saying something about being educated to another guy just in this thread. Yet, if you can't see analogy/logic here, you are the uneducated one here. I mean, this is basic stuff, not even something fancy. This is not about me, to begin with. Secondly, you don't know if they find you hitting on them repulsing. You will only know when you try. And, as practice shows, some of them a…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 01:45 AM
1

? Ctrl+c ctrl+v is not immune to typos.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 01:35 AM
1

Nothing funnier than a person with double standards trying to judge somebody for sticking to their standards. And no, I'm not wanting to be with one or even saying it. I'm showing how you sound when you judge people for wanting to be happy. Not surprisingly, you judge men for their desires, but would say that society moved on if somebody judged some women for theirs(e.g. slut-shaming).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 01:34 AM
1

Sorry, sluts are gross. Nothing worse than some banged out wench that thinks she still deserves love trying to be in a LTR with you. Ew.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 01:10 AM
1

Sorry, sluts are gross. Nothing worse than some banged out wench that thinks she still deserves love trying to be in a LTR with you. Ew.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/17 01:10 AM
1

nope. Not more gross than taking multiple dicks, yet you wouldn't slut-shame, would you? You are just biased against men. And you can't talk about general feeling of younger women. You can only talk for yourself and maybe some of your friends, that's all. Or do you also accept that being disgusted by sluts is a general feeling of all men and they can't do anything about visceral reaction and sluts should just accept it and move on instead of grossing out everyone, trying to actually date men too…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 09:16 PM
1

Nope. Why would they go for women their age if they find younger women more attractive? It's repulsive to you, just like women their age are repulsive to them. To each their own. Definitely nothing wrong with these guys. What you're doing is the same as slut-shaming. Ew. You are the one being gross and stuck in the past. Everyone should be doing what makes them happier. If a woman wants to sleep around - don't shame her. If a man wants a young woman - don't shame him.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 09:12 PM
1

No, not pervs. They absolutely can get women their age, but women their age are gross and ew ew ew. SO they go for attractive women. If women are grossed out by them - then they just don't get anything. But sometimes they do, so they keep going. There are women happily sleeping with older men on dating apps, for example, and that's why those men even use apps. Demand creates supply. If there was no demand for older men, they would offer no supply and wouldn't hit on younger women. You are blind …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 08:01 PM
1

Nope, nothing wrong. If you don't like something, it's your problem. And basing your judgement on "ew" and "gross" is nothing but shaming you would be oh so pissed about if someone dared to shame women for anything. Going for what you like is not wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 07:59 PM
1

And older guys hitting on younger women will always be viewed as creepy and gross by the majority of the women being hit on. And if it's true, it still doesn't mean anything is wrong with those men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 07:27 PM
1

Sure, that could be true in terms of numbers. But it's only if they choose it cause of upbringing for example. If they wanted to, they could have much more. They don't have slut phase because they can't. They can.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 07:07 PM
1

Eh? What about hitting on girls your age that want nothing to do with you? Same thing. You don't know if they want anything to do with you until you hit on them. And yes, there are young women that go for older men. It's a fact. 30yr olds don't hit on 15 yr olds. And if a 30yr old can't get a woman his own age, he won't get a woman in her 20s either - those have much higher SMV and are much harder to get. To sum up, again, there's definitely nothing wrong with those guys. Like there's nothing wr…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/17 06:36 PM
2

1: This is craziness, right? Intelligence is maybe the sexiest and most important thing in life, right? Or at least one of the sexiest and most important things in life, right? The answer to this explains everything. It's a supply-demand kind of thing. Maybe the sexiest you say? And water is probably the most important thing for survival, yet it's much much cheaper than diamonds that nobody really needs. It's easy to get what you can get from an intelligent woman, i.e. a conversation, exchanging…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/17 06:57 PM
1

no idea what you said
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/17 09:42 PM
1

That's of no interest to me. I'm just here to point out the mistake. Men who search cuckold wouldn't necessarily want it. Maybe majority would, maybe not. But definitely not "men who search" in general, as a group.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/17 09:39 PM
1

So as I said. This statement Men who search cuckold would want that is false. Men who search cuckold could be some bulls and not want cucked. Not to mention men who don't want to be in the scenario at all in any roles and are just using that category currently because of its novelty cause are tired of whatever they were using before.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/17 09:07 PM
1

To be honest communism is an insult to all people who work hard in general period. I mean you literally and figuratively give away blood, tears and sweat that you invest in work, whereas some other person gets to spend it all drunk/drugged having all the good fun. Sorry, but where is the "justice" there? Eh not taking any sides here, but this description sounds more like capitalism and what you have in the west right now. Your low class who literally and figuratively gives away blood, tears and …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/17 09:02 PM
1

Yes, yes you can. Because you don't have to have a particular job to have money to survive. No matter which job you have - you are you.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/17 08:55 PM
1

No, because you can't separate you and your body. Looks is merely a shape of your body period. As pointed out 2-3 times already - your body is a necessary condition of your existence. You ARE your body + some more. Take your body away - and you don't exist. Take your job or money away - and you still do. Unless you're saying you identify as your job title, then I can only say it's sad and don't assume all people are like or should be like that. It's just false.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/17 06:31 PM
1

No. What you have is not a part of who you are. It's by definition a separate entity. There is you AND there is what you have. These sets don't even overlap, let alone one of them include the other one.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/17 06:15 PM
1

No, that's not who you are. That's what you do/have. I understand perfectly what others are talking about. The problem is that they don't understand they are wrong. And I'm pointing out where - looks and money are not anywhere close to equal. Again, take status/power away - and the person is still that person. Take the body away - and there's no person anymore. Or add status. A person is not his job. A person hasn't stopped being himself just because he got promoted or demoted.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 08:16 PM
1

Yeah, I commented on a particular point, commented on a comment to what you linked. Not on what you linked overall. Commented on the whole thing too and no matter how you spin it, there's no paradox or question here. Looks is a part of who a person is, money isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 07:59 PM
1

Yes, that was. That's exactly why I joined, to clarify that logical mistake you made. Right here: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/7b89y9/q4all_is_higher_intelligence_a_trait_that_women/dphmbu6/
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 07:27 PM
1

Sigh. Again, it's not about what you judged for. You are who you are with or without money. You don't exist without a body.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 07:21 PM
1

In this universe they are not equal. Again. It's a whole different aspect. It's what you physically have. Material belongings. Take them away - and you are still who you are. Take your body away - and you don't exist. Yeah, no one becomes more beautiful at 60+ years. How is that a counter argument to what I said? Yes you did confirm what I said. When you're old looks are not what they were at the age of 20. And hey - you also aren't who you were at the age of 20. Cause you're not 60. And look di…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 06:48 PM
1

Eh okay? I just did. Yes, they don't like 20 year old models = so they are not 20year old models. Like, what was your point? You just gave another example confirming what I said. p.s. most young 20 year old women literally don't look like 20 year old models, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 06:00 PM
1

No, money is not a part of A. You can't add or subtract things with different units.... His job and money are not who he is. They are what he does and what he has. What he is is a combination of looks and character.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 05:58 PM
1

No, it's more like how we define friends and care about them. I do and you don't. You don't put their interest above some weird artificial constraint.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 05:56 PM
1

It's not about me. And if anything, a body part is a part of them. But the point is, a person is a sum of his looks and character. If either of those things changes or is lost, then they aren't who they were. Now the question is, how much their partner valued each component.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/17 05:55 PM
1

No, it's not as much at all. It's a whole different aspect. It's what you physically have. Material belongings. Take them away - and you are still who you are. Take your body away - and you don't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/17 08:03 PM
1

It's very simple. Without our body we are no one, we dont' exist. We are our body and more. A body is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition to define who we are.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/17 08:02 PM
1

It's always a good idea to get your friend's back. If they get mad at you, it's ok. You're doing the right thing and they will be thankful in the end. Because they would want to know, most guys would want to know if you ask them. You won't be responsible for them breaking up. And you won't feel guilty. You said the truth, it was up to them to decide what to do next. It's the liar who's responsible, not you. It might be best not to get involved only if you don't care about either of those 2 peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/17 07:56 PM
1

And once again, it's not getting involved in people's relationships. It's not just some people. One of those people is your friend. That's a selfish position and simply shows that you're not a friend as you claim, that's all. No wonder you can't tell a dick move from a friend move.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/17 07:51 PM
1

The question is how he knew. If he doesn't follow her around, then it was likely to be rumors. I don't trash talk people based on rumors even if they turn out to be true in the end. It doesn't matter how. He did, and it was true, she later admitted to it herself. He didn't just talked based on rumors. Firstly, he saw some things himself. Secondly, if he didn't see, he referred the friend to very sources of rumors, so he could get info from the first hands. Never said she was right in lying, just…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/17 11:17 PM
1

He doesn't. He gets to relate to his friend and tell him what he would like to know himself. And then it's up to the friend to decide what to do with that information. Again, I have no idea why you're siding with a liar over your friend. That's why I said you're a shitty friend. It's not his place to judge her and maybe he doesn't. It's his place to get his friend's back and tell him the truth, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/17 11:14 PM
1

OP told Harrison shit about his girlfriend behind the girlfriend's back. And I bet that a lot of that is rumors too, because unless he's a creepy stalker, he wouldn't know so much about someone's private sex life besides rumors that are spread around. I asked him under his other comments - he witnessed some of those things himself. Also, him being a stalker is irrelevant here. No idea why you're trying to shame him and turn it on him. What he said was true and the girl admitted to it too and cam…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/17 08:37 PM
1

Good luck making it through any real-life debate with such arguments m9. Yes, context is irrelevant and doesn't change the fact that events mentioned took place. Disagree? Explain why.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/17 07:00 PM
1

My policy is to not get involved in other people's dating issues unless I saw something really bad like cheating or committing a felony. It's not my job to be the police of what they want to or don't want to reveal in their relationship. So now that's a dick move. If you KNOW (like in the story we're discussing) you're friend is getting shafted but you won't tell him because of "mah policy", then you're a shitty friend. And no one is saying about "policing" anything. A friend was being lied to, …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/17 06:59 PM
1

Yes, it is irrelevant. No, you are not correct. Not just because you say so, definitely. And here you're saying that one should be a bad friend when their friend is being lied to and directly says he wants to know the truth. And how does the context matter here? She did the things her bf was informed of? Yes. So which context suddenly makes it not the truth?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 07:45 PM
3

Didn't see it in the report. The 5th paragraph there is about something else. The blog you linked has It is not known whether the illness prompted the breakup or whether the couples in the study who divorced were already experiencing marital problems before the diagnosis. If couples are happy before the diagnosis, it appears that men are more likely to abandon wives who become seriously ill. If couples are already troubled before a partner becomes ill, the finding suggests that women in unhappy …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 07:38 PM
1

eh yes they are. Facts are truth. He simply listed the events that took place. Context is irrelevant. Of course, siding with a person who lied you want to bring up the context because that person lied. But no, that's not relevant. Liar's feelings aren't relevant, sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 07:35 PM
1

I did some research :) But it was just trying to click all links in the article you linked + in comments. I'm not that interested in the topic and the burden of proof is on you, so I wanted to take advantage of that haha. Yes, I did find this last link you posted myself. It was somewhere in the article or comments. I even went one step further and found http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.24577/abstract and even http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cncr.24577/full However, let …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 07:24 PM
1

Exactly. Some other guy can meet and date her. And if he doesn't care about her past, she's better off with him. Saying the truth is not trying to blow up relationships. It's giving a man a chance to decide what to do himself. If anything - if he chooses to break up over that - it's her who blew up the relationship, not who filled her partner in. Trying to blow up relationship would be lying that she had a slutty past when she hasn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 07:14 PM
1

Hey yes she could, but so what? It's not like he lied about her past or claimed that she's still doing it. He just told his friend the truth. It's up to friend to decide what to do with it, don't you think?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 05:56 PM
1

And again, the key words are "I ever knew". Also, that leads to a question of how you measured their n-counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:58 PM
1

You're walking in circles at this point. Of course fat women can rack up high counts. All a woman needs to do that is to want it. Again, for women it's about "openness". For men it's not. Almost all men are open to sleeping with new girls or having specific sex acts, yet - the majority of men doesn't get laid with new/hot girls and the majority of men ask on forums how to convince her to have anal.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:27 PM
1

Yes, 25 is a small and biased sample. 1. It's your social circle,2. it's probably the area you live in and maybe some areas you traveled to. 3. That's a group of people who somehow for some reason would tell another man their n count and not lie (as you assume) - then probably it's your friends... So yeah, bad sample. Not to mention that even there you say that not all extroverted. And whose n count is higher than average? Of all 25? Or of extroverted ones and then that's the reason - that they …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 07:36 PM
1

lol it's like you're trying to find sexism where there is none. Knowing how people in STEM are, I'm 99% that what OP said would be brushed off because it was dumb and she is just not good enough to understand it. But she shouldn't worry. When guys suggest something dumb it's brushed off, too. Sometimes they are made fun of/teased for that. Is that what she wanted - for others to vocalize she said something dumb? But then it would look sexist and she would think it's cause she's a girl ... oh wai…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/17 10:59 PM
1

Lol yes but the script is not written to accommodate. And these people always argue with what they think you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/17 10:32 PM
1

The porn is just pictures on the screen. The dicks were in which tells a lot about her and what she actually did. That's not just being afraid of his judgement. That's to trick him into being with her so she can get all of what he can offer (predatory), including his money, too, btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/17 08:18 PM
1

Slave owners never harmed slaves :) They just kept them from leaving them :) How is intending to keep him from breaking up with her not harming if he would rather break up if he knew the truth? Also, if lying to him and tricking him into wasting his life on a person he wouldn't choose is not harming.. How is breaking up with her harming her? Like I'm not sure what you're arguing about - are you saying that doing something is not harming another person as long as you have your other interest in m…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/17 07:50 PM
1

Eh no, in your scenario she is attempting to harm him. Assuming he would judge her for her past = she thinks he doesn't want a girl like that.But. She IS a girl like that| AND|=> intends to harm him to get what she She tells him she's| wants (him). not a girl like that|
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/17 07:35 PM
0

You still didn't answer either of my questions? Or are you here just to insult and down vote others?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/17 08:38 PM
0

No idea what that means and how it's related to the thread. Link your studies or show the mistake in method in what I linked. Or admit you were wrong. Btw did you read about single results "defying stats" so you don't embarrass yourself in the future?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/17 11:45 PM
1

And because child support impacts a man's bank account, he should be able to terminate any financial obligations. My money - my choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/17 08:18 PM
0

I shouldn't, men who should - are.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/17 08:16 PM
0

Pathetic. So you argue just to argue and annoy people with stupidity + downvotes combined. Can't believe someone said you weren't a troll, when it's obvious you are the very definition of a troll.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/17 08:15 PM
0

Still being a piece of shit, I see. So, we take as you acknowledging facts, since I get you have no counter argument or studies to show?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/17 07:04 PM
1

no other explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 10:20 PM
0

Exactly. The data is there. Your blahblahblah doesn't change anything. Show your studies. You still being in denial is yawn-inducing indeed.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 10:20 PM
1

that was talking about trolls in general. In this case she. Maybe. Idk. Haven't seen pics or anything. The truth is - as demonstrated by links I showed you, how can you its' not a troll? Who else would debate like this? "Simply not true.Period". When they numbers are linked. And I asked to link anything suggesting anything else multiple times.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 09:04 PM
0

Browsing subs? Are you serious? lol. Talk to real people. Browsing subs is not indicative of anything. The sample is not representative, the numbers aren't counted, certain subs have only certain people sitting and posting there. That's why I'm not telling you to browse subs, I'm telling you to talk to different people not to listen to echo chambers. I'm also showing you cold data that shows how things are, the proof of how things are. Yeah there is. "It's proven" without linking the proof means…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:50 PM
1

Simply not true. Period. It is true. I sent you multiple links all showing numbers. Are you gonna send anything? Or it' simply not true because you refuse to believe it and accept the objective reality?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:45 PM
1

I want numbers to be respected and acknowledged. She's ranting and thinking it's patriarchy or something. Idk. As I said, I think it's trolling. And I"m not sure why you would call someone "no one" and encourage the troll if you didn't bother checking what he said. Look, there's more https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/73svp8/42_of_japanese_millennial_women_avoid_cc_why_cant/dnygvup/ Numbers are "simply not true. Period." Wtf is that? Discussion? please
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:43 PM
1

Wtf are you talking about? Men aren't excused from anything. In this particular case their number is not correlated with the divorce/breakup rate. Period. end of story. "For some reason" means idk why, no one can know why for sure. It's not real science, it's not physics or chemistry. There are no mathematics deriving or predicting anything. That's why "some reason". But that's irrelevant. What's relevant is that women's partner count is correlated with the break up rate. Mens' past partner don'…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:17 PM
1

No, it's not. I'm talking about objective reality and numbers. IDGAF that women don't care what I think about their past and don't care about my past. That's not at all what I'm arguing about. The argument is that women's sexual past is not irrelevant, whether they care about it or not and whether men care about it or not. And yes, there are butthurts on your side. That's why threads like this one are common, and there are still women crying that men shouldn't care about their past etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:12 PM
1

omfg. Can you fucking read what correlation is already? No one said it was the only factor or main factor (even though it could be a main factor). It simply shows that the N count matters and is not irrelevant. And numbers show that for women, but for some reason not for men. It's a fact. So, no, patently males' past lovers don't have the same effect. Not on the divorce/breakup rate. It is demonstrated by numbers. If you can prove they have the same effect - please, show the studies. They have t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:10 PM
1

feminism to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:07 PM
1

learn to spell. There is no stigma on your sexuality. Do whatever you want as long you aren't lying. And men will make their choices. And the correlation between women's partner count and breakups is demonstrated, the numbers are out there.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:03 PM
1

But no, it's obviously a troll. We were discussing certain things which are shown by data. Disagree with me? sure. The numbers are right here. Write your counter argument. But see argument, not how you feel things should be. We were arguing about N count, and later - that there's a correlation between women's partner count some of the bad stuff, like divorce rate, which wasn't found for men. Here is all you need to see: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/73svp8/42_of_japanese_mil…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 07:02 PM
1

Which no one said they are. They don't describe 100% of population. They represent population with a certain range of confidence. And the correlation is shown. And what does she do? "I don't believe it", "I don't need sources, just common sense", "I defy the stats", "men can suck it". How is that not a troll? Oh and "you are hypocrite", "double standards", when there's literally holding everyone to the same standard of not having lots of dicks, I expect others not to do what I don't do myself - …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 06:50 PM
1

By saying - I disagree, you are wrong here and here, instead that's how it works. Here are the links to relevant studies here and here, and the studies you linked are wrong because of the flaws in the method here and here. Propaganda is in interpretation. Numbers don't care. They are just numbers and reflect the reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 06:38 PM
1

No, normal people, that aren't on either extreme end. You are wrong and I am right. Idgaf about all that mgtow crap. I talk to other people and see - men do care about the count, to different degrees, but still. And if that was wrong you wouldn't be so butthurt to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 06:36 PM
1

Lol you millenials. Savage? GTFO. Dimwit? Explain who you are to hand out titles like that. I know I'm more educated, it's a fact. That person on the other hand demonstrates 0 knowledge of basics of statistics and logic. Really? THe argument of correlation is that not all people with the high count are cheaters? No shit sherlock. Also no one is trying to eat and have any cake. Talking about data, research and facts. And men aren't trying ot be in LTR with other men.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 06:33 PM
1

Where am I a hypocrite? You might want to look up the definition before embarrassing yourself. Logic 101? Have you read any book about that at all? No one said anything about all people with the high count being cheaters. You fucking idiot, also not all cheaters have a high count. NONE of what you said is true in general, and then you dare to say something about logic? After this and after your "defy the stats" questions? STFU lmao. Once again, if you don't know what a correlation is, educate yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 06:27 PM
0

That's the majority of men to begin with. Secondly, nope you're wrong. A lot of men agree that promiscuous people are people with a high number, a lot of people - both men and women - agree that they don't want to be their partners #11 or something. You are in the wrong here and are completely divorced from reality. Stop reading feminist blogs and getting brainwashed. Talk to normal people and go to school already, what you're saying is completely illogical.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 01:06 AM
0

If you had a brain instead of that piece of shit, you would understand that there's nothing wrong. You uphold computers and refrigerators to different standards, too. It doesn't matter that they slept with men. Do you fucking understand what a correlation means? If not just ask to explain and learn from it, instead of embarrassing yourself. They slept with men, yet men with different partner counts had about the same divorce rate, whereas women with lower counts divorced less frequently. That's …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 01:03 AM
0

Sigh what a piece of shit. When women do ditch them, good for them. That would show they care about the number and men need to watch it. So far they only let few top men rack up those numbers and then marry or LTR them anyway. How does it change anything now? Data is not from a biased site are you really that dumb? The site has a link to the actual source and the author name. All data is from there, from a national survey. There were also links to other studies. You want to show me links? Show m…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:58 AM
1

Actually, you can be sure now that she is. She was arguing about studies and bias and then demonstrated complete ignorance in how studies work. No understanding of what correlation or sample is, etc. This person said that the data is sexist. Numbers. Numbers are sexist. Why? Because she disagrees. She said studies are wrong because her and her friends "defy the stats". It's pretty obvious she's arguing just to argue and not to get closer to the truth and really understand what data is out there.…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:50 AM
0

You can disagree all you want. I showed you data demonstrating and thus proving it. What would you disagree with? It's correlated with the divorce rate period. For women. ANd there's nothing good or bad about it. Bad or good are your own moral grades, this is just data it's neither. Marriage is just a word and paper. In this context, you can just use a breakup instead. Same thing. Divorce but there were no papers to begin with. Even less reasons holding a woman who had multiple partners with the…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:14 AM
0

Oh being a fucking piece of shit again. Tbh I honestly thing you're a retard at this point. After those "defy the stats" questions. I don't care about fucking men so I don't have standards for them. See, different sexes, different standards. It's up to YOU and other women to uphold men to standards. But don't expect that their standards will be the same. And, yes as multiple sources and studies show just that. No correlation with man's partner count. If you have any sources showing the opposite …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:07 AM
1

Nope. Got any other algorithm? What defines if ANY number of anything is high? It's relation to other numbers describing other elements of the relevant set.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:02 AM
1

How is this biased? That's what numbers show. The fact that you don't like numbers doesn't mean they are biased. Statistics doesn't care. It's not a joke. The study is there, the link to the source is given. All numbers can be checked, plotted and the absence of correlation shown if it's not there. No one said men were pure, there is also nothing hypocritical, or sexist, or misogynist. If data shows something you don't like, it doesn't make it any of those things. It's just data, cold and neutra…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 12:01 AM
1

Market decides, preferences of the opposite sex. If the opposite sex is not disgusted by some number, then the number is not high. Talking about girls, this number is a good estimate N=age/2-9. If it's higher, it's high. Also, if it becomes double digits after rounding up. So basically anything higher than 5 is already pushing it, and 10 is definitely being there. For men idk, seems like girls don't care about their count as much in practice. Also, the studies I linked show some numbers, for exa…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:50 PM
0

wtf is this nonsense? It has nothing to do with insecurities. Wearing a seat belt doesn't mean you're insecure. Refusing to eat shit doesn't mean you're insecure. And this is a combination of two - it's a combination of being smart about your safety and disgust. Now that's exactly what happens. Again, emotional labor and all doesn't change the fact that the partner count is correlated with divorce rate and other bad stuff. There's data and numbers showing it. I linked some sources. Do you have a…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:44 PM
1

The initial? That that's why we are obsessed with CC blahblah whatever else was in your rant. Please keep pressing parent to get there for more detail. With this links? That the partner count is not completely irrelevant and was in fact shown to be correlated with a lot of bad stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:38 PM
1

I never even used this word, how is it relevant? Don't ask me what another user meant to say in his comment. The comment is only linked because it has links to some studies. Click the links, "need no source, but common sense". The definition - and it's mine, but just a common definition - is a person with a high number of sexual partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:34 PM
1

The thread doesn't matter. Click the links. The studies are there. The facts and datat are there. Idk what a promiscuous womyn is, because Idk what womyn is. Yeah blahblahblah she can, it's the quality, not number. In the end, the number IS correlated with the quality of relationships, that's the whole point. As shown by studies. I understand that you feel that things should be like you want them to be, but regardless of your emotions we have what we have. Double standards where? There is no dou…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:25 PM
1

Idk who womyn are and if they marry or divorce men, but what you said is irrelevant to the partner count. Also, both genders don't divorce easily. Women do. Men have to say cause courts are biased against them. But of course illiterate feminists are okay with that. It's only bad and inequality unless women benefit. But yeah, the partner count of women is correlated with the divorce rate regardless of those reasons. Sure, maybe something kills romance, but maybe it's cause of all those dicks she …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:21 PM
1

I'm sorry, how.. What? If your degree is not in science, after saying I see that it also can't be in psychology or sociology or anything like that. What is it then? These are such obvious things. No studies discredit people's personal experience. No people's personal experiences defy the stats. They are the part of the stats. You know, that part that is the smaller percentage. Say, a study (any, not necessarily related to this thread at all) shows something for the majority of cases, there's sti…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 11:11 PM
1

It's not a competition(maybe would be between 2 men or 2 women), not to mention that most men can't do that even if they want to. Men can also pee while standing up without as much trouble as women. Different sexes, different sexual challenges. No one said there's repercussions. I don't know about that. All I'm saying is there's no correlation with the divorce rate. There might be other repercussions. But no, no repercussions regarding things I was talking about. It's not even me who's saying it…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 10:54 PM
1

It is, it is relevant. Because it's correlated with the divorce rate. If it wasn't relevant, there would be no correlation - just like there is no such correlation with men's partner count. Men's partner count turns out to be irrelevant, indeed. Oh you believe it? Now THAT is irrelevant. People get together with different people. Regardless of what you believe, it is shown that the correlation is there and the count means something. Is it the only factor? Maybe not. Is it one of the factors and …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 08:07 PM
1

See, and that's how I still know you have nothing to do with science. You are so easily affected by a selection bias and don't even notice that? And arguing with studies when all you know is people you personally know? Really?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 08:04 PM
1

Just that - no, trolling and down voting for disagreeing does, tho. Could simply refer to studies and not downvote as rules say and since downvoting is for irrelevant content, not for the one you disagree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 08:03 PM
1

1) Are there any links at all? You would remember some key phrases or titles or something to find some info about it. 2) No one is blaming anyone. No one is blaming women. Study simply shows that the divorce rate is correlated with the number of sexual partners of women. Also, it's not just about that. A lot of other things, too. But no one is blaming women for divorce because of that - women with low partner count don't divorce as much for example. Two to tango is irrelevant here. IT's a fact -…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 05:31 PM
1

I need no source, but common sense. That's how I know you aren't a scientist. Common sense means nothing. It was not found, that's all. Two different sexes can work differently. Or don't you understand what a correlation is? And what do you mean takes two to tango? Yeah it does, but it's possible that one of the two gets tired faster than the other. Has nothing to do with common sense. Turns out that women with more sexual partners divorce men regardless of their partner count, whereas the rever…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 05:27 PM
1

you stopped breaking rules, so already half way from piece of shit back to human. Can stop here, still waiting for links, titles or any ways to see the studies where feminists prove their points and a proof that studies are fake ass and propaganda in another dialogue.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 05:14 PM
1

Yes, I did. see Above. The number of partners is correlated with a lot of bad stuff - including divorce rate, cheating, etc. All those studies were linked multiple times here. You on the other hand started spewing some nonsense about menz and womenz, and bias in peer-reviewed journals, and some studies showing the opposite(?), but there are no such studies known, they weren't discussed here, and you never mentioned them when asked. In fact, I clearly remember one of the studies saying no such co…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 05:10 PM
1

Whatever you call it. Don't be a piece of shit, if you expect others to be civil. I was nothing but civil until you started down voting stuff that is relevant to the thread and was basically replying to you, so was relevant even to the sub-thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 05:01 PM
1

The discussion is possible if you have any arguments. I am being civil, calling you out on acting like a piece of shit is not less civil than acting like a piece of shit in the first place. You were presented with an argument, instead of giving a counter argument you went into trolling and started downvoting even earlier even though you should only downvote stuff that is irrelevant to the thread like bots, ads, or discussing completely different subjects.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:52 PM
1

Which still doesn't change the fact that you mentioned no studies or even results of the studies, and that the rule 8 is there, and that you shouldn't down vote simply for disagreeing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:50 PM
1

I am not present myself as stoic or anything. I am definitely calm. It's just a simple constatation of fact, nothing emanates from the screen. You must be projecting because didn't like that you called out for acting like a piece of shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:11 PM
0

First of all, I did. And brought up surveys that were linked here multiple times and are well known by everyone, whereas you started trolling in response and when asked to say what surveys you are talking about so I could search for them,kept trolling. Secondly, rule 8. There is no downward-facing arrow enabled in this sub. Only one pill to upvote. You'd need to go out of your way not to follow rule 8 and either install something enabling that arrow or go to profile or something. Either way - bo…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:08 PM
1

Being a piece of shit without using curse words is still being a piece of shit. That's less civil than not being a piece of shit but using curse words. Content>form.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:04 PM
1

I don't stalk you or memorize things like that. Nor do I ask you about the title, I'm just stating that it's not in science. Do I believe you that they are stalkers? Sure they might be? Do I believe you you went to uni? Sure, just not a science degree. I mean why wouldn't you, there are more girls than guys in universities. Achievements? Any educated contact with what subject? And no, everyone needs to explain their opinions if asked. I do, for example. Can't believe you even bring it up, when y…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/17 04:02 PM
0

Not losing anything. Typing all this with an absolutely neutral face and normal heart beat. You're a piece of shit, that's all. No bitterness.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 10:30 PM
0

nah, it's the opposite of what you said. Have degrees and shit to prove it. But no need to be civil to a piece of shit, who can't follow a discussion and starts (and keeps) downvoting. Lol, sure. So, feminists prove their points means bs to you, but when menz do the same is "science", "biotroots". Pathetic. That is not civil either. Links were not presented or mentioned, whereas what I'm talking about is all over the place in the sub. Combined with down votes it told me everything I need to know…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 10:29 PM
0

I'm neither. It's very sad, on the other hand, that you can't handle the truth or even logic and are just being a pathetic piece of shit, down voting people and not replying to actual arguments. And no, nothing wrong with responding. But you keep down voting like fucking piece of shit that you are, when no one is touching you and the rules mention not doing it. But yeah,enjoy being a piece of crap and breaking the rules without being punished.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 10:28 PM
1

So as I thought, you've never written a thesis. And hey, good for your and your bf. Now why would it matter and how is it relevant? I explained many times above. It's not the N count you love someone for? Well, it's also not,say, literacy you love someone for, then how would be education relevant? And it can be said about anything else. It's a combination of all things that matters. Huh? Who's belittling or rejecting anything? Where did I say I didn't believe you went to uni? Everyone and their …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 10:18 PM
0

pathetic piece of shit keeps doing what pieces of shit do.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 09:34 PM
0

and you keep being a piece of shit
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 06:59 PM
0

Nope, you were not. The moment you started going out of your way to down vote you were a piece of shit. And nope, the content is more important than the form. Would be polite and civil to a human, but not to a piece of shit. Let alone your dunning-kruger in the last stage, maybe you shouldn't claim stuff you have no idea about.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 06:37 PM
1

Do you have a thesis? I highly highly doubt it. Well, unless it's in stamp collecting, because the logic just isn't there, sorry. Yeah, there's difference. If she kissed but didn't sleep, it's not as bad. In that case there's not much difference if she kissed a guy or a girl. Well, that could also sound like that woman cares so much that she avoids bringing up. And no, I don't debate your worth. You do whatever you want. I just wouldn't want to date, like you wouldn't want to date a fat guy or a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 06:23 PM
0

Yeah, crap. My mouth - as well as education - is just fine. And when you're acting like a piece of shit going out of your way to downvote, then not sure why you expect to be called something else. You are what you do.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 06:07 PM
1

Neither am I, has nothing to do with fear, or I would be afraid to go the restroom.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 04:42 AM
1

absolutely nothing ridiculous or unfair. Also, have nothing to do with mgtow. How is my standard sexist? It applies to both sexes - I'm not fond of anyone who had a lot of dicks. If a partner has a huge count it tells a lot about that partner and to me it's not perfect by definition. IF you gladly would be with a guy who had a lot of dick - more power to you. If you'd get over it. But you probably shouldn't say that until you have that experience. You are then fighting a strawman you built yours…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 04:39 AM
1

it's all summarized above. And many times in other threads. It's disgusting, if the number is high that implies that all the dudes got it easy probably casually, I'd really need no self-respect to chase it seriously. It just cuts off any romantic feelings to a person automatically. I get it you would gladly be with with a guy who sucked a lot of dicks? And I mean what is the problem anyway? If a girl isn't attracted to a fat or short guy, there usually are no questions asked?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 04:26 AM
1

Absolutely no problem with them. Not sure why you thought no one will ever call you out on your crap.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/17 04:24 AM
1

TIL a man's wallet is equal to a woman's womb. Hey, if you know how I can fill my wallet without spending time and my body, I'm all ears. Which is it? In this case? Biology. Because we don't have the technology yet. The abilities of a society's technology has and always will inform the laws that we put in place. Technology drives change and reform. So if it's biology, then a man's biological ability to just walk away should be protected by the law, too. Equality. always gets back to this. Dude j…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 05:18 PM
1

That's a rare situation but if that was the case there should be grounds for prosecution. Because uninformed consent is technically rape. False. THere was a case already http://www.uptownmagazine.com/2014/02/woman-used-sperm-oral-sex-get-pregnant-get-child-support/ or google philips v irons. The point of the argument was - you can't put all responsibility on a man anyway. It's not just his fault. In fact, it's HER who gets all the consequences, so she shouldn't thought about it in advance.. Ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/17 09:05 PM
1

I am male. You sound like women when they say they want "nice guys" lol like "duh, of course I meant I want attractive nice guys!" On PPD its silly to make that assumption without pointing it out. Unless anyone still reading this thread disagrees? Just like with nice guys, it's clear for everyone here that "attractive" is implied in reality. Yet, I had to specify because you would bring up ugly girls. I thought you knew. Grass is always greener. No matter which path you take, there's always a sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/17 08:36 PM
1

I did not assume this. Why would it be obvious? I guess it's not if you're not a guy. In future, please assume that when men mention anything about wanting anything to do with women, you add "attractive enough" or "hot" - it's just implied. In this particular case definitely everyone is talking about sleeping with cute/hot chicks, I promise. Well since now we're on the same page... yeah Well .. yeah . lol The peace of mind of not being sex-starved is a good feeling, but you don't need to be able…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 08:32 PM
1

It's almost as bad as murder. Similarly to murder you take away person's opportunity to live the life he wants to live. And he might end up with a person he would never want to end up with if he knew the truth and he will live the life he would never want to live. Or if that cheating leads to pregnancy - then it is basically genetic murder if the man doesn't know he's not father and raises somebody else's genetic lineage while not reproducing himself.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 08:21 PM
1

So....ban abortion? Have I got that right? Or protect men's biological freedoms/options, too. Either give both sexes rights to be in control of their body in regard with pregnancy (have or not have a baby, stay or not stay with a mother) or take rights away from both until come up with a way to not treat them with such bias. Or stfu about equality. No protection should be considered towards the child? "more than 90 some percent cases" what? that doesn't sound like a complete sentence. .. a child…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 08:19 PM
1

The bar is not high. It's just most guys would prefer not to go around fucking the ugliest, slutty chicks on a constant basis. Which is understandable. There's not much benefit to fucking loads of girls anyway. It is insanely high. It's obviously assumed that no one is talking about ugliest chicks. There are guys who fuck loads of average to hot girls. That bar is insanely high. And there's a lot of benefit to it: being happy and in control of ones' sexuality, not to mention variety and confiden…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 08:03 PM
1

In regards to the Slut and Stud double standard TRPers always tell us that it isn't a double standard because it's a fact that women don't care about the sexual past of their partners and that no high value man would date a slut. That's not why it's not a double standard. It's not a double standard because they are two different sexes so they have two different sets of standards. But I'm open to hear all why you think that this isn't true. But most importantly that the method makes this "researc…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 07:42 PM
1

"A man is worth" lol It's not "just" and not "or". He necessarily has to be attractive to his target audience. The bar is high. Many men who would like to fuck loads of girls will never do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 07:16 PM
1

well this is a different discussion because we can't force a woman to give birth where abortion is a legal right. Bodily autonomy is where this blocker is unmovable. Until technology catches up. There's nowhere to go from there. Well, then it should not be a legal right if a man has no legal right for financial abortion. If she wants that legal right, she should be ready to fully take responsibilities for her decision. His wallet, not 'his body' As long as we're allowing abortion in the country …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 07:14 PM
1

False. YOU are the one basing your arguments on emotions and feelings and "should"s. My argument is logic based. Hygiene and education aren't needs, one can survive without them. Of course a shirt has to be laundered. He can be home without a shirt while it's being laundered.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 07:08 PM
1

Then there's no obligation? How is this relevant? EDIT: I realise I missed that part of the question. I know that in certain states or whatever a man has financial obligation to a child that isn't his. Yeah that's fucked I don't agree. Aha, you already got that. That's just a symptom and another evidence how the law is biased against men. And now you QA works the other way around and can be applied to a woman as well. Moreover, if you're saying a man shouldn't have any choice, then it's only fai…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 10:15 PM
1

No, because only a worthy man can get a high n-count. YOu can't compare these two things like that. You can't say that 1 meter is longer than 1 kelvin. They are things with different units.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 10:09 PM
1

This is coming off a post about double standards on n count. The crux of the debate was that getting sex and dates is easier for women. There is no double standards on n count. There are 2 different sets of standards for 2 different sexes and they aren't based on whether or not it's easy to get. With the rest I agree, but they just won't do that because they don't need to. Demand-supply. As long as they are perfectly happy with who approached them compared to who they can get if they approached,…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 10:07 PM
1

It's not encouraged by puritan thinking. It's encouraged by ages of evolution. Many girls do feel disgusted by promiscuous guys. Many don't. Because they are attracted to the qualities that enable his promiscuity to begin with. And it's not about just slutting around. Most guys don't "ew" at girls who slut around with other girls exclusively. When your puritan thinking WOULD make them ew at that. But no. It's all about having a dick of another man. Yes. Always did for humans. The optimal strateg…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:55 PM
1

No, "Should" is a moral obligation to begin with, and no one can tell if a certain man should or shouldn't care about the kid. If the system would only benefit the kid, I would probably understand it, but there's no control over it. And it doesn't answer my other examples. What if it's not his kid? And the argument was different and I was arguing with a different statement too. About biological inequality and such. It's not biological. It's pure discrimination.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:51 PM
1

Utilities (kids take way more baths and require laundry be done way more often), another $75 for the kid's share probably. No, they don't require laundry and they don't require more baths. That's already way more than needs. That's already extra. Needs and desires are different things. Groceries, for a conservative estimate, $300 per month. If the kid eats one third of the food, we are down to $89.50. It doesn't have to be $300 per month to meet kid's needs. Gas money to get the kid to school an…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:48 PM
1

Nope. Our structure adds more inequality to it, it doesn't follow it. If it did, it would protect biological advantages of both sexes. That's inequality before the law, not just biological. The law doesn't treat sexes fairly. Repeating you again - just because it happens, doesn't mean it should happen. Let's not forget cases where a man can not know that the child isn't his - say didn't have a reason to suspect - and then turns out it wasn't his, yet he can't opt out. That's not fair. And in thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:25 PM
1

Doesn't matter. I don't care about how hard they work. Some men don't work hard for it at all. Had many dicks inside - disgusting regardless of the motivation. You were talking about biological differences? There you have it. Only one can be a baby-carrier. The other one biologically is risking to raise someone else's babies if doesn't find sluts disgusting to commit to. Add hundreds of thousands of years of evolution to that. No double standard here at all. None whatsoever. Standards aren't def…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:22 PM
1

Wouldn't call it a double standard because Before it was: Adult and Adult No, it never was that. It was chaser and selector. It was a person who can't get pregnant and person who can. Baby-carrier IS a part of what defines sex, that's why sexual standards aren't double. The presence of the child changes the entire approach. The unjust inequality is because pregnancy and abortion is biologically unequal. Nope. Biological inequality is fair because it's natural, but we are changing it. Biologicall…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 09:18 PM
1

A child doesn't need to go to Disneyland, a child doesn't need to be happy in order to stay alive. If a man is soo concerned for the child he should opt for joint custody. Yep. doesn't need to. If a man was concerned, he wouldn't want to abort to begin with - that's the scenario I'm discussing. Since he couldn't afford, now his priority is not to pay 1 cent more than absolutely needed. What? Is this a rule/law that's enforced? It could be. Just there's a rule that a man can't have a say in wheth…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 08:03 PM
1

No, that's not a double standard. Both are adults? Have the same standards in that field, sure. As in - can apply for driving license etc. Consent? Sure. But slut-stud? Not a double standard. Not a standard related to them being adult at all. It's related to their sexes. Two different sexes, two different standards. Chasers and selectors.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 07:55 PM
1

It's not a double standard. Two different sexes - two different sets of standards regarding sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 07:14 PM
1

That's just wrong. It's not only about who was the chooser. It's also (and mostly) about a number of dicks she interacted with. Don't believe me? It's easy to check. Most guys wouldn't mind if she had sex with other women (or maybe will even be glad and hope that they can bring other girls for both of them). 1 female partner is not equal to 1 male partner in her count
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 07:12 PM
1

Oh yes, of course she can. But only half of the part that the kid will eat should be eligible to spend CS on. Say, a box of spaghetti is worth 1$. Because an adult woman eats more than a kid, let's say, the kid will eat 20% of that box (the actual % can easily be estimate and is probably already known anyway). Then only 20c out of that 1$ were spent on a kid. Half of that amount has to be paid by his mother. So 1$ of spaghetti had 10c of the CS in it. NOT 50c. Same applies to apartments. And eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 07:08 PM
1

This is unlikely. But in that event it would be a case of neglect of the child wasn't adequately cared for. We have already systems in place for that event. Likely or not, it is possible in principle. hahahahaha! Do you have kids? That would be a terrible idea. That's not an argument. Or maybe a lot of things. But the burden of 'proof' is not practical in this hypothetical So because it requires extra steps to prove, let's just not require the proof and shit all over fathers? No, I disagree with…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 07:05 PM
1

That's putting a roof over her head,too. And it's not like a kid absolutely needs his own bedroom. There are full families where kids don't have that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/17 06:42 PM
0

I don't think that's a better system when you look at the day-to-day of parenting If the alternative is that father's money can be spent by mother on anything but a kid, then it is better. It's about justice and fair treatment of everyone in this situation. Who makes those decisions to what the kid wears? is it simply randomly assigned package labeled (clothes for your kid) who arranges this and delivery? All this is overhead from the govt which usually means = increased taxes. Either a kid (if …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 11:02 PM
0

No, I'm not making anything up and the last thing I base my arguments on is feeling towards anything. It IS logic and indeed it doesn't matter what you or I believe. I'm not "trying" to call it anything. I'm calling it what it is. See, another beauty of logic is that if something is illogical - you can show it. But in this case you can't, because the statement is true and your statement wasn't true in general. Again, You can't say that all mothers spend every cent of that money on a kid. Not eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 10:50 PM
0

It very well might be 80/20. 80/20 includes those who have sex once a year into 80 (or a few times a year, but still, the study doesn't say anything about frequency and the number women), don't you think?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 11:21 PM
1

Everywhere where there is supply and demand and where people (or other subjects) exchange things - economic terms are applicable.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 09:00 PM
1

It's so high that many men on tinder can't "afford" a pussy they would like. And either have to settle for a much cheaper one or stay with 0 matches and 0 result.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 06:06 PM
1

Sorry, but the analogy is bad. Is there a low that forbids drunk sex in any form? No. Is it possible that she had drunk sex and won't accuse anyone of rape? Yes. In that very thread someone was saying that if she's tipsy it's ok or something along the lines. Now is tattooing prohibited under any degree of influence? Or is it legal if a person is like drunk but not too much and knows or thinks that he knows what he's doing, etc?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:13 PM
1

I honestly don't understand what you don't get. As I stated in the beginning - faithfulness has to be included in that definition whatever it is. And then you ask me so what is definition? Doesn't matter, but it has to include that. And speaking of bible - commandments... You shall not commit adultery. Pretty straightforward. I've no idea how you can't understand that loyalty is a very old concept. Definition? This one will work for now: Love - feeling of deep emotional and sexual attachment, in…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 08:07 PM
1

No, just like in the comment where it all started. Being okay with other men putting their dicks in her. Loving her. Pick one. Nope, the burden of proof starts with the first affirmative claim, which was pretty much what you said in your first paragraph here. Sex with other people is compatible with love. Being penetrated by another dick isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 06:44 PM
1

No, don't forget the context. We are discussing men being okay with other men sticking their dicks into and defiling the women they love. OF COURSE you won't find a word about love in THAT article, because it has NOTHING to do with love. That's the whole point. And of course I shouldn't prove that love is NOT letting that happen. I would need to prove that it IS letting that happen, because that's an affirmative claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/17 09:36 PM
2

Title misleading. Expected to read why women like rimming men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 05:20 PM
1

All these words are just that - words. The reality and results is all that matters. And the fact is - no matter what you say - that most men can and go get LTR but can't and don't get casual sex. Men are more choosy picking LTR because it's easier than getting casual sex. They can't afford being as choosy with casual sex, because they might just not get it. You are telling me that if a wife told her husband that she wanted to start just having casual sex and he is not okay with this, it's becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 04:00 PM
1

Gross. http://imgur.com/247XSDb
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:57 PM
1

Keep looking. The article didn't have that word, of course. Because it was about women taking dicks of other men. This has nothing to do with love, that's why you don't see that word there.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:41 PM
1

This is not a biology study. This is a sociology study at best. The data is self-reported and doesn't matter. The whole field is not better than astrology with reproducibility rate of 40% and not meeting simple criteria of science. It's not science, so who cares? Even if it was science and anyone cared, the fact that data is self-report - and it was shown that women lie about sex stuff - would be enough to dismiss it. No physics or chemistry study is based on teh questionnaire. If they didn't WA…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 08:39 PM
1

Keep looking then. It's the one that includes/implies that you don't want a woman you love to take dicks of other men. And idk simple google search would show something like this http://www.bibleinfo.com/en/topics/adultery with relevant parts of bible written.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 05:32 PM
1

That's patently false. It is easier to get LTR than casual sex. In case of LTR stuff like "oh well he's not super hot, but he's kind to me, treats me well, etc etc" works. For casual sex it doesn't matter. You can't make up for the lack of attractiveness as much. For men it's vice versa because LTR is easier to get. So men's standards are higher for LTR, but lower for casual sex - they will fuck whoever is DTF because why not? With women - it's the opposite, because men's standards are lower and…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 05:27 PM
1

It's not open no matter how you want it to be. And woman being loyal to a man she loves is a very old concept, there's literally nothing to argue about for poets and philosophers, it's in the bible even. Trying to bend the definition to justify slutting around is the only possible reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 08:37 PM
1

I thought it was pretty clear that it's defined through sexual success there. If he gets all the sex he wants - he's an alpha, if not - then not/beta.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:56 PM
1

For what men? For men in general? That would imply all men and then you're wrong. For some men = the minority of men? Sure, no one ever argued with that duh. But talk about back pedaling, facepalm. Re-read the post, it's written as if it was about men in general. And if it's about the minority of men? Then the view is wrong - you can't say they aren't more selective, there's just not enough men to see any trend. But those few men who do have freedom? They are obviously selective - unless you're …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:50 PM
1

I'm not back pedaling, I'm explaining what I actually meant to say, because you didn't understand at first. Not everyone is a native english speaker. Once again - add or not add that billion, most men DO NOT live there anyway. Therefore, in fact, there's no sexual freedom. What percentage of population should be able to get a legal prostitute 24/7 so that you can say there's freedom? I'll remind you, that 13% of population of US were slaves and apparently it wasn't negligible enough (or 87% of f…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:49 PM
1

Who says I'm making that decision? And who says I was making that decision? oO Your definition. They have a different definition which is the only definition that is valid for them. That's the thing about love, you don't get to define it for anyone but yourself. It's not MY definition, it's the initial definition. No, that's not how it works. You can't redefine words that are already defined. Call it something else but love - like luff or something - and no one would argue. Words have definition…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:40 PM
1

LOL facepalm. Yeah they are all special snowflakes. And who are you to decide that they love each other, huh? What anyone says is worthless. Actions and definitions is what matters. Allowing other men to fuck your women is an objective action that can be observed and happens to not fit the definition. Nah, you have no idea what you're talking about. You and those people just rationalize your behavior, so you can seemingly get the best of two worlds without making choices and facing consequences.…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 05:27 PM
1

So they won't have any freedom, because they won't be able to have sex with who they desire. Nah, crappy idea. At least now they have a shot because they can make up for the lack of physical attractiveness. lol you're proposing a system where only rich people can make any good money. Poor people can make money as long as they don't take anyone else's money. No, they don't have any rights or any benefit out of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 03:39 PM
1

No, it doesn't. They are in relationships and fuck each other and fuck other people. No contradiction. He was talking about men loving their women. If those men loved their women, they wouldn't be ok with them getting fucked by other men. That's his point and no contradiction so far.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 03:37 PM
1

What you meant to say is that sexual freedom exists for men with money and time off who can afford travelling. I know tons of men who have none of that sexual freedom you're talking about. And it's not freedom for men. It's just freedom rich people always had.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:53 PM
1

At least they don't die virgins and do have ways to get sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:46 PM
1

Nope. Only if it's ALL people having sex with who they desire. Because otherwise you're saying let's give freedom to some people but completely revoke it from other people. Most men wouldn't have freedom, so how is this freedom?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:43 PM
1

The use is just fine and not sure how what you said contradicts what he said. He never said anything about men in all types of relationships. He said men don't allow a woman they love to etc. Not "a woman they are in relationships with".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:13 PM
1

If it doesn't make it better for the majority and in fact makes it worse, then there's no reason to stop propagating "you have to be this or that". Simple. There will always be people who are sick or poor. Doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:06 PM
1

It's both. First of all, the more guys the more likely it is someone got it better. But also of course taking multiple dicks itself is just gross and disgusting whether she worked harder for those guys or not. Don't forget, that in most cases high count means those were casual partners. So it's already something they got better - she slept with them and didn't mind if they slept with others.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 06:40 PM
1

yep, this is why what you said is irrelevant and definitely doesn't help to make you point stronger. It's doing the opposite, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 06:32 PM
1

Factor 1/3 out. They can give a combination of sex and money. 1/3*(sex+money). Or if we consider sex a resource, kinda like money but separate, then yes 1/3 of money and sex. I mean, for some reason people who have money do give them away so that those who don't have them contribute. And again, if you read the 2nd paragraph there's a way not to give sex away. Just pay for it with the part of the money.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 03:39 PM
1

Doesn't mean everyone will want it to stay that or that it should stay that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 03:36 PM
1

It kinda does in a way. Just like he's forced to work for others and is basically 1/3 slave, might as well make people give away 1/3 of the sex they have. But in this case even that is not necessary. Just have prostitutes on salary paid by government(tax payers just like they pay for other stuff for other people). Sure, top prostitutes can afford have their own rates and be paid per visit (which incels have an option of doing too btw), but some women/girls might want to sell sex for the fixed pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 06:34 PM
1

women already go for the guythey want, which already leaves most guys in the cold, getting leftovers after top men.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 05:23 PM
1

He is. The government takes 30% of his time/labor. IF he starts working 30% less time - he won't keep all the money he made. He'll make less and will still have to give X% of it away.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 05:13 PM
1

yeah lol, surprised you even have to explain this. How dense should one be not to understand it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 05:11 PM
2

so you don't ignore anyone in public places?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/17 06:59 PM
2

Why would I feel sympathy for rude people? oO why not? These are two absolutely separate things. A person can be in a situation where he needs sympathy even if he's rude, you know. Also, there's hardly anything rude in ignoring your friend. They came to talk to you and had 0 interest in talking to her. Don't you ignore people you pass by on the street and have 0 interest in talking with?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/17 06:57 PM
0

lol with reproducibility rate of 40% or so it's WORSE than guessing. Knowledge my ass.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/17 04:57 PM
1

The rule was in the movie because it's funny. It's told by the deep shit character and the deep shit female character. It's funny how they juxtapose the two characters saying opposite things. You can't even read humor. Nope. The rule is there because it's there. It was NOT invented for the movie. Also, they say the opposite things because men and women are two opposite sexes.... I mean, how can you even not understand why they are saying the opposite things after reading this sub? Oh, so if she …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/17 04:36 PM
3

Fuckbuddy/casual sex partners is already a red flag. It's actually good if they are vastly different in the sense that she doesn't have them, but has serious boyfriends.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/17 04:01 PM
1

Yes. Yes he was. That IS WHY the rule was in the movie at all. Because if it wasn't important to him, then it wouldn't add to the plot or characters at all. Also, yes he was hoping she didn't move on. And why would that be related to her number if as you're saying the movie's message was that it's ok for a girl to fuck left and right? BECAUSE if she got fucked by other guys - that in fact means she moved on. Because fucking around is NOT ok. That's the message. For men, fucking with others insti…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/17 04:00 PM
1

I think you need to rewatch the movie. The point is your next sentence. Moreover, he's proven wrong - the girl didn't actually inflate her number, which emphasizes the fact that the asshole was just talking bullshit. Which is so important because Kevin was DISGUSTED by a thought that she did. But SHE DIDN'T AND IT IS GOOD! The message is very clear - a guy is disgusted by a slut, but is happy that she turns out not to be one and didn't inflate her number. And yes HE IS. That is why he is relieve…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 09:13 PM
1

No it wasn't and I demonstrated it with the links. This conversation is about that. Oh and no. Sleeping with boyfriends is 1 thing. Hooking up with multiple guys = slut and the other thing. And you can't pretend you or those girls who hook up didn't know it. They know perfectly well guys don't appreciate sluts. And I'll ask again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9oVoJMVsKtk Here. Did they edit the movie and cut these scene out of it in Canada?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 08:45 PM
1

No, you can't. You can't even follow 2 sentences and say I said I would like something when I was commenting about how things were in the past. You absolutely can't know if men women in your entourage are dating have less or more talent or are less or more attractive. Not to mention, that other things you said about those women are questionable and if they had hookups, cheated, etc - they wouldn't necessarily tell you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 07:16 PM
1

I can, you are the one who said I've heard some other people say in their upper middle class entourage, women still dated up and I said that it is possible that they are. You can't know if they are or aren't. I mean, you couldn't follow written text in another discussion - of course you can't follow things that would give you cues if they are dating up or down.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 06:47 PM
1

I actually do and if the sequence of "honest tries" is too long, then it's a slut and not someone honestly trying.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 06:38 PM
1

Nope. I'm just showing how in YOUR definition it's already implied and included. You said it yourself. re-read. "She's dating a guy who less attractive than her, who makes less money than her, who has less talents than her..."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 05:38 PM
1

You've said women who have sex before marriage are doing something that their partners don't want them to do. ---> That's false because most men want women to have sex before marriage and they are often the ones who insist. Eh really? From creators of "this is hamstering". OF course they insist. Do you see the difference between having sex with that man and getting fucked by many other guys? Because it's the former that I meant men don't appreciate in their partners - if they are sluts and have …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 05:37 PM
1

You are mistaking me for someone. Never said anything about hypergamy. Besides, in this scenario he could have more talents than her and there's no redefining happening. Or he could be more attractive. The only thing you can possibly know is who makes more money.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 05:23 PM
1

It shows how messed up you are. What's important to you is to possess the woman, not to have regular sex. No, and not sure you are licensed to say if anyone is messed up. It's not important for me to posses a woman, it's important for me to find a woman I want to find. Which implies certain criteria. What's wrong with that? Or are you about to say that expecting her to be monogamous is to try to posses and control her? Yeah, but it's happening less than before. Before it was the norm, now people…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 05:20 PM
1

Not bad. How is it relevant to what I"m saying? It's only making my point stronger - women weren't as slutty. They wouldn't even sleep with their husbands sometimes, let alone strangers. p.s. What you described is happening now too :) check out deadbedrooms.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 05:03 PM
1

Maybe they are dating up just in a different sense. Either way, gender equality has nothing to do with it. In fact, it's due to social inequality and their fear to lose what they have if they lose their reputation :)
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 04:58 PM
1

Hyperboles aren't supposed to be accurate. That's the whole point.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/17 03:36 PM
1

So you decided to add even more nothing to the discussion? Because he just expressed his feelings about the situation and did add something, because the amount of hours per week (even exaggerated) wasn't mentioned before. But you correcting what was obvious to everyone anyway definitely adds nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 08:44 PM
1

yawn. the point was that it's too much work for little - more often none - reward. Literally, everyone but you got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 08:19 PM
1

By that logic I shouldn't believe the red pill either as it uses field reports to describe sexual dynamics. The difference is that social sciences use sampling which make their conclusions much more representative and accurate. Of course you shouldn't. Do you? Self-reported stuff is unreliable. Reproducibility rate below 50% - it's worse than guessing. And don't remember redpill claiming to be science. And how does it matter if it's representative? All that matters that explains and predicts cer…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/17 08:17 PM
1

The amount of time didn't have to be accurate. We all got the point and he's not wrong. Are you here just to argue for the sake of arguing?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/17 08:31 PM
1

Ok, show me actual science then. RP field reports don't count. The actual science is physics. Or chemistry. Or biology. They don't deal with crap like this. It might be 10 years old, but I couldn't find a single study that supports your argument. Which doesn't mean it doesn't exist. You found the one that doesn't support yours either. Previous studies didn't look at the experience level of the partners, like this one did. Previous studies reported stated preference rather than actual mating. Act…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/17 08:30 PM
1

For some reason you found it appropriate to correct his exaggeration. Why if not to say that it's not bad? Because of course it's not 16 hours a day, we all understood it. What it means is that you spent X hours a day for 3 months just to get laid once. Even X=1 is too much.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/17 08:10 PM
1

It is crap. I guarantee that. Simply because it's not actual science. But the answer to your question? because you're mixing 2 different types of attractiveness now. Which one are you talking about? For sex or for LTR? p.s. can you really take research seriously when it's 1) Outdated. More than 10 years old. 2) Basically starts with "Studies has shown mixed support" etc. And no wonder. They will show mixed support of the point of this paper as well, I guarantee it. Reproducibility rate is very l…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/17 05:46 AM
1

Yes, there was a typo. And no In that case, how do men sleep with promiscuous women if they don't want promiscuous women? There is no contradiction here, because men never minded sleeping with promiscuous women. Getting casual sex is hard, and if promiscuous women give it away, why not take advantage? They aren't that keen on having relationships with them, but sleeping is fine. Don't forget, that most men can't sleep with promiscuous women and it's men who chase and women who choose who gets se…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/17 06:13 PM
1

Not plenty. Otherwise men wouldn't consider one girls like that as something special. I've never talked to a girl like that or heard any of my friends tell stories. Or maybe there are girls, but they only don't need to be gamed by 20% guys and need to be gamed by everyone else? Well then your point didn't change anything, whether it's true or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/17 05:47 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/6ivqd1/discussion_the_alleged_double_standard_of_sluts/djb8j2f/ Ok, then you include yourself in sluts. Either way, you weren't talking about yourself. And either way - no excuse, because sluts more than anyone see how men jump through the hoops to get laid and how only some of them can get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/17 04:24 PM
1

Your viewpoint doesn't matter in this case. It's about what it actually is, not how you see it. You sound like a guy who says that getting grocery is not a transaction because somehow someone gives it to him for free. Also, let's not forget, what you said: Because we don't see sex as a transaction, just something fun you do. And then repeated and bolded we: Did you miss the part where I said we don't see sex as a transaction. It was never about you, even when you first started this. You were tal…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/17 07:37 PM
1

Because I've never been in an LTR? How is that relevant? The last sentence clearly explains that it's not about you in particular. I don't have sex with everyone because that's physically impossible. I don't have infinite time to give everyone a go. I don't require different effort. I require as much effort in that I don't have to put in any. I try to make it very simple. I find you attractive, so come over to my place and fuck me. And yes, I don't find every guy attractive, but I also make it c…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/06/17 03:36 PM
1

No, if you ask a genuine question cause you don't know something or want to hear opinions about something - that's not trollling. I argue for the sport of it. It's enjoyable. And now THAT is arguing in bad faith and trolling.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 06:50 PM
1

Greater genetic variance. Yes, so? That's besides the point. There are two different sexes period. Again, either. Sex is sex. No, sex with men as a woman is taking dicks. Sex with women as a men is giving dick. They are different mechanically and obviously partners are different. So which is it? Sex with men or sex with women? How so? Explained right after. Are you seriously coming to debate and don't read the whole thing before replying? smh Ah, because you can't read. I'm not demonizing women …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 06:49 PM
1

???? so then your research is crap or how do promiscuous men sleep with men if women don't want them? But then again, you didn't show any research. I could as well claim that there's research showing the opposite. Nope, women want same types of men, that's why some men become promiscuous. And yeah they don't want men who get fucked by other men, not men who fuck women. No clue how your comment was relevant to what I said tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/17 06:40 PM
1

I totally understood. You totally don't understand how the described-life scenarios are among things represented.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/17 12:18 AM
1

Trolling is fishing for reaction and response. Why would I report anyone? And why would I care what mods who are people and can be dumb would say? They aren't presenting their own claims. And those claims are already explained by others. So what's the point? Are you trying to understand the claims or to make others feel bad/make yourself better than them?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/17 12:16 AM
1

Either. Sex is sex. No. There's a reason there are two sexes and sexual dimorphism is a thing. 99% people who had sex with women reported that they weren't penetrated. More than 50% people who had sex with men reported that they were penetrated. So which sex? With men or with women? Which is exactly what the people you're arguing against believe. To us it is the same sex. So it's you who has double standards then. Because people you're arguing against don't believe that. They demonize both men a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/17 12:13 AM
2

Nope, ons, fwb, short-term relationships are not normal stuff and are under her control. Of course, it's easy for a woman to get high numbers. That's one of the reasons it's not respected.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 11:49 PM
1

Consent doesn't matter in the count. You count a number of dicks she interacted with. Nonconsensual sex is still sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 11:43 PM
1

It is hypocritical to demonize women for having sex while idolizing men for the doing the same. For having sex with men or with women? It's only hypocritical if you demonize them for having the same sex. Look up a definition of hypocrisy. I do X but judge you for doing X = hypocrite. But in this case it's I don't do X and judge you for doing X. And that's not hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 10:48 PM
1

There's tons of logic, as I said. And you can find it all. Debates are not held for the sake of debates. But I see, yeah you're just here to argue. I was right in the previous comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 10:35 PM
1

It's not about different people being charged different prices. It's about the milk being free for everyone, and one sucker who chooses to pay for it. That is literally a special cases of different people being charged different prices. Yes, I covered this under "particularly thirsty". It's not about what some are ready to do. It's about what some men have to do. Realize, that lots of men in LTR wouldn't get just casual sex from their SOs. I would even say - most.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 10:32 PM
1

Literally no one who does that can read and/or understands logic. Call it unfair, complain that you don't like it, but it's not hypocrite. Different combinations of sexes of partners = different standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 07:42 PM
1

That's the thing. For some men entering a relationship IS payment for sex with a particular woman. As I said, it's fairly easy to test. At any moment check if she will have sex with him without being in a relationship like she had with others (before LTR started or stop being exclusive any time during for a bit). Only then can a man assume that she's not using sex to get a relationship from him. And if she won't have sex with him without a relationship/being exclusive but did have it with others…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 04:12 PM
1

So then wtf was that part? Also why buy the cow if the milk is free? This implies that the only reason to enter a relationship is the sex. For men with abundance mentality, this level of thirstiness is pretty foreign. Of course it doesn't imply what you said in the slightest. It's just a reminder that sex is important, a requirement for a relationship. Yet she would give it away but now won't. The test is easy - check if she'll still have sex with you without a relationship like she used to have…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 03:51 PM
1

Nope. Sleeping with a lot of partners is bs. We are talking about sex. Men and women are different sexes. The sex of a partner matters and changes everything. 99% people who had sex with women reported that they weren't penetrated. More than 50% people who had sex with men reported that they were penetrated. Many people accept that a man has the right to sleep around with women! Stop omitting that part. Men who sleep around with men are judged by many people.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 03:30 PM
1

No, there's no such thing as "lots of sex". There is lots of sex with women and lots of sex with men. If he judges her for lots of sex with men while engaging in lots of sex with men himself, then yes that's a bit hypocrite. If he judges her for lots of sex with women while engaging in lots of sex with women, then that's a bit hypocrite, too. Again, look up a definition. You don't seem to have any idea what you are talking about. A scheme like: I don't do X and expect you not to do X. - is not h…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/17 03:28 PM
0

Because it's not a double standard. It's not about who has sex. It's about who they have sex with. Having sex with men and having sex with women are 2 different things. Mostly, women are judged for sex with men. And so are men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/17 04:30 PM
1

Is foundation the only part of a building? No. But relationship with no sex is friendship.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/17 03:59 PM
0

It's not even close to it, just look up a definition. It would be a hypocrisy if he made her do something he won't do or vice versa. In this case, he doesn't have sex with men and expects her not to do much of that as well. So, it's not like he judges her for the behaviors he has, like you said. Unless you are talking about men who have sex with men, too. In that case you are right, but I don't think those men judge women for sex with men. All fair and square. Not that there's such as hypocrisy …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/17 03:40 PM
3

That's incels. I'd assume most men here are not incels, they are unhappy that they can't get all the sex they want on their terms (like other men can), not that no one will date them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 03:48 PM
1

Huh? No, you aren't being an asshole to anyone, you're just making yourself look as a try-hard. No, I wouldn't watch you or any man have sex. Again, porn mostly is focused on women and what they do, men are barely shown there if at all. There's also tons of porn with no men at all. You are just trying to trigger but you're making 0 sense. Here and in your own thread multiple people explained everything to you already. And either way, all this is besides the point. The point was - if a man wants …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 05:19 PM
1

Why do you even consider something as subjective as a "view" to be of any relevance? I don't offer my opinion or view. I'm just pointing at the definition. No, I want you to type a definition you are using so I can refer to it, otherwise you'll be saying that the definition I post (if I post it first) is wrong or whatever and the time will be wasted on that. That's why - I want you to offer a definition yourself. And I'll show you how there's nothing hypocrite based on your definition. However, …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 04:28 PM
1

No, it's not a problem. A problem is that you are making conclusions about something you have no knowledge about whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 04:10 PM
1

Ah, trying to make this about me. No, not about you. Just seeing this phrase way too much. "oh you better off without him/her". Clearly there's no agreement to be had here and you're not interested in actual conversation, so I'll move on to something else. Of course I am. I even took my time to explain and show how it's not hypocrisy. Did you google the definition yourself? Looks like you are the one not interested in a conversation. Or maybe you googled, saw the definition and that you were wro…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 04:00 PM
1

Yeah, if you watched it a few times, you'd know that you're not looking at another dude. Not to mention that there are no dudes in, say, lesbian porn. Either way, wanting anything you see in porn and/or know other man can have does not make you gay or bi or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 03:43 PM
1

Looks like you don't understand the point of most of the porn. I watch videos were girls are getting satisfied or acting as if they were. Or videos of girls doing something which I could imagine being done to me. I think maybe there are videos of blowjob focused on a man and showing a man instead of a being focused on a girl's face? Idk, I don't watch those. Yeah, it's simple, as said above: there are people on the sexual market that get all that that you see in porn - anal, facials, threesomes,…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 03:26 PM
1

yawn, I don't get triggered by such obvious trolling, sorry. Others already have explained everything to you there. It's only not straight (bi- or gay) if another male is involved. Nothing bi otherwise. It's simple, actually. There are people on the sexual market that get all that that you see in porn - anal, facials, threesomes, etc. Wanting to try it is simply not wanting to be a loser and never try what other men get to try.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 07:21 PM
1

Nope. It also has repeatedly helped that innovation. Different times. The idea is, the system set all that in motion. If inventors/scientists had no reason to contribute, they would not contribute. Globalists and liberals are antiscientific. They don't even know how many genders there are and are trying to add more. They support affirmative action and giving places of people who'd qualify and could contribute to people with lower score just so their minority is represented with more people. Scre…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/17 03:53 PM
1

It was a great system that brought us where we are. If it hadn't been for it - good luck making all those inventors and scientists contribute. Such a huge leap in science and technology after enforcing monogamy speaks for itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/17 03:55 PM
1

Nah, we're talking about getting laid. Everyone wants to get laid and learn what it takes. Most scientists actually do science or whatever because they think being great at something and doing something cool for humanity will bring them validation and sex. All men do is subconsciously for that. That Freud's assumption is very believable.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 06:35 PM
1

some women will FWB men that they wouldn't dream of marrying while waiting and hoping for a man of their dreams. The FWB/plated man is just a stand in while she's looking for a man who excites her sexually and emotionally for a LTR. This is common. So this guy gets to fuck her with no commitment, while the other one has to pay more for what another guy got for free. af/bb. many more women would like to FWB a nice guy for the sex but are too worried that he'll develop feelings for her or he'll fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 09:05 PM
1

No one said they are ignoring social skills. They don't ignore them. And no one said it's impossible to learn. The rocket science is just easier to learn. Like really WTF are you talking about and arguing with?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 07:04 PM
1

Their egos are irrelevant. Their degrees and accomplishments speak for themselves. They are learning, but it's not enough to just want to learn, unlike rocket science. And haha you must be a nobel laureate or something if you're judging those people. Lol lazy scientists. smh
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/17 10:14 PM
1

No, not a good sample group simply because of the size.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/17 07:45 PM
1

lolol and if he tries hard but doesn't succeed, then he just didn't try REALLY hard? Now THAT is a stupid argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/17 06:54 PM
1

Rocket science is much easier. Most scientists and rocket scientists in particular have zero success on tinder.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/17 06:52 PM
1

And that's still patently false and not enough. You indeed could go without it, that was already assumed.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/17 06:47 PM
1

Trying to insult someone doesn't make your argument less of a nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 08:58 PM
4

The man of average height could be 7 feet tall if he was 7 feet tall.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 08:40 PM
1

No, you are just plain wrong and I'm right. You can agree to disagree about what kind of music or food each other likes - subjective things. This subject is objective - most average guys either get casual sex or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 08:39 PM
1

No, they can't. Mentioned multiple examples that I know of above. And you can't use "then it's not a true scotsman. No true scotsman puts sugar on his porridge " "oh they didn't pursue it enough, otherwise they would get it". Because a) it's illogical. b) it's patently false - I saw people who pursued it and failed. c) who are you to say if they pursued it? Or are you defining it via result and I didn't get laid because I didn't pursued it even though I know I did? Then see the whole conversatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 08:32 PM
1

No, initially you said most average men get casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/17 07:19 PM
1

No, that's wrong. I am taking average as defined by your via height etc. I see guys who you define as average not getting laid for years. And please no, you kinda have no right to even mention occam's razor after all those scotsmen. You can't employ one logical tool while ignoring more fundamental things. Again - if you are investigating how Y depends on X (in this case Y = getting casual sex, X - being average), you absolutely can not define X in terms of Y. That is absolutely unacceptable and …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 07:31 PM
1

Ok, you assumed. That's what I thought. Well, I'm assuming they made it up in some cases. And then? Don't base it on your friends only. Guys tend to feel defensive about their sex life and if you're a girl - you won't necessarily get the whole truth, just saying. No. Again. That is not how it works. You do not define average via the thing that you are investigating on dependence on being average. That's illogical. You define average first - then you see how it correlates with getting casual sex.…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 07:04 PM
1

No, that's not how it works. I already explained multiple times. What you are doing right now is trying to define "average" via the result in getting casual sex. That is wrong in principle, because we are investigating whether average guys get casual sex. And the value of how women perceive you is a little different thing. We are talking about being an average guy BEFORE women see you to begin with. = you're average in looks/height /etc. Not better but not worse than most others. It wasn't all c…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 06:05 PM
1

And I'm telling you, using your definition of average, that most average guy don't get laid consistently. Also, it is pretty close to absolute. An absolutely one is made simply by look at normal curves of height, weight (for example) and finding the averages there. At this point I question that you know they could get laid and saw it or they just told you. And no, that is once again a notruescotsman. No true average guy doesn't get laid if he tries enough. Scratch that. You can't use it in a deb…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 06:02 PM
2

Ahahah because someone called you out on your bs he's an omega? LOL. Good old ad hom - the last resort of people who are losing a debate. There was also no rage. No idea why you see logic and telling you things that you could read in textbooks/derive yourself if you were educated in non humanities areas as aggressive or raging against you. I am also talking about who consistently tried for casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:55 PM
2

NO. That's not how it works. If you are looking at the dependence of something (getting casual sex) on some parameter (averageness), then YOU CAN NOT define that parameter via that something that you wanna study the correlation with. Therefore, first you define average, which you did - 5.5 height etc. THEN you look at data. And guys are telling you - and their sample is larger than yours - that you're getting a confirmation bias. Most average guys do not get casual sex consistently. Especially o…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:47 PM
2

It is a lot, especially for an average guy. And duh tindering every night and going out two times a week is what I'm talking about. Notruescotsman one more time :/ Aaand moving goalposts too. Stop, just stop. You defined an average guy already. It's a criterion that is objective and separate of their success in getting casual sex ( since some average guys want LTR for example). Only AFTER that you're looking at whether they get casual sex if they want to. And what you are trying to do? Say that …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:45 PM
2

Which I assure you they don't. I wouldn't even get a girlfriend except for someone around 30-30+ who can't get anyone better to marry. Again, you are committing the same fallacy. You are now defining average via getting laid just so the result fits what you believe. That's not how you do it if the question is whether average guys get casual sex. You first define average via something independent (which you did - described looks and height etc), then you see how many of those people get laid. I j…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:39 PM
1

Once a month is a lot still. And not only RP guys are telling you this. See, I'm telling you this, too. And low value? Define low and high value separately from getting laid once a month. I'm 100% sure that I know examples that aren't low value according to any reasonable definition and who don't get laid. As for me, I am very confident I'm not of below average value or at least wasn't back when I tried tinder and all. Have pics and degrees to show for it lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:34 PM
2

No, says your definition you typed somewhere above. You are committing the same logical fallacy again and again and again. You are saying that a person is not trully average if he doesn't get the result that an average person should have according to what you believe. You're being completely illogical now.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:31 PM
2

No, most average guys don't get laid. Yes tinder is a numbers game, still most guys lose in this game. I am most certainly above your definition of average in both looks and social skills. Below average social skills = a guy wouldn't even get a girlfriend or operate in society normally - talk to people, work with people ..
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:17 PM
2

No, they don't. What you described is already not around average. But even if it was - at any party an average guy doesn't get laid. There are tons of people who party and smoke weed. MOst of them still don't get laid. I just don't get it why you want to believe they do so much. Guys are telling you. And guys know better, they talk to more guys than you and have their own experience. But it's up to you of course. Unless you saw your most average guys have sex, no guy will believe you here anyway…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:15 PM
2

They will be fine in a company of women, too. I know I am. Fine - yes. Getting laid - not necessarily. Same league looks-wise if they swiped right. The rest is game/competing with other options. Which you said yourself. And which also means only top few % will get laid and be best option. And that was the whole point -not most average guys get laid, so no idea what you are arguing with.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 05:04 PM
1

It's a selection bias. Or those guys are lying to her. I highly doubt it she actually has seen them having sex with tinder matches. Tinder chats mean nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/17 04:39 PM
1

Because they don't want platonic convos from women and don't pursue them for that. And when they do - they pay therapists. At the same time, women do want and have sex. The attempt to make an analogy failed. The end.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/17 10:00 PM
1

No, it's not weak. It has the same relationships between subjects. You failed to prove it's weak. I looked at any side of the coin. You need to stop whitekniting on the internet though. That's not doing you any good + can make your brain degenerate. E.g. not seeing that being active is harder than being passive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 10:19 PM
1

And here's another reminder why social science isn't science. This thing is as scientific as alternative history or astrology something. She takes some numbers and write completely made up and non-falsifiable "explanations" of why it happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 10:04 PM
1

Of course, you can. Can't you say it's hotter in Sahara than in Antarctida if you've never been there? You can. Can't you tell it's harder to work to make money and/or become rich than to just count money others bring to you? You can obviously see who's active and who's reactive/passive and only acts IF she wants to and IF an active participant acted. It's pretty clear who takes the risk and for whom it's harder emotionally and in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 08:06 PM
1

Because it's irrelevant. I'm talking about which side is more difficult and exhausting. Not about any personal experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 07:57 PM
1

The point is - most women can get hookups if they want hookups and they can choose not to hookup and just have platonic convos if they don't want hookups. That's much less exhausting than not having options. The end.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 07:55 PM
1

Which I did and I would much rather filter through different options then had to look for them. And again, it's a fact, that chasing things is way easier than choosing one of the things that come to you themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 06:18 PM
1

Those who want to and choose to hook up can easily do so. I think you're missing the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/17 06:13 PM
1

It is a fact, that counting money (or sex offers) that people throw at you is not as exhausting as trying to make it. Oh the money can be in different currencies and you have to sort through them? How tough.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 08:33 PM
1

Yes, women keep hooking up. Why is that? Not the same thing at all. People aren't messaging me for money because I don't have it. Women do hook up with guys they meet online. That's the reason guys still use online dating duh.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 08:29 PM
1

You can disagree all you want, but the fact remains the fact. Yeah, they can be different and some are worse than others, but they all present themselves and all she needs to do is pick the best for her.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 10:27 PM
1

oh so you don't understand. Then I have no idea why, it's pretty obvious and there's plenty of proof if that's not enough. Having to count money when other people don't even have it? ZERO reasons to complain. Not as exhausting as trying to get money.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 09:50 PM
1

How is it relevant what I like or not? Oo Women like sex in principle. Sometimes they have it with guys they meet online, so I don't understand your point. Guys don't like just giving away money in principle, so what's the point of comparison? p.s. also yes, either way, I would like messages asking for money. They mean people acknowledge I have a lot more money than them and think I can help them = I get validation and reminded that I'm rich. But since I'm not rich, I won't be getting those mess…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 07:32 PM
1

I don't pretend anything. Again - then you should understand that the chasing side is more exhausting, so not sure what you are arguing about.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 07:30 PM
1

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of why colleges accept students. It is not to "reward them". They accept the students they think will be the most successful. Successful students = more money and prestige for the university when that student becomes alumni. Lol no, you should graduate first before teaching me, I think. The only possible way to know which student could be successful - is their score. You know nothing else about them. And stop taking every word literally. There are abstract…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/17 07:29 PM
1

Again, in this case you should understand that the chasing side has it worse and more exhausting. Having to count money when other people don't even have it? ZERO reasons to complain. Yes, I have.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 10:52 PM
1

Not only searching - but them message every single one of them and many times to get any result. That's WAY more exhausting than filtering through. Once again - you have zero excuse here. Don't match with more people than you can filter through. You're making no sense. "Awww poor me, it's so exhausting counting all this money I have. I disagree it's more exhausting to work or be a beggar. Counting money - that's where it's at".
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 08:20 PM
1

OF course it would be exhausting. That's the whole point of this argument - it is really exhausting to chase and create options. Much more exhausting than filtering through them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 07:28 PM
1

I don't send anything anymore. I also never wanted to be laughed at and whatnot and would send 1 message per match and yeah I tried to refer to profile, etc. So Idk maybe a couple or 5 a day? More in the beginning, less when you swiped everyone already. Needless to say, I wasn't special and that "strategy" didn't work well :) Should've swiped right on everyone and send multiple messages to everyone every other day.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 07:08 PM
1

As many as the number of matches I get. How many matches I get? Not so many EVEN if I swiped right on everything I assume. Which I didn't, so very few. But somebody already told you that being on a chasing side is much more exhausting.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 06:32 PM
1

Why would I get messages asking for money? O_O Also, I am already getting messages asking for money all the time - ads, spam, they are all over my browser.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 06:31 PM
1

I don't send anything anymore and for a while. I found something IRL. But basically - 1 per match which aren't that numerous?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 10:43 PM
2

Lol OF COURSE. Not only two days, but namely Saturday and Sunday. I don't work on weekends, why would I be reading forums? O_O As you can notice, I haven't responded to anyone in those 2 days, while I see that you did respond to others :) Honestly, it doesn't matter when we are talking about accepting students. Accepting students = choosing the best and rewarding them for whatever they were doing and studying before applying. No, I don't understand. How does it matter who the game appeals to for…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 09:27 PM
1

You send as many as you need until you start getting results. Again, it's way way more exhausting than receiving those messages. I tried online dating. There's a reason a lot of guy aren't happy with it and don't find what they are looking for. I encourage you to try your own advise and get sex as a guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 07:53 PM
1

LOL pathetic. Once again, just leaving the convo once provided with an argument. Read the scenario and show how it's equal or admit that it's not.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 07:51 PM
1

I'm sorry about your experience. Maybe now you should understand OP better than. More messages - more replies.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 08:23 PM
1

I believe on bumble you are supposed to message first and if you don't in 24h - you're unmatched... maybe that's why you aren't getting messages - cause they can't message you? If they get messages, it is impossible that you aren't getting them. https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=168948903 https://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=144422591
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 07:57 PM
1

I seriously doubt it. Not just that -I'm also sure you are getting some messages too.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 07:44 PM
1

They aren't less qualified. Lets say you are the head of a magazine company and you are trying to reach out to a new demographic of black people. Who is more qualified for that position: a black man who grew up in that culture? Or a white woman with similar GPA and experience? Probably the black guy... even if the white girl had an extracurricular sport or slight better GPA, the black guy would still be more qualified for that position. That's all good, but I'm talking about STEM departments. Gu…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/17 06:29 PM
2

How do schools benefit in having less qualified but more diverse students? What do you measure this in? Do they get more money for those students? Because they do have less prestige if their alumni are worse. How does it benefit the school? And also who gives a fuck if it does? It also benefits cotton farmers to not pay their black workers, but we kinda all agreed that it's discrimination and decided not to continue. Now since you seem slow, let me demonstrate you what's happening. You have a sc…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 08:07 PM
2

No, I'm not ignorant. I'm afraid you are. Or just illogical (which is the same thing for a stem major). No, hiring a few asian women is not discrimination. It's like hiring for one job position is not discrimination for people who'd apply for another position. Making sure there's at least 40-50% women - is. 40% women in director boards - how is that not discrimination? AA is not hiring an asian women specialist (who doesn't have to be female, by the way, to reach that market. Just like lots of m…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 05:52 PM
1

THere is a comment right under the comment I linked. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/67sbe8/so_do_you_guys_and_gals_support_mens_rights/dgu7o2x/ And no, my comments are never stupid, and definitely not that one clearly showing how AA is the opposite of equality + asking direct questions which are supposed to be answered by polite people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 05:33 PM
1

No you didn't. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/67sbe8/so_do_you_guys_and_gals_support_mens_rights/dgu10i9/
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 05:23 PM
1

Ahahah and there you have it - ghosting the conversation once gotten the arguments you can't deny. Next time admit to being wrong and learn from it. That's like the 10th time I see you doing this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 05:18 PM
1

I completely disagree. Men and women offer different things. As I said in another comment, male teachers get a lot of affirmative action benefits because schools see how it is beneficial it is to have male role models and a male perspective in the school. They don't and can't see any benefits from them. They are definitely not getting any benefits from the market. Then what benefits are you talking about? How can you prove that there are benefits to have male role models - how is that measurable…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 08:57 PM
1

No, I'm saying that you need to not only mention your experience but also guess and estimate what happens to other people. Otherwise - what's the point of you sharing your experience? You just want to share it or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 06:43 PM
1

They can, but most reasonable people don't care about that baggage. They are understanding and supportive. No, no one cares that records can be removed. I don't care if you have it recorded that you stole or murdered. I care if you stole or murdered.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 04:31 PM
1

About guesstimating how it is in general. I'm saying that experiences are all nice, but you can't make a general statement that hotness doesn't matter based on your experience only. That's all I'm saying. I'm pretty sure that just like most people in mainstream "don't notice" afbb and 80/20, you might not notice that certain types in the subculture are hotter than other types. I'm sure it's discriminatory and not everyone has equal success there. And those who aren't hot for mainstream are on a …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 04:17 PM
1

You make a good point. That first option is really only available to people with a switchy bent, or someone who is not naturally sub trying it for a while as something of an "apprenticeship". It doesn't work for everyone, especially since Doms are already outnumbered. Some people enjoy taking on that mentor role though. The whole point of classes is to gain the knowledge needed to be a safe Dom, so that you can find a sub and gain experience without as much risk. There are people on both sides w…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 02:07 PM
1

The problem is that most people won't share their experience, cause they don't even read this. Those personal anecdotes are pretty limited, especially if you're going into a specific very small scene.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 02:02 PM
1

No, that's not true. Baggage is not just emotional. A number of partners is baggage for many men, even if you are happy about it and have no issues or emotional scars. Crappy credit history is baggage, regardless of how you feel about it. Convictions, etc. No baggage never decreases. What happened - happened and others will judge for it. Your actions, not what you feel about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 01:59 PM
2

If you remove all teeth, a person will have 0 problems with teeth. But he probably might want to have a say in it instead of it being decided by his parents when he's a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 01:43 PM
1

And the best way to learn how to be a good Dom is to be a sub to a good Dom for a while. . Also, that's not how Dom/sub works, you can't just decide to change. Don't see the irony? And again, so how does a man get that experience if he has to compete with 20 others for 1 dom? Classes and seminars are nice and all, but worthless if you can't get a person to do the things with. Switches aren't necessarily subs or Doms, they're their own thing. It's like bisexuals, they're not gay or straight, they…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 01:26 PM
1

Well see, but in this thread we aren't talking about one person's experience only. It's in the context of how it works in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 01:23 PM
1

Not really, you can't undo what you've done or what others have done to you. You can be at peace with yourself and all, but in the end for many people it comes down to "Have you done that?" or "How many X have you had?" etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/17 01:21 PM
1

Would they? There's still a lot more men, even doms. Why would a girl choose an inexperienced one and how does one get experience in such conditions? And yeah, it works just like that for the experiment. Just changing it in your profile should bring you more dates/options? Not talking about whether it falls apart when she understands you lied. Also - isn't there a term switch that works exactly like that?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/17 07:19 PM
1

I'm interested in agreeing on general trends. Your experience is fine, but then there's my experience, for example, where I can't really join the scene all that easily + complains of others ( " It's not like if those guys suddenly change sub to dom in their profile, they would easily or at all find partners. (and then be like - hey, dominate me, you're a sub and that's my order).") That's all I'm saying. Like,don't get me wrong, I would love for you to be completely right - I would only benefit …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/17 07:17 PM
1

Probably he wouldn't. Again, just reading all his comments in the sub thread. Read them yourself, and tell me that you think he doesn't care about the number itself. Like, he describes the line of behavior he has to follow to get them to talk about it. Why would he go out of his way to know the number if he didnt' care? But then again, only he can tell.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/17 09:44 PM
2

Yes, I now see how things work. It's said blue side can't really put up a fight at least in the past year or so that I've been reading this place. I got my eyes open on a few things.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/17 03:40 PM
1

Obviously her actual n count is the part of the issue. He is going out of his way to find it out. I didn't say shit about him that he didn't admit himself. Not really. I was talking about you saying shit about, not just saying something. This part: someone so obsessed that he'll hack your computer and interrogate you like the FBI. No need to shame him for hacking the computer or compare with the FBI. He wanted to know something and made sure he got the right info. AND he was absolutely right to …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/17 03:29 PM
1

Based on this conversation I believe I'm more qualified than you. You understand that we need to agree on the premises in order to call a statement 'logical,' right? I disagree with your premises. Your logic doesn't hold up. And it doesn't matter how many times you reassert that you're being 'logical' and those who disagree with you aren't, because we disagree on the premises. No, you are not. And the logic does apply regardless of whether you agree with something or not. I believe it is you who…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/17 03:25 PM
1

Re-read what you just wrote again. Are you really a person to talk about logic? And sure, you can be in denial all you want. I don't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/17 09:10 PM
1

I didn't imply it, I pretty much said it explicitly. The only one who had actually serious feelings was your husband. Who, btw, did ask your count at some point. The fact is - you broke up with others. They'd make a lot of different choices if they were truly serious with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/17 08:21 PM
1

Considering that a dream woman of most guys wouldn't mind them sleeping around - sure the latter sounds good. But in reality - getting lots of casual sex is much harder. It is very easy to maintain a relationship if a man wants to. The former guy also has more chances to end up marrying his dream woman than a guy who can't get lots of casual sex. That guy will end up marrying a woman that he could get, and will spend the rest of his life convincing himself that it was a dream woman. Kinda like s…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/17 10:12 PM
1

That's dumb. You can't compare earnings - it doesn't take into account how many hours was worked. You also can't just compare men and women without making sure you're comparing exactly the same jobs and positions. If someone worked longer or just has a higher position - then that will result in the difference between the averages. But it's not a gender gap, it's a position gap, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/17 09:38 PM
1

If you can't see the difference in his posture and facial expression vs. the last three guys then you're proving my point. Yeah his posture is preparing to be taken from behind by another guy. Hands are handcuffed around the metal post so he feels more dominated and that he can't escape. Some hardcore gay action is about to happen. https://media.giphy.com/media/8fxad4tvqIzwk/giphy.gif p.s.How is Gay 3's posture gay? He's just standing straight.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/17 09:47 PM
1

How would you know if a relationship is perfect if there was no sex yet?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/17 09:22 PM
1

N=(Age/2-9) and if it becomes closer to double digits than to 0 it's already icky, so I guess something like 5-6 is the upper limit. No casual partners among them. Why would I commit if someone else could fuck her without it? Seriously though, it just doesn't sound desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 10:51 PM
1

I'm not wrong, you are refusing to see the main point. Stop being in denial and read about the black box concept. I have no idea how you can choose to stay wrong when you already were told and demonstrated that you're wrong and your "clarification" is obsolete and doesn't add to the content.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 08:53 PM
1

Yes it is. Practically and logically it's the same. If the input is 0 and the output is 1, it doesn't matter which function is inside. Please, educate yourself, that's a basic concept. Don't be that person in a classroom who is like "oh but you put a comma in a wrong place here". No one cares, really. Argue with other humanities majors about that crap.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 08:04 PM
1

Yes it is. Take a science course or something. If you consider it as a black box the output will be such as if inside the box we assumed they were lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 07:51 PM
1

Yes logically and practically it's the same thing. You need to stop caring about the form and start caring about the content.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 07:41 PM
1

It is practically the same thing. The result is or should be the same - you do not take their words for granted and don't act until the evidence is provided. Now it's a period.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 07:08 PM
1

You should assume that until the evidence is provided. That's why you asking them about details and all. You don't actively neglect everything they say because of it, but you should always assume that they might be lying. If you don't like the phrasing, phrase it this way - you don't assume that they are not lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 06:50 PM
1

Yes it is. They should assume everyone is lying unless there is an evidence for their words.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/17 08:19 PM
2

No, that's dumb. All those artificial constraints shouldn't be there if they interfere with the main purpose. ANd the main purpose is to find the truth. Whatever it takes. Why would they stop investigation? The whole point of this argument is that they will investigate even if it means neglecting the emotional state.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/17 06:52 PM
3

That could mean the difference between claiming an innocent person guilty or not guilty. That's not justice. If a tactic creates more emotional distress but lets get to the truth - then it should be employed. Especially since the "victim" might be lying, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/17 06:20 PM
2

That should be the assumption by default and then that someone is supposed to prove that they are saying the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/17 06:19 PM
2

I'm not saying it's not true that you stay "friends". But "just wasn't in the cards"... Riiight, never once and now you're almost 30. Must be bad luck.
/r/RedPillWomen10/04/17 05:54 PM
2

lol riiight. That must be it. Keep being in denial, please. Not going to talk you out of it.
/r/RedPillWomen07/04/17 06:38 PM
2

Yes, they are running from a relationship with you.
/r/RedPillWomen07/04/17 06:37 PM
2

The percentage means 0% in this. Again, whether a goalkeeper failed 3 out of 3 shots on goal or 3 out of a 100 - there still will be a "3" in the goals scored. Not answering = answering. And they don't need to ask. You give off that vibe and they are running. It was bad luck or whatever at first. But now that's what it is. And come on, you bonded? With 15 men? And they all left you? No, you didn't bond, don't lie to yourself. Girls who bond then don't have other men for years.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:17 PM
1

Some will when they ask and you don't answer. That's already an answer. But the thing is - they don't need to. You got changed and don't even realize it. Of course they are running away and don't want exclusivity. You give off that vibe that you went around town. You can't control it and don't see it, but now it's clear that's what it is. That's the topic you are most defensive about.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:13 PM
1

The frequency doesn't matter as much. The speed at which you're moving to that promiscuous territory doesn't matter. 10 mph or 50mph, all that matters is how far you traveled.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:06 PM
1

-150 dates and double-digit number of sex partners. -I am selective. You have to pick one. Yes I can relate. To men. It doesn't matter where they live. But sure, I guess you can keep thinking that you know men better than me. After all, 150 dates and all.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:05 PM
1

First few - nothing wrong. Once it gets closer to double digits than zero though... Double digits - that's it. Double-digit number of guys were special to you? hahahah lol indeed.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:02 PM
2

it definitely applies. You're full of yourself and aren't reading anything. The most you do - is argue with literally everything. Good luck.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 08:01 PM
1

Visa is easy to get there. Most likely you would find a work, too.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 07:54 PM
2

facepalm. 3 times.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 07:53 PM
1

No, it's because of the number of dates. Yes, 150 dates by the age of 30 and still no relationship. After a certain number it really looks desperate already. And it's quite a lot for someone who is almost 30 and has never been in a relationship. My friend is almost 30 and has never been in a relationship. He's had maybe 5 or 10 dates or something. Because if you're single it doesn't mean you should just go out with everyone. You can, say, get a PhD or something. And go out with someone you reall…
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 07:52 PM
1

Cool, now google premarital sex partners and marriage stability. The idea is - the more you have, the harder it is to bond with every new one. And no you can't look and now the number. But your gut will tell you to run, sometimes. And again - the bonding won't be as cool. But haha keep being in denial. I think I see the problem now. Well under 20 still can mean double digits. And I'm sure that's what it is, since you'd just say a number otherwise given it's an account specifically for this issue…
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 07:49 PM
1

Move to eastern europe.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 05:01 PM
1

Lol keep being in denial. And keep not reading the messages people send you. It's pretty clear now that you only listen to yourself and are here just for some attention and to hopefully for you get some confirmation of what you think. This sentence is the THIRD time in a row I'm asking you to stop replying and arguing and if you want to argue/discuss - do it via a personal message.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 05:00 PM
1

You do on forums, that's for sure lol. The logic is not flawed if you were on 150 dates with different guys. Just the fact that you stopped after that doesn't suddenly make you more selective or less desperate in general.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:58 PM
2

The end result is at 28 you never had a boyfriend let alone a high quality one. So you are as far from a marriage is it can be atm. Your life just begins and it will be glorious I'm sure. But right now the truth is - you never got a bf. How many was it then? Cause it does sound like it's well into double digits otherwise you'd mention it long time ago instead of avoiding it altogether. I'm almost sure now that it's a 1000cock stare.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:56 PM
1

Then what is it? Of course it's relevant. Yes the number is a reflection of who you are of course. Yes they care. Asking about your past is indirectly asking about that. No, stop looking for excuses. All women men are attracted to are seen as sex objects by those men among other things. Again, send a personal message if you want to discuss it. No reason in doing it here. But I guess you aren't reading everything people tell you, guess whoever said you are all into yourself were right :)
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:19 PM
1

That's called a selection bias. You don't meet all men. Maybe you are paying attention only to that kind. THe majority is like that maybe, but you only need 1. Do you want to bet that there are committed men in your area who don't just want to hook up? Keep looking. Good job, keep doing that. But it's not just asking. You should look for signs. Like his past. What's his sexual/dating history? Why? etc. So X months. Same thing. You don't get to know men, that's for sure. The evidence is that you'…
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:16 PM
1

You said it here https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/5xpzdi/if_a_woman_can_get_lots_of_dates_lots_of_fwbsex/dek0h2p/. Of it not - then what is it? Yes, you don't. Just the fact that you are getting approached doesn't mean you should go out with them. Actively dating most likely means you come across as desperate. A break is good for you, you must stay alone for a while and evaluate things. You'll meet someone when it's time.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:13 PM
1

That's what you're saying and how you are describing yourself. For all we know - it could be wrong. By red pill standards, all that matters in the end is the result. And the result is that you are almost 30 and never had an LTR ever and currently can't get mediocre men to commit to you. You aren't high quality by these standards. That you have "your" dream body and enjoy your life - good for you, but doesn't make you high quality. You did say that you were with 25-30 guys our of 150 that you dat…
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 04:11 PM
2

Your N count at your age is high. If you have so many partners, that does look like you are casually getting in with different men. If you were looking for something serious, you would go without men for extended periods of time - like years sometimes. Basically whenever you are single. But you aren't going without men, you're dating like it's your job. And yes most likely you do give off that vibe already and you can't control it. And that is not a problem. Men do think about sex when they see …
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 03:23 PM
1

So people who think you are high quality - you don't date them? Because you think they aren't looking to settle down? Maybe you should like ask them first? And I understand they might lie or change their mind. But you can see at their past too and see if they are a player type or LTR type. Honestly, you shouldn't even date every man you meet. You should maybe first make sure there are mutual feelings (to an extent) and then date. Not just wait X dates for sex - that's artificial.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 03:19 PM
1

1) So no objections that it's higher than 20-25. My point holds. It's extremely high. Remembered it from here. https://www.reddit.com/r/relationship_advice/comments/5xpzdi/if_a_woman_can_get_lots_of_dates_lots_of_fwbsex/dek0h2p/ 2) And that's weird. They never cared about committing if they never cared about your past. As others said - vet better. But anyways, the point was that they "felt" it because of your vibe. You can't control that. 3) No, you don't. And they don't have to stay with you if…
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 03:14 PM
1

Ok got it, thanks.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 03:06 PM
1

By red pill standards you aren't high quality if you can't get mediocre men to commit to you and are about to hit the wall at your age and N count, but you still call yourself high quality on this "red pill forum". So no, that's not an excuse. p.s. don't take it personally, just being blunt, not intending to insult you or anything like that.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 03:06 PM
1

The ratio doesn't matter, the number does. IF a goalkeeper can't reflect 3 shots on goal, it doesn't matter if it was 3 out of 3 or 3 out of 100. IT's still 3. Either a goalkeeper is bad or defense, which doesn't matter. How? They can just feel it, the vibe you give. You're saying it yourself, that somehow you give off a casual sex vibe. That's why.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:24 PM
1

Then you wouldn't call them mediocre. You don't know the society's perception at all, so don't refer to it.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:21 PM
1

You mentioned something around 30 iirc. No man dreams "oh I want to meet a girl and be her #31". Liberal LA or not. Men don't compare your N to N of other girls in the area, they compare it to their own standards. They don't, but probably it's "leaking" through the way you behave at this point. And that's what you observe, isn't it? That you give off a vibe that "screams Sex!".
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:21 PM
2

What you feel and that things are the way you want are irrelevant factors. What you're told is "let's just see where it goes" when you're looking for LTR. Why are people who say you are high quality not dating you?
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:19 PM
1

1000 cock stare? Didn't you mention that your count was well into double digits + dated around 150 men counting those you didn't sleep with?
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:17 PM
1

His point is that your perception of them as "mediocre" is probably leaking. No man wants to commit to a woman he's not the best for.
/r/RedPillWomen06/04/17 02:15 PM
1

Statistics of self reports doesn't bother anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/17 09:07 PM
1

Lol how is that a proof of anything? But also - yes, it was explained by another user. The difference can be explained by the traffic. Look, imgur says that the first pic had 2032 views and the 2nd one - 5018. 5018/2032=2.47; 80/52=1.54. The ratio of views is actually greater than the ratio of likes, so one could argue that the first girl is preferred. Or if you don't like this metrics then 52/2032=0.026 and 80/5018=0.016. So 2.6% of viewers liked your "model looking girl" and 1.6% liked your "c…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/17 09:02 PM
1

No one is complaining about anything, just calling you out on your BS. Of course this is it, you stopped saying anything except for excuses long long time ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/17 06:49 PM
1

It isn't, it's just being a logical and not capable of seeing what's valuable. The insults were there regardless of disagreeing. It is possible to disagree without insults.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/17 08:37 PM
1

Not offering, but begging. Women can offer it since they control it and have it. Men are trying to stand out and attract them. They compute perfectly. Women see that men ask for sex all the time and even from ugly girls. Thus yes, women see that sex is valuable to men. Unless they are dumb or playing dumb and pretend that they don't see it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/17 05:38 PM
1

Everything I said was thought of, logical and valuable. That's exactly why you couldn't argue with that and instead tried to insult an opponent. We've seen that tactic many times here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/17 05:35 PM
1

Pathetic. Asking for links and ignoring them, wasting time lmao. Of course you should leave, you have nothing valuable to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 10:29 PM
1

Not related to this thread and you being full of it and wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 09:42 PM
1

Again, I wasn't a person who mentioned any studies. I am saying that you are wasting everyone's time. And that claim is already proven. You can do it, obviously. Here's a link. Once again, different studies about it come up in this sub all the time. Or if you come to argue about partner counts - then you'd do some reading beforehand. Otherwise who are you to argue or claim anything and who are you to prove you anything? Search for partner count (and,say, marriage stability) or something similar …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 09:41 PM
1

Yes, precisely.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 09:07 PM
1

Hey, that's was an abstract person, not saying that you aren't stem. Also, there's nothing wrong with not being stem. But if you have a stem degree, you should understand what I'm saying. You know precisely that no one would waste time on a person with requests like yours. My claim was that you're wasting everyone's time (I'm not a person who you initially replied to). The evidence to that is in this very sub-thread: when I asked you what you searched for - you dodged or ignore 4 times already. …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 09:06 PM
1

Yes, just like you admitted in the previous comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 08:56 PM
1

yes I have demonstrated that you are full of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 08:08 PM
1

No, it's not. Like I will not waste my time proving to you that the electric field is conservative if you didn't even bother to open a textbook. I will argue about it with a physicist or a physics student who at least put some effort into it, not with some liberal arts who walked into a conference after reading about burden of proof on wikipedia and thinks scientists will waste their time on her. Please. You should understand that no one will prove anything to someone who just questions and that…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 08:07 PM
1

And then no, you're wrong and I explained why. In the instance you mentioned, giving insulin to another person is not taking it away from you. Whereas affirmative action is doing exactly that - it's intentionally treating people unfairly and unequally.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 07:57 PM
1

Nah you're full of it and you clearly demonstrated it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/17 07:55 PM
1

Nope. My only point here, is that you will then deny everything or come up with new and new excuses of why you won't read that study. That is my claim. And that happened hundreds of times here and everyone saw it and knows it. I'm sorry, but I won't prove to a humanities major that there's a square root of a negative number if we are in a place where people are debating about math or studying it. Everyone is expected to come there with a certain level of knowledge already. You gotta do your home…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 10:49 PM
1

Again, there was no exact study mentioned. He said studies, and I found multiple studies. In fact, there was a study linked in this very thread already, too. Tbh, right now you are just confirming my assumptions. Be honest, you didn't even try to look, did you? Otherwise, what's the problem - tell me what you searched for?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 09:55 PM
1

you wish, but not until you admit you were wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 09:09 PM
1

nope
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 08:32 PM
1

Not until you admit you were wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 08:13 PM
1

Not until you admit you were wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 07:28 PM
1

Not really, since you still didn't admit that you were wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/17 06:23 PM
1

Almost since you still didn't admit to being wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/17 04:56 PM
1

So what you describe is not corresponding to the title. The correct thing to say is: Cheating is always a cheater's fault. Not only women are cheaters, just saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/17 04:45 PM
1

No, because you insulted someone and didn't apologize.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/17 03:40 PM
10

Yes, I do. What you're saying is not what's happening in real life. What feminism stands against us misogyny and often violence This is false. Then why discriminating men? Why quotas, special treatment, affirmative action? Sorry, but the way it looks is that feminism stands for grabbing more and more at the expense of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 08:33 PM
1

Again, you're making it all about yourself. AND not even trying to dig. Yes it might be working like this for you. But yes, I'm against acknowledging, because I"m sure you can enjoy sex even if your partner doesn't. For example, receiving oral or whatever else makes you orgasm - him masturbating you or something maybe? no idea. Either way, it's not about just you. And I disagree with your OP. JUST watching a partner enjoy sex doesn't give sexual pleasure. It adds to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 08:30 PM
1

No, I'm trying to understand. And yes a lot of them basically demonstrated the same thing - different sources of different pleasure.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 08:18 PM
1

Not really, you did insult someone first and never apologized.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 08:11 PM
1

It is, it is. You're just in denial for some reason. Blindfolded, not seeing if your partner enjoys anything, if he goes down on you - you will have an orgasm. Also, it's not about you only, it was always about women in general. Don't be making it all about yourself. And seriously stop being in denial, you aren't even testing your claims. We're trying to understand how it actually works, and you go all like "uh it's just like this".
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 08:09 PM
1

He did call you out on your bs though and asked you a simple question. The point of that question was to show that you don't really enjoy the fact of pegging itself. You demonstrated it again and again already, that your mental and physical pleasure in this case have two completely different sources.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 06:34 PM
1

No, it wasn't. It was an explanation why I wouldn't insult you first.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 06:31 PM
1

No, I wouldn't mentally enjoy it. But I was talking about physical pleasure. For all I know a girl could be faking her enjoyment - unless she's explicitly showing that she doesn't like it, you technically can't know if she does or doesn't. But the nervous endings on a dick will still feel the same. I mean, why even assume? There are tons of men who are having sex with prostitutes right now. Most of them will have an orgasm even though a prostitute doesn't enjoy sex with them in most cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/17 06:31 PM
1

Nah, cause your reasoning is reeking BS. No wonder another person called you out on it. If you peg because he likes it - then you don't enjoy pegging, you enjoy giving him pleasure. You wouldn't orgasm if you weren't getting your clit rubbed, but you could get it rubbed without pegging at all and still have an orgasm. So pegging is obsolete.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:49 PM
1

Okay Then you don't enjoy the pegging itself. My logic is flawless, I have degrees to show for it too. The point is - that if you enjoy a sex act, you enjoy it regardless of what's happening on the other side of your genitalia. It might be less hot, cause of course, it's way better if both enjoy it, but it still would be physically and sexually pleasurable. So to continue this - you might as well masturbate without putting a dildo in his ass with your hand. Or - if you didn't masturbate, you'd g…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:46 PM
1

I did. It doesn't answer any of my questions. It's nonsense and especially applied to pegging. So will you enjoy watching him enjoy sex with another woman? Cause you never said it has to be you. Will you enjoy pegging him if he doesn't enjoy it or if he doesnt' show that he enjoys it too much? IF not - then you don't enjoy pegging, you enjoy his reaction. If yes - then your initial claim is false and it's not intertwined. What about pegging without you getting any stimulation? No grinding on the…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:27 PM
1

In what sense? That one is not possible without another? So if a woman closes her eyes while her partner is doing stuff to her, she won' t have sexual pleasure? pfffft
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:21 PM
1

Huh? I can identify as whatever I want every day. If people change that once, then they can do it again. You'll hold me to whatever you want, but you have no business assuming my gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:20 PM
1

No hypocrisy here, I require from others the same things as from myself. And of course I wouldn't insult first, which is what you did. So in this case it wasn't a backhanded insult, but just stating the fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:04 PM
1

How is that trolling? You need to stop being a bigot assuming genders and all.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:03 PM
1

So would you enjoy watching him enjoy sex with somebody else? Or if you were holding that dildo in your hand (so no physical stimulation for you)? No it is very logical and follows from what you said, that your mental and physical pleasure in case of pegging come from two separate sources.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:02 PM
1

So, there will be no proof? That's how I read it. Well established by who? If there's no proof, then there's no need to challenge you any more than that yet. Someone said "bible" here, and in Bible I only found that God was more than okay with having multiple wives. I didn't find the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/17 07:00 PM
1

What trolling?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 10:16 PM
1

Of course I wouldn't. Why would I insult people I don't even know? I actually have manners and was raised well.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 10:15 PM
1

No, I'm not a troll. No idea why you think you can just insult people on the internet simply because you don't see them. And no, doesn't seem that I'm interpreting it wrong. The last paragraph is just a conclusion that follows from what you said. No interpreting here at all. I don't allow myself to interpret things, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 10:14 PM
1

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 10:12 PM
1

It depends, is he an armpit fetishist? And there you have it. That's why I don't believe you and am not buying it. The way you feel doesn't depend on him. If a girl is not fond of anal sex, a guy's dick will still feel good. I want to fuck my partner who likes getting fucked by a strap on. I like making him happy, I like watching him enjoy sex. And as a bonus, I get to grind my clit against the sex toy that is giving him pleasure, so I get physical pleasure as well as mental pleasure. What is so…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 09:00 PM
1

I wouldn't have if you didn't start.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 08:58 PM
1

Yeah, who was also thought to be definitely loved by God himself. I'd be happy to be proven wrong here though That's not how it works. You are wrong right now. You still didn't show any proof to your claim, so there's no need to prove it wrong at the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 08:36 PM
1

Don't remember any multiple conversations with you. Also, if they happened in the past, it doesn't mean I don't identify as a woman today. It's the 21 century, stop being a bigot. Yes, all those things follow from a simple first step, which you still didn't comment on. Is thrusting it into his ass different from doing it into his mouth or armpit?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 08:35 PM
1

Yeah I get it, you're just trying to get away with an insult. To bad it's not a bannable offence.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 08:33 PM
1

Did you just assume my gender? You get sexual pleasure from what - a vibrator there? Still see no relation between it and pegging a man. It wouldn't make a difference if you put a strapon in his ass or his mouth - you'd feel the same thing physically. Hence - the hole are interchangeable. Moreover, you can slide it under his armpit - same feeling. In fact, and that's where I started, you could use something else entirely. No, the point is that for some reason you enjoy penetrating and dominating…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 07:56 PM
1

yes
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 07:53 PM
1

Oh no, I got it, that's the whole point. It wasn't a joke to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/17 07:46 PM
1

Nope, you're trying to come up with excuses. That card "oh it was a joke" won't cut it here, because it definitely wasn't a joke in that context or wouldn't be one by itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:35 PM
1

The point is that pegging is not sexual pleasure for a woman. Sexual please is a byproduct -yeah you can attack a vibrator and all, but it's not like sex. It's the same as if she took that dildo in her hand and inserted it. It's about her performing actions on somebody. In that sense it's not different than, say, beating that person and seeing how he moans and moves. Or talking to him or whatever (why not, there might be that type of deviant too, who will moan and move to that).
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:33 PM
1

You can close your eyes and imagine all that. The physical sensation won't change.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:31 PM
2

We already resent each other a lot, that's not a reason to lie. No white lies don't do anything good
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:05 PM
1

Yes, the difference is, when you close your eyes and a human fucks you - you will know it's human and will enjoy it and maybe have an orgasm. If they put a wooden stick into you, though - you won't like it. You will feel the difference. It's different physical sensations. You do seriously have to explain how it's applicable to pegging.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:04 PM
1

I did succeed, and the evidence is that you started explaining yourself and finding excuses, like it was a joke or whatever. Riiiight. sure it was. No it was obvious what you did, and it wasn't an attempt to be funny. THere are no opinions here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:02 PM
3

Not really, that's just your fear. Also, we will date anyway, reproduction is our instinct. Again, I'd rather be bitter than get robbed of my right to make choices about my life.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 08:00 PM
20

Feminism seeks equal opportunity and fair treatment: just specifically for women. It focuses on areas where women are oppressed, or suffer more difficulty than men (slut vs stud mentality, for example). Excuse me? What about all those scholarships and conferences that are exclusive for women? Like these. http://www.aps.org/programs/women/index.cfm What about quotas for hiring women? Or quotas for women in director boards? That's obviously special treatment and enforcing the equal outcome, it's t…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 07:41 PM
1

And that's all good. The problem starts when someone says they are about equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 07:37 PM
1

He is right. And there is no competition. Why would you dump a girl who's into threesomes with her SO for a girl who maybe isn't? Staying with the first one means having her and all others. Leaving for a "spark" with the second one could mean having only her. Simple math after this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 07:24 PM
1

Yes they should if she really wants to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/17 06:37 PM
1

Huh? Yes you can be married to multiple women. Solomon had 700 wives, a lot of others had multiple wives, too. It's more than one dick that's not cool. Group sex with just one dick involved doesn't seem to be not okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 11:00 PM
1

It's because in this generation some get them without paying. Which man dreams about having a relationship where he gets less than other men get?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 10:27 PM
1

You can grind on a hole in a tree, too. You can enjoy a vibrator or dildo pointing the other way while pegging a hole in a tree. You can move your hips in sex motions while doing it to a hole in a tree. What if a partner is not enjoying it? Also you can close your eyes and have the visual pleasure of seeing how much your partner is enjoying it with a hole in a tree. Seriously not seeing how it's pleasurable.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 08:55 PM
1

No by baggage I mean refusing to try something with a partner or refusing to please a partner because of something in the past. No problem with preferences. So she knows what she prefers doing? great. We'll do that. It's all good as long as it doesn't mean she won't try something else.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 08:46 PM
1

Not talking about abortions, but about murder. That OB/GYN thing is not related to this thread. It's not what it's about, too. The idea is - doesn't matter how many guys she turned down. It matters, how many she didn't. Think of a goalkeeper. In the end, it doesn't matter how many shots he blocked, what wins or loses the game is how many goals were scored = how many shots he failed to reflect.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 08:45 PM
1

No, you tried to insult period. Not jokingly. You then tried to write it off as a joke after being called out. Also, I didn't try, I called you out.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 08:43 PM
1

The best course doesn't mean a good outcome is guaranteed. But she at least will try things with you. (and you will make sure she's open to at least trying before marrying of course).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/17 08:41 PM
1

No by baggage I mean refusing to try something with a partner or refusing to please a partner because of something in the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:50 PM
1

These claims stem from studies. Where are proofs to your affirmative claim?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:24 PM
0

It's MY shit. Why can anyone be entitled to it? The fruits of my labor are mine to decide what to do with. And don't bring that crap about rights and protections. We are talking about how things should be for it to be fair and just, not how they currently legally are. Not so long ago, there was legal slavery and you owned other people's physical bodies and they had no rights or protections.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:23 PM
1

No it wasn't. You tried to insult me, I called you out on your crap, and you pretended it was a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:20 PM
1

Someone does. But it's basic and common for majority of people. Sure you won't make someone do it for you. I wouldn't either. But why wouldn't you go for such person who doesn't like giving pleasure to you. Find someone more compatible?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:19 PM
1

She knows how she felt it with her ex. Not how she would in fact feel with a new guy. Either way, no reason for a new guy to go for a girl with more baggage like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:18 PM
1

Doesn't matter. IT's about how many dicks she took, not how many dicks she could take. One person murdered 1 baby and the other - 30 but worked in a hospital. The second person is still a worse murderer, even though the first one had less opportunities. And again: It's a bad system and don't use it for anything, it breaks in basic cases. Example. A young girl meets a boy and dates him for a while, then they sleep at some point - they are bf and gf, maybe even talking about marriage, first love, …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:17 PM
1

Still more credible than just your words. And yes there's more if you wanna look for them. Like this https://www.jstor.org/stable/3600089?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents But you don't wanna look. You say you want credible sources but are just sitting there waiting for others to do homework for you. And that's when there are no sources from you that it's entirely moral.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:16 PM
1

Quotas and scholarships in STEM = women compete for all spots, men compete for less spots than before (and than women). Presumption of guilt in cases where woman accuses a man of something (like rape).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 08:00 PM
1

So it's a vibrator that gives you pleasure, not pegging a guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 07:53 PM
1

How? Isn't it just a plastic thing you put in there? Like, if you closed your eyes - would you know if you're pegging a dude or a hole in a tree?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 07:52 PM
1

No not really. There are cited studies showing the risks. https://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2003/pdf/Bookofcharts.pdf
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/17 07:44 PM
1

No, that's false. It's a bad system and don't use it for anything, it breaks in basic cases. Example. A young girl meets a boy and dates him for a while, then they sleep at some point - they are bf and gf, maybe even talking about marriage, first love, they are young and naive, maybe he even proposed already.. yet, she slept with 1 man out of 1 man who approached her, so she's a slut? Nonsense. Or your example. A girl slept with 3/7 and sluttier than 12/50, then she went out and 50 more guys app…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 10:52 PM
1

No that's a wrong approach. It's about the absolute number, not relative. If a house has 7 windows and only 3 are broken and another has 50 with 12 broken, it's still more expensive to fix the second one. It doesn't matter how many of them could've been broken. Just how many actually were.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 10:37 PM
1

That's what you're saying now. You can't retroactively make some random BS a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 10:32 PM
1

You can, but this was not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 10:31 PM
1

She hated it with the ex, it doesn't mean she'd hate it with a new guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 09:56 PM
1

Why does she hate it? She hates giving him pleasure? Then they shouldn't be together to begin with. Or you think guys go down on girls because they just love it? No, they do it because they love to see their partner convulsing in pleasure.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 09:51 PM
1

Equality or special treatment - you have to choose one. And if you think that what they said is a real argument here, then don't complain about slut shaming. But mind you, most men on ppd aren't most men :) And yes, even if it's bad it's still somewhat good. And that's what most women I met said too. The process is enjoyable. And that's what numbers show too. At least 60% had ONS (even more - other forms of casual sex) and they keep doing it, even though the orgasm rate is what - 11%?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 08:17 PM
1

I see, thanks. Don't think it's a double standard though. It would be double standard if men cared if a woman has been with some men(or women) but not others. What you said is not double standard. It's just a standard.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 08:14 PM
1

If someone lives in a cave or in a hut - will they survive? Or if someone lives with very little food - will they survive (see concentration camp survivors)? It's not and never was about survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 08:10 PM
1

No, it's not the same thing. You got called out on BS and then tried to write it off as a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 07:47 PM
1

Again - just because you call something a joke, it doesn't become a joke. You can't retroactively change insults to jokes.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 07:46 PM
1

No you do. If no one is entitled to anyone's body, then why would they be entitled to what's made using those bodies?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/17 07:45 PM
1

That's not related to what I asked at all. If I work and make something or earn money for that - why should anyone be entitled to products of my (body's) labor?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 07:52 PM
1

You don't need shelter to live. Not something like a modern apartment anyways. And not as much food to survive too. People in german concentration camps ate very little and were looking like walking skeletons but still survived.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 07:51 PM
1

What good reason should other basic needs be human rights? Sex is on the same level of the hierarchy of needs as food or shelter and more basic than, say, education. What good reason shouldn't sex be a human right? I really don't get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 07:43 PM
1

Avoiding the undesired outcome and/or not desiring some outcome is not insecurity. That's the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 07:03 PM
1

No, something either belongs to a person or not. Those resources are earned by their bodies and those services are provided by their bodies. So what makes you entitled to education or other stuff paid by other people? Not to mention that no one would be forced to have sex with you. The government could just create another job and pay for it, so women would go do it if they wanted those jobs. And if not - then not. The bodily autonomy stays intact.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 07:02 PM
2

How many is a "lot of men"? 3? 13? 30? Depending on who you ask, everyone will have a different answer. Slut has no concrete definition, even a virgin can be considered a slut for kissing a lot of guys. Closer to double digits than to 0. So that would be 5 and above. Or above average numbers (which the average is between 2 and 3 as shown in that CDC survey somebody quoted in another thread), so that would be 3 and above. But no matter how average changes, 5 is the hard cap. No one every dreamed …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:57 PM
1

Sex is mentioned indirectly twice in this sentence. It is implied that it's there. Three times if we count sex as a basic need (then it's included in "lack of livelihood" too).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:43 PM
1

Are you entitled to other people's services, skills and/or resources?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:40 PM
1

Duh, it's not written there. Other things weren't rights too for a while. Obviously the context here is whether something should be a right. If sex is not a right, then most of hand outs people get aren't rights even more so.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:37 PM
1

Yes, if it is a human right, then it should be the same for men and women. Even in this case, no it doesn't mean taxpayers should fund birth control. Not with the current laws at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:36 PM
1

Men like men when they are allies, men don't like other men when they are enemies. When it comes to women, men who want the same (or worse - fucked) the same woman you like are not your allies.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 06:21 PM
1

Wearing a seatbelt because you want to minimize the odds of getting traumatized in case of the car accident is insecurity too? And the ads that show with graphic images and language what bad things can happen just project insecurities and we should ignore them?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:50 PM
2

Yeah a slut has a definition - a woman who has (had) sexual contacts with lots of men. Yes, it's negative, so then male sexuality is shamed too. Yeah, an idiot is a derogatory term, but it does have a definition. (just like slut). So if you have a phd, you know you aren't an idiot no matter what they say. And if you have a low partner count, you know you aren't a slut. No, a woman won't be called a slut if she has an active sex life. She can sleep with her husband or boyfriend all she wants. It'…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:48 PM
1

Why wouldn't he? If the number is high - then she is. You can't seriously be in love with many men within a short period of time.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:43 PM
1

What double standard?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:41 PM
1

No, you just didn't joke, you tried to insult, got caught not making sense and then trying to write it off as a joke.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:32 PM
1

Same applies to men. But they can't even find someone good at sex, because they can't try as many options. Also, no one stops women from asking for reference letters or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:31 PM
1

I'm not upset and clearly didn't start as a joke. Read the whole thread again.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:30 PM
2

It's not shaming, it's just a colloquial term like a stud or virgin or player or fuckboy. If a woman sees it as shameful, then probably she feels she shouldn't be doing that. Not everyone will approve of your choices, but they shouldn't be silenced just cause you don't want to hear what they have to say. p.s. Not all women are sluts, it's not shaming women's sexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 05:30 PM
3

So don't be a slut if you don't want to be called one.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:49 PM
1

Absolutely no reason why they can't get the quality they want. They can have arbitrary standards and those standards will still be met. What? you're saying they need to go through some partners to find good ones? Well, so do men, but they also can't find partners as easily
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:29 PM
1

Not really, chads get orders of magnitude more than other men. Women can get way more, too, if they choose to and that's what they want. I mean, there are still people who get what are just fantasies for others - threesomes, anal, whatever else people complain their wives would do with the exes but not with them. So yes, there are people getting cool stuff. And no, it's not about all being 100% of the time good. But for some it's at least something for some periods of time and for others it's "I…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:21 PM
1

No, it's obvious to everyone smart that there are no different ways. But no surprise you wouldn't know.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:17 PM
1

No, roasting is when you are joking and insulting. Just insulting someone and then calling it a joke is not a type of joke. And no there are no different ways of being smart. "Street smart" or whatever is just losers hamstering.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:17 PM
1

I didn't read your or anyone's flair. I read the comments. No it wasn't a joke and it's not where it all started. And yes, I didn't read your flair and said what I said because I wanted to. So don't be surprised it sounded as you putting words in someone's mouth again, especially in the context of all your other comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:16 PM
1

Isn't that exactly his point? Most men have to take LTRs to have any sex at all. And do you really think most of men in LTRs get everything sexual they want? I bet they'd like to sleep with other women while keeping their LTR around, maybe have threesomes with other women. But are they doing it? Unlikely.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 05:05 PM
1

I got that you were saying I am dumb, that was also obvious. You are the one doing the insulting lol. Good, so? Yes now I am, you started, so there's no reason to not do the same. Not my fault you don't understand that "smart" doesn't have to mean in every single thing. You are trying really really hard to prove that I am "dumb" by making strange changes to the way the word smart is normally used. It isn't working. I'm not trying to prove it. It's obvious to everyone. I'm just pointing it out. D…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 12:27 AM
1

No, insulting someone and calling it a joke is not a joke. It's what people do when they are caught not making any sense. That's what you did. It wasn't a joke. You are saying it was.. as if you were making sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 12:23 AM
1

Because you are. And me not having idea what you are talking about is not related to that fact at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/17 12:20 AM
1

Don't try to back-peddle now lol. Noone is back-pedaling. It's to say you're dumb, not american. And even you speak english. That's a person who can't follow the convo, doesn't see how his personal experience doesn't disprove the date, or who can't follow simple concepts outlined in the thread and won't understand that cheating is cheating and once caught - just goes and tries to insult the opponent. There can be ideas and concepts relating to language, there are ideas and concepts relating to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 07:05 PM
1

No, saying crap and then backing off pretending it was a joke is not sense of humor.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 06:58 PM
1

no idea what you're talking about
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 06:57 PM
1

Sexual characteristics. Yes there might be a few men born with anomalities, but close to 100% are born with dicks. A few exceptions do not prove you can't generalize billions at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:55 PM
1

Because we're discussing sex here and other similarities don't matter as much as sexual differences. Also: Men and women are almost exactly the same. . I don't understand how you can generalize billions of women and men as all the same.. You gotta pick one.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:52 PM
1

No, you aren't smart enough with assumptions, which was proven above. You also aren't good enough with reading comprehension, since I never even assumed you were american. I made a general statement. But then again, you are always putting words in people's mouths. No, ideas and concepts are language-neutral. Language is just a way to express them. And no , street smarts is just hamstering of dumb people, who can't admit they are losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:14 PM
1

that has nothing to do with a sense of humor
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:12 PM
1

not paying attention to those
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:11 PM
1

Yes. But you feel free to stay in denial in your magical unicorn land where people don't sleep around and every guy has only 1 partner at a time. And every guy gets a girl. facepalm
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:11 PM
2

Which would be enough already - his value in the eyes of peers is lower. But also to other women. There was a study (discussed here a couple months ago) that being with lower value women makes men less attractive to other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/17 05:04 PM
1

No, smarter in English makes no sense. Smart = ability to operate concepts and ideas, not knowing the language. Even the dumbest americans speak English. Just look at you. And the proofs are plenty. I want obviously link my degrees. This subthread alone is enough. Just re-read it and see how you're debating.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:26 PM
1

And in general case I'm right and you know it. This for every woman who is having casual sex in her early 20s, there is a corresponding man doing the sex to her, is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:23 PM
1

No, the difference is that you don't have it at all or so it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:23 PM
1

I'm not quoting anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:22 PM
1

Duh because alphas won't commit/ be exclusive. For betas it's a huge risk to commit to a slut.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 10:18 PM
3

Marrying a slut itself lowers man's value.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/17 09:53 PM
1

Smarter doesn't imply being good in a language. Sorry you have to find out like that - but there's more than one language out there.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 09:44 PM
1

Because it wasn't, the structure of what you tried to do explained above.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 09:43 PM
1

I do what I want
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 09:43 PM
1

I never said 80/20. I said it's not 1/1. Also, your friends can be shared dudes with other girls that are not in your circle. How would you know they don't, especially if they aren't "exclusive".
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 09:42 PM
2

lol choosing to stay in denial doesn't even surprise me anymore. Far too common in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 09:42 PM
1

for every woman who is having casual sex in her early 20s, there is a corresponding man doing the sex to her, Check your math. It's not 1-to-1 relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 08:53 PM
1

No contradiction. a few flings that's casual sex. that's CC. Not a long ride, but still. So no reason to be surprised someone called it for what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 08:52 PM
1

Men are raised to overcome those things. We don't care to have partners to support us or even more so listen to "emotional" whining lol. The most common emotional problem for men is that they can't get laid with multiple women like some other men can. Do we need a partner that's a reminder of that and will actively not let us sleep with others? lol Oh she had threesomes in the past/didn't mind that a guy who fucked her slept with others too? No, she's matured now and not like that anymore. All t…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 08:49 PM
1

It's not bad, but most guys don't want to be her last choice after she gave her youth and energy to others, but only settled because of other benefits. We want to be loved and lusted for, too, you know? I really don't understand why you're even asking, OP. Isn't it obvious that it's possible that some men (in this case most) wouldn't like to live knowing that they aren't sexually attractive enough? Like, don't you see that the girl of their dreams is unlikely a girl who was passed around by othe…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 08:38 PM
1

I'm sorry but your dictionary doesn't cut it, especially considering that they would change definitions left and right. You know exactly where I'm getting my definition from and how this word is used. If you will, you can use your definition in the context that the passive voice applies to women and active to men. p.s. Mind you, that there are more languages than English. Translating the word fuck to those languages will show you the same, I'm sure. I can only speak for one, of course, that is m…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 08:33 PM
1

Don't confuse. Those are jokes. You are just being dumb, then trying to insult when being caught not making sense, then saying it was a joke. No you didn't hurt my feelings. But you did try and it's obvious. So not sure why you're saying you're sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:36 PM
1

That you're not one of those some.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:34 PM
1

I'm not. You need to stop trying to put word in people mouths, tones in people words and now - moods in their heads.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:33 PM
1

Now after the last comment I understood. Without that explanation it just seems that you don't know the difference between the sufficient and necessary. (Which tbh you don't, if in your book it was "pretty much" as saying it's all that's needed). But at least we know what you meant now.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:33 PM
1

No, fuck is fuck = penetrate something. That's why a male can fuck an apple pie or a watermelon or something lol. Have sex with is have sex with and "fuck with" not just "fuck". I mean, that's how it used by most people, idk looks like you didn't know. ANd mind you, there are other languages where this is reflected as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:31 PM
1

Not really need that. Just a good amount of girls with no slutty pasts. Which shouldn't be a big deal if girls are encouraged to make choices, instead of being encouraged to sleep around to show them dirty men and fight patriarchy or some other nonsense. Going to church won't suddenly make the culture religious. In fact, in Eastern Europe the religious culture is not strong, the whole region was a part of an atheist country for a while, yet - children there are raised differently. And you have y…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 07:29 PM
1

No, it has nothing to do with sexuality. It's all about who gets a dick inside. If you use a strapon on your bf, you're absolutely fucking him back, yes. Otherwise - no.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 06:28 PM
1

No idea how it's that in your book. And that's not at all what he said, so you shouldn't be surprised some people didn't understand you. They never read your book xd
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:45 PM
1

No. And you didn't answer the question. Which is fine, of course you know that I and many others get no benefits from it, on the contrary, we lose a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:44 PM
1

Lol no, you can't insult people and then write it down as a joke and being fun. That's like elementary school level. I remember my brother would do it all the time at that age.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:43 PM
1

Yes you are. It's clearly seen from the claims you make about other people. And you can bet some of them are more educated than you.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:42 PM
1

The point is, if you don't know something and want to discuss it anyway - then read up on the subject first. You're saying a lot of things that don't make sense. Like, I can understand why they can make sense for you and how you truly want to believe in them, but they just can't withstand a fact check.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:41 PM
1

About what exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 05:39 PM
1

Apex fallacy tho. Most men couldn't even be sluts to be slut-shamed. Those who could, wouldn't be shamed for anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/17 09:09 PM
2

what good things do I get? Sounds like nothing I'd want and moreover - sounds like I specifically wouldn't get what I want if promiscuity is encouraged and it's hard to find a good girl who didn't ride or had casual stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 11:24 PM
1

Yeah but that's still saying looks are pretty much all you need. That's what you said. And, it's not saying that. You need that and then some. What it was saying is that you needed looks for sure, but not that it's all you need.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 11:17 PM
1

one more thing to understand, then.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 11:10 PM
1

Let me give you the same advice on how to solve a simple problem in physics. Draw a picture Draw forces Right down equations Solve them. Now show it to some freshman who never took anything but humanities. Very useful? I doubt it. As said above, you need to know exactly WHY steps will work and how they will work and how to vary them for different cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:51 PM
1

If you paraphrase, you don't put quotemarks. And no, that wasn't my intent at all. He says he'd do that sort of thing? What sort of thing? That women will "let" him? Sure, that's consensual then. Oh you can think he's guilty all you want, but your opinion isn't worth crap here, unfortunately. Especially here, where a person is rich and famous and it's obvious why they could lie. No evidence - no guilt. I can say that too just for fun or pursuing other interests, and can say it about a person who…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:46 PM
1

Somebody needs to understand the difference between necessary and sufficient
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:36 PM
1

Yet, they did it before commitment so couldn't expect much => they were perfectly fine with the possibility that it won't lead anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:24 PM
1

Kindergarden debate club is back in business? Stop embarrassing yourself, you aren't impressing or entertaining anyone with this "tactics". It looks pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:22 PM
1

No, you haven't. If you did, you wouldn't say nonsense like above.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:21 PM
1

Here. There was a thread discussing this exact topic in detail.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:20 PM
1

Where did I say what you quoted? That's not what I said. And no, Trump never said that either. Some women accused him of something - and if there is no proof, you can't say he is guilty. They have too much of incentive to lie about to take their words without evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:20 PM
1

Lurk more. Yes it would be and it is. 1 out of 17 men reproduced back in the days. Like 5-10% men can perfectly keep all women pregnant at all times.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:50 PM
1

Mitt who? Nobody remembers or gives a f. Trump had a real shot of becoming a president and did become one. ANd how is majority of men not getting these accusations equivalent to men getting these accusations being guilty?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:49 PM
1

YEah that's why it's surprising that lately I always am.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:47 PM
1

No, I do. And you're definitely not someone capable of evaluating me, that's one thing you can be 100% sure about.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:46 PM
1

Ok got it. So if he wasn't rich and famous, he wouldn't be 100 in your system.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:45 PM
3

What is a personality score and why would 100/0 make a woman wet and like want to have sex? I can imagine such guy talking her into sex but getting her to actively want it - not so much. Think Cera if he wasn't famous and rich., but is actually like one of his roles lol. Also, your system assumes there's no minimum requirement on the physical score, and that seems wrong too. If someone is absolutely hideous no matter how deep his personality is - a woman won't want to sleep with him. And yeah - …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:33 PM
1

But wasn't there a study where 60% women admitted to having ONS? And that's like the extreme form of casual sex, it is safe to say that even more had some type of casual sex at least once. Idk it seems like the 60%+ is a majority, not the women who only have relationships. Unless you of course include little girls or something. Or traditional cultures in eastern countries.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:30 PM
1

No, not every guy is a variation of the same type. Every guy who gets laid consistently is a variation of the same type. A couple of types maybe, but definitely not "a lot of different types of guys".
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:23 PM
1

No, I already posted you links before. You ignored one and I had to remind about it 5 times and then you still never admitted you were proven wrong with it, and didn't read the other one. Do your own homework. You're no one to bother proving anything to you and you do not act like you care in finding out the truth, so all it is is pointing out you being wrong to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:21 PM
1

^ my point proven completely. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:19 PM
1

It still needed bodily resources in the past, since those nurses fed it anyway (far past, when there were no bottles). Now yes, they have different mixes which arguably took people to invent and produce though which in turn took bodily resources, but ok I guess you only want to take as many steps as it's convenient for your point of view. Anyways, very soon embryos will be able to be grown outside of female body. Already they can survive for a couple of weeks like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:19 PM
1

Oh what a coincidence, they come forward around election and he appears to be rich and famous. It's almost as if they could have other incentives. No no, that must be crazy talk. Presumption of guilt is the way to go.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 09:15 PM
1

What about a baby and breastfeeding?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 07:39 PM
1

facepalm. Kinder garden debate club president in action.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 07:25 PM
1

No, not a lot. They are all variations of the same type. Lurk more. It's been discussed already in the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 07:25 PM
1

No. It's pointless with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 07:24 PM
1

Makes very little sense
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:55 PM
1

It was worded well. You're saying they aren't attracted to the same guys, yet it's the same type of guys who gets laid and the same (but another) type of guys that doesn't get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:54 PM
1

Pretty sure you didn't see the DNA tests, but then again - it doesn't matter. There's more data out there. I heard about the same studies in other schools, they all show the same about stem having way less sex than others. 15-20 is not pretty close to even a 100.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:53 PM
1

Not all girls are attracted to the same thing. Yet, it's mostly the same thing that is getting laid and mostly the same that isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:35 PM
1

And if he'd say you can sleep with others, it wouldn't be cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:34 PM
1

No. I Didn't ignore them. You said the number of people who you know have families. That's not what I asked and not what the thread was about. ANd yes you can extrapolate it to entire industry and no old guys don't count because the whole thing was about college years. If you want to include older guys, then you wouldn't talk about virginity (which you still can do and I'm 100% sure you will see that stem has more virgins than others), but you can talk about about numbers of new partners per uni…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:32 PM
1

Exactly, and in this thread there was nothign about any discussion where you're allowed to sleep around.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:23 PM
1

Yet, it's mostly the same thing that is getting laid and mostly the same that isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:21 PM
1

You do think so. We had this conversation in another topic and that's exactly what you said - that monogamy is still implied. Doesn't matter. DOn't focus on this one, you still didn't answer about the number in another thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:11 PM
1

It's not about gender equality tho. It's "focused on women's issues". It's like I have a banana and you have an apple, give me an apple and then we both have an apple and it'll be equal. Nope. BS.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 09:06 PM
1

Cheating for you is still wrong if it'd had to happen. Cheating is cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 08:50 PM
1

No I don't expect that. But you also shouldn't expect that a few people you know say anything about the majority. Anyway - what is the number of men whose sex lives you know about? Asking for the 4th time. Not almost all people have a shitty sex life. Almost all girls have it as good as they want + the guys who they sleep with. Also, it's not just about teens, it's also about young adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 08:38 PM
1

No says they stay virgins forever, what are you talking about? It's all about young years teens and early-mid 20s. Just showing a point that their sex life sucks. And no, being married and having kids doesn't say anything. The kids could be adopted or from the previous marriage or it can be "an open marriage" where she sleeps around and he doesn't get any. Technically, marriage alone doesn't say much. But then again, you still didn't answer the question. I'm asking for the 3rd time: How many men…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 08:23 PM
1

No there was. Cheating to get back at him or for whatever reason was wrong. The question is arguably wrong. But no, it's just weird. If you don't like it or think it's too specific - just don't answer it. The OP set the rules and wanted to hear answers. Nothing wrong with that too.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/17 08:11 PM
1

I'll repeat. How many men's sex lives details you knew about? Say a number. Also, having kids doesn't mean they're his or that they are having sex at all. And don't forget, that no one said they stay virgins forever, so you would need to know that they never had troubles getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 09:35 PM
1

ok now this is totally your choice and has nothing wrong with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 09:33 PM
1

Of course you didn't know everyone. Knowing their names doesn't mean you know about their sex lives. And don't lie that absolutely every guy told you about his sex life - which even then you wouldn't know if it's true. Besides, "your degree" is not just your class. It's 5 or whatever classes (different years when they started). How many men's sex lives details did you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 09:07 PM
1

no original did say one of them cheated. Well, had more than 1 wife. I guess yeah, it's not cheating if both parties know about it and it's officially allowed.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 09:04 PM
1

Anything closer to double digits than to 0 is high.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 08:49 PM
1

The point of that was to compare majors then. And yes, either way, those studies can't say anything about one particular school. Your school can show something different even if the majority are virgins overall. But then again. you in fact don't know the statistics about your school. You only know what a few people told you. Not everyone, and I bet not even the majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 08:45 PM
1

Nowhere in the original he also said you are allowed to cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 08:42 PM
3

No, he's a new buyer. The product is old, another buyer took it and returned it. What you're saying is like saying that people can sell their used cars with mileage for the price of new cars because it's new product to their buyer as in he didn't drive any miles yet. What a nonsense. No I rarely ask it on the first date, I don't have first dates often. But if we hook up and lay in the bed after, yeah, the talk about it will happen very soon. Probably after the first time, yes. No reason to wait …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 08:42 PM
1

You don't have to do anything you don't want. But if you wanted to get fucked by a guy after a couple of drinks but require more than that from another guy, don't be surprised that another guy won't be happy with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 08:13 PM
3

Lol what? How is it a new product? Do girls have the way to un-take all those dicks they had inside?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 07:39 PM
1

She could learn it without having ONS to begin with. It's all over media and surely parents told her. And definitely not a few ONS. Also, I don't think you interpret it correctly. It's not anger because she had different standards. It's not anger directed at her, too, btw. It's anger that you can't tell this woman is giving you her sexual best and is attracted to you more than to anyone else. It's not a girl of your dreams and not what you've been hoping to have.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 07:37 PM
1

Yeah, there are other stigmas now for not being able to make a lot of money - cause that makes you unsuccessful and a loser. The role of husband was always voluntary. Who cared about stigmas if they left to travel the world and tend a bar in another country somewhere? But either way, what you described is not good for men who are not in top few %. Before they at least had an option to get a woman because a woman needed them for support or whatever. Now nobody needs them or wants them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 07:18 PM
1

lol he's weird then. Why call the thread monogamy vs polygamy then
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 07:07 PM
1

I think you bought it. Your sample is just a small non-representative sample. The studies are talking about tech in general. No shit they don't relate to every single place? You mean, like statistics or the theory of probability can't predict the outcome of a particular dice throw? Of course they don't. They describe the majority, not your place and your circle of friends, which is biased by definition. Who's to say, that virgins aren't just invisible to you and you happen to connect better with…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 07:06 PM
1

How does it free men from that role? They are still expected to do it and can't be stay at home husbands. They always could travel the world and tend bars if they wanted to. Now on the other hand, sex and getting sex is a strong motivator so if a man isn't born with great genes - he has to earn a lot to get something from a woman he'd like.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:55 PM
1

Biology determines whether someone is a person't father. The law determines what obligations come along with that. The law can say a man doesn't have any obligations to his child, but it cannot make him not the father if he is (and it cannot make him the father if he isn't) because that is a biological fact. Yes, biology is fair. The law isn't and that's what I'm discussing and what OP was discussing. Because the law gives all power to woman and protects her advantages while making man's advanta…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:51 PM
1

They might do that, yes. How is it unrelated? Read again.You're saying oh if she had a ONS in the past it doesn't mean she's aggressive. Yes it doesn't. What it means is that she was attractive enough to the guy she had a ONS with to have it. It's all about the outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:40 PM
1

This is a simple disagreement about economics. I feel that the fair solution is for the amount they are responsible for should be based on what they can afford, and you don't. It's not about "punishing" anyone and I resent the accusation. It is punishing the higher earner. Also, in this scenario they BOTH can afford paying $750, the one who earns more just has more left. But none of them will starve to death or anything like that. So why wouldn't they pay equally? What happened to equality? I'm …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:38 PM
1

They can have positive effect, I'm not arguing with that. I'd consider a woman who didn't have a bunch of dicks and she would have a very positive effect, that's true. But the one I feel disgusted with? I don't think so.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:35 PM
1

No, you wouldn't be allowed. Read the OP again. You simply have choice between two options. You can always choose the other one if you don't want him to sleep with others. But no you wouldn't be allowed to sleep with other either way. Think of a muslim country or something. You do it - you get stoned.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:34 PM
1

It doesn't matter what seems logical and what either of us thinks. If you really work in tech and have a tech diploma (not there as HR or something), then you should understand that your sample is nothing compared to those studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 06:26 PM
1

Just because a woman has had a ONS in the past doesn't mean she's aggressive to the point where if an attractive man asks her to dinner, she's going to try and skip straight to fucking instead. It's not that the man "isn't allowed to", but that sex isn't the top priority for either person - the date itself is. Yes it usually does. You really don't believe that it's the same woman that will be like "oh you didn't behave so no sex tonight - go sleep on the couch"? If she ever makes you work for wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:39 PM
1

The woman carries the child, therefore she can choose what happens to it. The man doesn't so his choice ends at conception. That's what I mean by biology being unfair: The man has no inherent biological right to determine the fate of the fetus because it isn't inside his body, so why would that "right" exist in the law? Therefore, the fetus or the woman has no biological right to demand the man's support them. No, not the right to determine the fate - but the right to no support it since he has …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:33 PM
1

Biology defines what a "parent" is. I never said it is the basis of everything, but your claim that the father of a child isn't necessarily the father is just ridiculous. It's not. Biology defines whose DNA a child has, not who has to raise it. The system isn't perfect. Ideally, I think there should be a set amount and each parent is responsible for an equal percentage of their income until that is reached. So hypothetically if the amount the child needs is $1500 a month, and one parent makes $5…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:24 PM
1

I didn't say that was biology, I said biology is what makes him the "father". So? And the law is what makes him to pay. And can make him a father or make it so that he's not a father. Should we base how things should be on biology or not? I thought you meant yes, insisting on biology making someone a father. But then what does it have to do with supporting children? Biology doesn't make men do that. There are two fathers - the one who gives sperm and the one who raises a child. They aren't usual…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:19 PM
1

You can get to know her after fucking. ANd sure, if she tried to throw herself at him but he said - "no let's have dinner", then yes it's all good. She did show intentions of fucking. But if others fucked her just like that but this one isn't allowed to... Yeah, it's a bb. And WTF? Where did I ever saying anything remotely close to attractive men not having dinners? Also, why do you think attractive men can't be bb?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:12 PM
1

I don't need a woman to feel alive or bring out the best in me. I feel alive by myself just fine. The desirable outcome is to not be fucked over in a deal - not pay full priced for something others used for free. Not be someone's plan B who decided to "explore herself" instead of exploring books and doing homework or something else useful and most definitely not be someone's #38 or something. How special is her "exclusivity" or commitment or sexuality to me if so many others got it? Nah, that ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:10 PM
3

Thats because men are more likely to have actually done the crime. Facepalm. He just told you, taking a man who has done the crime and woman who has done the same crime with a lot of the same other details, he will get a harsher punishment. It has nothing to do with who is more likely to do the crime. All the people in question did do their crimes and were called guilty.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 09:03 PM
1

No, it's not about my insecurities. Wanting to have the desirable outcome is not insecurity. I know what I want and how I want to see myself. And what type of behavior I want to encourage, too. And what type of behavior I don't want to encourage and be a part of people's (who indulge in such behaviors) life plans or contribute to their happiness.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:53 PM
1

google rollo smv curve. it's not "So will her husbands" blah. Sexes don't follow exactly the same laws. And her husband will be around or higher than her SMV as he ages. She gets to gain a lot - companionships, comfort etc. Socially accepted way of having a family. It's really weird you're even asking this. Are you saying most women don't want to have a family? Anyways, this is being discussed in the neighbor topic about men paying. Read it, there are other women saying what gain from being with…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:48 PM
1

But it's not about higher "goals". If she liked him enough, she would've wanted to have sex and would push for it. If she had sex "for free" with another men in the past but goes to a dinner with this one? Yeah, he's right. Sounds very BB. And considering that 60% admitted to having at least one ONS (not even mentioning other forms of casual sex... that was in another thread here), it's pretty safe to say that what he said makes sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:40 PM
1

What to think about here? Didn't she say the vow? Wtf is wrong with people these days, that they don't want to be responsible for their words. No one forced her to say vows and commit to marriage through "thick and thin" and "til death do us part". So no, not grounds for divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:30 PM
1

Um...that's not biology. Yes it is. He provides sperm and then keeps going. What's not biology is any form of "obligations" or "support" that he (or she) is forced to pay. That's pure law. In my opinion, yes, you should. OK. Then a nonrhetorical question - are feminists who claim to be for equality, fighting for that to be implemented(because I haven't seen examples, but I assume you are a feminist so you should know)? And if not - then do you see how hypocrite they are and how can you identify …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:17 PM
1

Biology is unfair. Biology is fair. The law is unfair. According to biology, if that's what you're gonna take as a main instance, a man can leave the child with mother and never come back. How come a woman's biological "right" and "power" are reflected in the law and man's aren't? Are you supporting this or equality? No, it doesn't. Child support goes to whoever is taking care of the child to be used for the child. If the father has the child the mother pays support. If a grandparent takes the c…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:09 PM
1

That's not how biology works. So now we only talk about biology? Then what legal obligations are you talking about? That's not how biology works.. Because he has an obligation to support his child, just like she does. Her support can be enough and if she has custody then why'd he support? What about the cases where he pays more support than what she spends? Also, why is that support based on his income and not a flat value enough for a child? You really really really believe that the system is f…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 08:04 PM
1

That's not approaching differently. You're saying that a trend can't predict anything about a specific woman. But that's irrelevant to what you said that it's a male projection and sex doesn't affect bonding. In general it does, which you can read about. For example, the link above.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:54 PM
0

No, he's no one to the child, because he had no say in whether the child will be born. She might as well have had a sperm donor or sleep with a guy whom she won't see again. It's her responsibility then. You still didn't answer anything I asked. What if she can afford raising a child if she cuts her expenses (or even if she doesn't), then why should a father pay? What about the case, where she cheated and got pregnant by another man and a "father" only found out later? Yes, it's the law. But thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:50 PM
1

Yes there's. The reasons you only see ones about women are: 1. you're only seeing them because they are linked here and that's what people are talking about here. If you do your own research you will find both. 2. They don't have such interesting correlations like women's, that's why only the part about women is published and it just mentions that "no such correlations" was found for men or "correlation is not as strong" blahblah. Depending on what you're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:46 PM
1

I don't care about causation in this case. Correlation is more than enough. That's the case where causation is not and can not be defined. Not to mention that high n count itself without any other qualities it can correlate with is a turn off.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:44 PM
1

why would she trap herself in a sexless marriage with someone below her SMV? Why do you think her SMV doesn't drop when she's older? We don't need to get married anymore, so why would she waste her time and money on a marriage she doesn't want? You are so young and naive. Just for your own good, don't give up to feminist propaganda and don't turn this into "strong independent slut" because that's "empowering" and "your body your choice". You WILL regret it, I promise. And yes, the paragraph is l…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:42 PM
2

If he contributed the sperm that made the child, he's the father. That's basic biology. No, he's a sperm donor. If you wanna talk about basic biology, then a father chooses whether to support a child and can't be forced to. It's up to a mother to make sure she's nice and aren't sleeping around so he can't question who contributed the sperm. AND if they "divorce" - they divorce. For the evolution's and natural selection's sake, no, children shouldn't get support from fathers if mothers can't choo…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:39 PM
1

Yes, and when he was a child (until he legally came of age and had to start taking care of himself), his father was obligated to support him. It's not like this is a new concept. And keep protecting his rights now and dont' force him to pay for something he can't be responsible for. Because he can't have a say in whether a child will be born, while a woman can. Children have the right to demand care from their parents because they are incapable of caring for themselves. They have two parents, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:36 PM
1

That's not his child, it's hers. If she's the only one who decides its fate. She and her family can take care of it. Also, you didn't answer. What if she has enough money for her child without his support? Why should he pay then? Then it's obligation to her, not to the child, because it's done in order to compensate her expenses. Please explain why you believe a parent shouldn't have an obligation to care for their offspring. He's not a parent, she is. It shouldn't work that way, that she has al…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:32 PM
1

In a hypothetical where you aren't allowed to leave, nothing changed about you having to keep acting according to the promise you made. No one forced you to. So, when I say I would cheat, it is because it would look that way only because I am not allowed to leave. That's hamstering. You cheat because you want to cheat. Whether you're allowed to leave or not, if you said you won't cheat - you shouldn't. No one forced you to.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:29 PM
1

one school does not equal all of the tech world Exactly, that's why - no, the majority of people you saw in your school are. The majority in all schools are virgins as you can see in the provided link.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:27 PM
1

but also a few really amazing ones. no. just more poisoned ones. There's way more amazing ones in the bowl with small n-counts. Sluttiness is not something to be amazed about. My point is that you'd rather rely on her n-count instead of just listening to her for an hour and doing some activities with her. Just get a read on her and you will see if she crazy, so why use an unreliable factor? It's way more reliable than intuition. As if girls never pretended or couldn't hide some of their qualitie…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/17 07:25 PM
1

Incorrect. No different premises. There's only 1 question - does the number of sexual partners affect bonding. Studies seem to show it does. But you choose to close your eyes and not look.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 09:29 PM
2

If you know that there are poisoned skittles in the bag, will you take and eat some? Didn't think so. You can spend time doing chemical tests and such to make sure it's not poisoned, or you can just take another bag.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 09:28 PM
3

Causation and fault both matter lolwhat? Why? Do I care that she has a high N count because she's a psycho(for example) or she's a psycho because she has a high N count? I just should avoid her either way.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 09:09 PM
1

It's not TRP arguing that. Studies show something like that. In fact, men are slightly more able to sustain LTR or marriage the higher the count iirc.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 09:07 PM
1

It doesn't matter. Not arguing about semantics. You still didn't answer none of my questions. Then why give money instead of buying stuff for them? Or not require her provide all receipts and stuff to make sure all money was spent on a child? Why not a flat amount of money? If a father is a millionaire they'll make him pay more. Why? There should be a calculated amount that is enough for a child to survive, and that's what men should pay regardless of their income. if a mother can afford to supp…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 09:04 PM
0

That doesn't make it their right. Also, they already have an adult - their mother who chose to give birth. You still didn't answer the first question. Why should a father be punished? She's single and chose to have a baby. She can pay for it herself - and her family can help her as they are her family. A "father" is no one to her. Also - what if she can afford raising a child if she cuts her expenses (or even if she doesn't), then why should a father pay?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:51 PM
1

It's like, I can disagree that the earth is not flat, but why would I hurry with that and not do research and read? Just no idea why you choose not to know how it actually works.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:49 PM
2

What does it have to do with what I asked? also, if a mother can afford to support a child by herself but a father still pays support, then yes- it's the money for the parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:47 PM
2

Then why give money instead of buying stuff for them? Or not require her provide all receipts and stuff to make sure all money was spent on a child? Also, why not a flat amount of money? If a father is a millionaire they'll make him pay more. Why? There should be a calculated amount that is enough for a child to survive, and that's what men should pay regardless of their income. But that's not really what we see.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:44 PM
1

Paternity tests don't mean shit. He might just happen to be a "father". If she was sleeping around but happened to get pregnant by him and not others, it doesn't mean he owes her anything. What if it was a gangbang, who's a father then? Her body her choice and all. Not even talking about the legal side of paternity tests, and how you can't use them even if they show you're not a dad, if you took them without her consent or too late (3 years or something before the child is "yours" forever?).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:37 PM
6

Why shouldn't it? If a father can't have a say in whether to abort or have a child, then it's not his child. It's her child. He just happened to be a sperm donor (who happened to "win", because she could be sleeping with multiple men. which btw, what if she got pregnant after being fucked by N men at the same time?).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:33 PM
1

And if a father doesn't make this decision then why should he be punished? A father is someone's child too, btw, if you're trying to make emphasis on child's "rights". Or to be blunt, why would a child have more rights than an adult who actually contributed and is still contributing to the society (unlike a child).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:28 PM
1

But then doesn't the man consent to the possibility of pregnancy by sheer virtue of having sex? Not really. if for example she said she was on pills and lied - then what? Also, to be fair, he's not the one getting pregnant, so... Consenting to the possibility of her pregnancy doesn't mean he consented to having a baby with her. He might just not mind that she wants to be a single mom. Also, she has a choice to keep a baby or abort it. So in a way he consents to her choosing either of the two. In…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 08:18 PM
1

More and more, yet the majority of older people don't want that. No it's worth it for a guy. But obviously a woman pretend the attraction is there more often than not. The dead bedroom usually happens after the marriage, before marriage everything is fine and how would a guy know it will change.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 06:30 PM
1

Yes they might project. But that doesn't change the fact that they happen to be right in this one question. Even if they didn't mean to.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 06:28 PM
1

The vow was already broken, I would no longer have to be loyal to that person. Q.E.D. But that's not what you were trying to say here. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5k25yv/cmv_the_socalled_alphas_women_may_date_in_their/ddr03gf/?context=3
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 06:14 PM
1

Yes, if you are trying to say that the fact that the majority of guys you know aren't virgins is somehow falsifying the general trend that he linked, then you are committing a biased sample fallacy. And if you just mention it to share your feelings, then well stop doing that. It came across as you trying to say that what he said is not true because you see different guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 06:12 PM
1

. I have no reason to sleep with someone who cheats on me. It is disrespectful. Absolutely. But you also have no reason to cheat on whoever you promised not to cheat on, right? Because didn't you say that it was oh so bad in another thread? Yes you did. You can just not have sex if you don't want to. But cheating is breaking your own vow/promise, which I'm pretty sure didn't end with the words "unless you cheat".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 06:00 PM
1

Once again, just google and you find a lot about the topic. Like http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-445X.2000.tb00014.x/full - random link I got just googling. You are arguing either just for the sake of arguing, or because you're hamstering and can't let yourself admit that slutting around can have a negative effect on anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 05:58 PM
1

Yes, and I explained to you why you observed it. You both are right, but what he said is more general and is more credible than what you said, because the sample is bigger, and it actually has some numbers etc. Yours is just "oh I know some people". What you said is biased. Of course you don't know virgins. That's the whole point that they are mostly invisible to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 05:55 PM
1

Duh. That's irrelevant to this sub-thread,though. But yes, men need to realize that. Their parents should teach them, media should show that etc. Yes we tend to be less attractive in STEM. Well, guess what, if you want to be really good at it, you need to spend a lot of time practicing it. No surprise here, though. And unlike some other jobs, this one doesn't go along with the active lifestyle, like, idk, a lifeguard or something. But you need to realize one thing too. Women are and will be coer…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/17 05:54 PM
1

Risk of cuckoldry is real and not just projection. And on top of that, yes, it is special for men if a woman didn't give it to other men and wasn't easy for anyone. That's not related to cuckoldry etc. It's more like wanting something exclusive and applies not only to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 10:34 PM
1

Well they are not fake, oxytocin and stuff is released, and it gets old at some point. I won't look for the link, you can google it yourself. but ok.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 10:13 PM
1

I am a scientist. And I did ask scientists about this particular subject, too. You are wrong. The actual sad thing is that you're so ignorant and can't admit it :(
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 10:11 PM
1

Because that's how they are raised. But anyways, the topic was a little more general. It's not about matching cloths, it's about life paths.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 10:02 PM
1

You are by all means should not have sex with them if you don't love them anymore. But cheating is a whole different thing. It sounds like "oh you did/didn't do that? Then I'll cheat". Also, not sure why you think that in this scenario your partner doesn't respect your polygynous relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 10:00 PM
1

Your "observation" and how it doesn't change the fact that he was right is explained.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 09:59 PM
1

There. You said there was no way I could possibly know if a guy enjoyed them (wrong), said pretty much everything else is better (to you). You also think it is ghetto to give someone a handjob in the car. So clearly you don't understand that people can have different preferences than you and could possibly, actually, find handjobs very enjoyable, enough so that they sometimes ask or hint at one. That's a definition of ghetto. And once again, I didn't say : u siad you think handjobs are a waste a…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/17 09:58 PM
0

No, both of us described the classic sexual vs natural selection argument. Then the peacock example. I'm sure now you have no idea what you're talking about. No actual scientist would use a wikipedia definition and say that it's standard. Not to mention that you didn't recognize that we both were talking about natural selection vs sexual. You are the one who needs to get your stuff together here. Go read an actual book. lmao, standard definition, from wikipedia. Can you believe this guy?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:26 PM
1

But it didn't look like that at all from this line of replies. Also, I replied to that comment with "line of men". You do have it. On any dating app or site. Create an account there and choose whoever you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:23 PM
1

You should specify the steps then. If you mean steps like getting in shape and such - yes they will work. As I said - and that was my focus - the steps where the contact with other men is implied won't work.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:22 PM
1

I'm not attacking you. I'm answering your question. Mean girls don't get a line of men. Shy girls and nice (=sweet) girls do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:19 PM
1

No, he had a point. He was arguing sexual vs natural selection. You are the one arguing semantics. Also being annoyed doesn't give you the right or excuse to talk like that. Especially the fact that you "got annoyed" after only one comment. So no. You probably took biology I in your freshman year and wanted to feel superior because you think you know it all now. That's how it looks at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:17 PM
1

I'm glad that you date a cuck who still wanted to stay together after you started cheating. As I said, almost no self-respecting man will sign up for that. I promise you, that most likely you will break up with that men "put in the situation later" (or already did) and it will be because of that "dread" even though he won't tell you that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:15 PM
1

Lol that string of replies+ "where's my line of men". So turns out - and you proved it yourself - that guys don't actually go for mean bitchy girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:13 PM
1

Any dating app or site.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:12 PM
1

LOL that is exactly what he said. Every single sentence. So the point is, why would a man work towards being a provider, when instead he can work towards being hot. Like, why would I spend all this time to get a PhD which I thought would make me cool, if instead I could've spent this time going to the gym and having some active job to make and keep me hot? But a lot of men understand it too late, deep into a PhD or already being old and they don't have many options. And that's another thing. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:07 PM
1

Women would much rather marry the hot poor guy than the ugly provider. Soo yeah, play by the same rules as women. You can't expect women above your SMV to want you because you're in a STEM field. Answers OP right from the horse's mouth.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:04 PM
1

Lots of stories around of guys finding past messages, vids, hearing from friends etc, about their SO's previous escapades. Someone should be collecting them all in one place.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 09:00 PM
1

And yet someone will marry those girls who would come over. And you bet their husbands won't get their sexual best, and won't even know they had FFM threesomes in the past. Because she's not like that anymore and apparently sexual best, FFM threesomes, anal etc are for guys she doesn't care about, but when she loves him, they are off the table.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:55 PM
1

Therefore it is special for men. More precisely, it is special if other men aren't able to get sex from a woman in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:47 PM
1

Yeah sex does lead to bonding. Search something like "bonding hormone" and you'll see. And it makes sense that studies show that the number of sexual partners correlates with a lot of bad stuff including divorces. Just because getting sex is easy doesn't mean it's more special. If others got it easy, that makes it less special for a husband.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:45 PM
1

It does reduce it's value though. Why'd you want to buy a cow if others got its milk for free? The reason why you hear that men prefer good girls is because they want to feel special in the sense that they got something others couldn't get.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:42 PM
1

define bad. I don't think I'm bad, yet commitment without sex is friendship, basically. It's pointless in a sexual relationship such as marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:40 PM
1

Well, that doesn't change the fact how men are. You would need to be a man to understand. You would also understand if you listened. But apparently you just disagree with whatever you don't want to believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:36 PM
1

No, there's not. For example, peacocks and their tails. They select for them because they attract attention. It's a trait needed for males to get laid, not for species to survive. It's not just semantics, it is indeed different. Evolutionary purpose is if traits were needed for individuals to survive, sexual selection involves traits that don't have such purpose and are selected for just for the sake of being selected for. There's no pressure on a species to have those traits. Only on males to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:35 PM
1

It doesn't matter. It's just a detail. If she had any form of casual sex, you can imagine it was there - doesn't matter. It's still gross that someone got it easy and you have to put more effort and give up trying other options.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:23 PM
0

No you read what he said. He said Sexual selection is not evolutionary. And he's right. It doesn't mean it's not an evolutionary process. It is in the sense that those traits are passed on in next generation as well as preference for them. But it's not evolutionary in the sense that there's no evolutionary reason for those traits to be selected to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:21 PM
1

Western men don't have because it's not legal. Women don't fuck anyone, pegging is not that widespread, they can get fucked by others, okay. But those others are still within that 1%, so nothing changed. Also, a not-faithful harem is still a harem.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:19 PM
1

No, this is incorrect and I"m not a redpill man. Men are looking for a woman who loves them and want to love such woman. If she's seeing other men, then she doesn't and there's no need to stick around, because she's not a girl of his dreams in this case. They will stick around "for kids" if they are married, but more often than not, attempt to dread in a relationship will lead to a break up, I guarantee that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:11 PM
1

Why should a man be punished for her cheating in case it leads to divorce? And yes, it is very great of an issue for lots of men. Either way, you're moving goalposts now. The thing about 1% men having harems is true, even if those harems aren't 100% faithful.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:09 PM
0

No he's right. Natural selection is one thing. Sexual selection is a bit different. It can happen for traits that are not needed or no longer needed for survival. For example, peacocks and their tails. They aren't needed for survival of the species, but the brighter they are the more attracted females are, so those genes are passed on. But it doesn't follow from evolution. Moreover, those tails are harmful for survival because they attract predators as well, while peacocks can recreate without t…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 08:07 PM
1

So most guys you knew where not virgins and you knew few guys who were, even though they are the majority otherwise. How is that contradictory to what he said?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:53 PM
1

No. Same happens in eastern europe, at least during the school time - up to mid 20s. And then later that lack of experience doesn't help too.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:50 PM
1

In our society no rich alphas have multiple wives, if by our society you mean West. If you mean humankind in the 21 century, then yes, 1% rich alphas have harems in muslim countries. And yes they might get cucked, it's a risk every man takes even in monogamous relationships, but if she gets caught she will be dead and it will be legal. See, at least they have that. Men in monogamous relationship risk getting cucked, but they don't have multiple wives, their wives won't be punished if cheat, and …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:49 PM
1

So they are sleeping around with other rich alphas? That still means that 1% men are getting a harem. They actually don't, because the women sleep around and are not faithful to just one 'alpha', so no alpha has monopoly over the sexuality of the women he sleeps with. Yeah no, as societies where multiple wives are legal show, they don't sleep around. If they sleep around that's considered cheating and they get stoned for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:43 PM
1

So you need reasons not to cheat? It's not something you would do or would never do, but you only won't cheat if a man does something to prevent you from cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:40 PM
1

No it doesn't. It has the opposite effect after a certain step. No self-respecting man will be okay with her talking to others or possibly seeing others. Preselection might work on women. Women might want to fight for a man if they think he's seeing somebody else. For most men, however, those things are huge turn offs. Another dick in the picture? Bye. Maybe not coldblooded bye, and he'll be hurt and all, but he won't pursue he as an LTR option anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:34 PM
3

I am in my early 20's, and after graduating high school, the guy had to be on some kind of stable career path. And that hasn't changed. You don't need to be rich. Just make a decent income. $40k plus. I make significantly more than $40k so I am not asking for a lot. More if you want kids, though. No one would call that gold digging. Then again, if you don't require bank statements from men you hook up with, but require it from this man, don't be surprised he won't be ok with that. BUT you are no…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 07:31 PM
3

Men do it too. Irrelevant. You want a man with a stable job: "you're a gold digger" Yes, because you probably didn't require that from a guy you dated when you were hotter and younger. Also, you're supposed to love him for who he is, not for what he does for you. Just like he is looking for a girl he will love just cause. You want to marry when you are over 25: "you just want to ride the cock carousel" Wrong and misleading. No one will say that if you are in an LTR and is just waiting until your…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:55 PM
1

Okay so it is still a double standard, but why should "less women want to have casual sex" logically lead to "women shouldn't be allowed to sleep around"? No, how is this a double standard? Double standard would be if you don't judge one group of women for sleeping around but judge another group of women for something you don't judge the first group for. Eh, why would it lead to that? The latter standard was in place long long before the former statement. Also, they are allowed to sleep around. …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:41 PM
1

No, that's not "just like". In case of casual sex they both want sex and both get it. In your scenario he wants sex and she wants dinner and only one of them gets what she wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:37 PM
1

No I have no solipsism. You are comparing incomparable things, that's all. He wants sex and he wants you. Ideally - both at the same time, if that's not possible - then separately.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:34 PM
1

lol. You need to read on Occam's razor and russel's teapot. If I'm unlikely to meet them - then why even say that they exist? Either way, you were wrong saying "almost never". That's not true. For all we know, almost every girl in a dating pool did have casual sex. The girls we'll never meet aren't in that pool to begin with, moreover we can't even falsify or confirm their existence if we can't meet them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:32 PM
1

Ok to put it another way because your hamster is spinning. You siad you think handjobs are a waste and you assumed that non of the guys I know have enjoyed them, so clearly you don't understand that people can have different preferences when it comes to what is enjoyable in sex. No, show me the exact words where I said that. That's not what I said. You do. You have the burden of proof. That is how it works. I admit you have posted a source but since it will not open in my browser i can not actua…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:29 PM
1

So if you can't find them in usual place that means it's almost impossible to find them. If they just sit at home then there's no difference if they exist or not. But you're right, there are other social things other than bars etc. It's not like you meet them that often anyway. Seems like the only way to meet one is to be introduced by a friend/family member. Either way, that "almost never" part is wrong. Plenty is not a majority and not a majority of who we meet. Because if you don't meet them,…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:24 PM
1

This leads to a double standard where guys sleeping around is accepted because it's just in their nature, but it's assumed that women that sleep around are going against their nature and therefore must be broken in some way and therefore must be shamed and socially excluded for being abnormal. How are these double standards? They are different standards for men and for women, because men and women are different. If I say a standard for bikes is to have 2 wheels and for cars is to have 4 - these …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/17 06:20 PM
1

Right...sure...because tone can't come across via text /s No in this case it can't, because there is no tone. To show that you don't know everything about sex if you think handjobs are automatically not worth it and "no different than masturbation" This is bullshit and there's no causation or correlation between two things. Have you ever operated a nuclear reactor? That doesn't mean you don't know nuclear physics. You didn't back up any of yours, so why would I? You are the one making the claim.…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:29 PM
2

It's not a competition between him and her. How is that relevant? She wants it too, otherwise she wouldn't have it. You dinner thing is not similar to this at all, because he doesn't want to just pay for her obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:22 PM
2

That doesn't really disprove what I said at all. Good for you and your friends and for yall's SOs. But are you really arguing that there aren't so many girls on tinder and such, bars, clubs, who are hooking up with guys they aren't in LTR with? Or girls who do short "relationships", or girls who have FBs? come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:19 PM
0

What do you mean, what double standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:16 PM
1

He wants sex more than he wants you. Wut? There are two independent axes with different units and his desire is a function of two. You can't compare quantities with different units, too. Is 2 meters longer than 5 kelvin? No idea what you just said.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:12 PM
2

How is that similar? In his scenario a woman wants something too (sex), that's why she has it. No one was talking about rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:10 PM
1

yet, it happens so that it's almost impossible to find a girl who never had casual sex and has a low count. So it's probably not "almost never" like you're saying..
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 10:07 PM
1

OK I received it. And the title is the same. It's weird the search wouldn't find it.
/r/TheRedPill09/02/17 06:10 PM
1

Your attitude comes across as making it seem worse. You can't pretend your tone doesn't come across that way even if you don't actually use the word worse There's no tone, there's just text. You need to stop imagining things. You're arguing with yourself. lol right, it is totally ghetto to have some fun "risky" sexual activity, some people enjoy it in cars. Others fuck in the park at night. It isn't ghetto, it just isn't your thing. I have been reminded by a guy about a handjob that was memorabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 06:08 PM
1

In that case we'd still find the post with comments by searching for the thread's name and/or her reply to a comment. You have both of them in your post. Yet - the only thread google finds is yours. p.s. Mentioning the thread's name without the link and this part: In a response to a comment she qualifies the statement thus: He does look wimpy, he has the body of a hairless michael cera. ... gave you away. If she just deleted the text, the rest should still be there.
/r/TheRedPill09/02/17 05:13 PM
1

You've said women who have sex are 'worse' than men who have the same amount of sex. You have said this without evidence. That is shaming. Own it. Quit hamstering No, I didn't say that. I did a ctrl+F to search, and the only one who said that is you, trying to put words in my mouth again. I said that they are affected by the number of partners differently, not that it's universally worse or better. lol have you literally never had a good handjob? Never had one in the car in a parking lot? Never …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 05:39 PM
1

No, they didn't choose anything. Chose between what and what? Between having a high salary somewhere else and being a soldier? Pls. They didn't have viable options. And if you touched it, here's another example of feminist hypocrisy for you - the push for women in STEM: scholarships, 2:1 hiring rate, etc., even though they choose to works elsewhere. Meanwhile, there's no push for more women in bottom level jobs. Lol, wtf are you smoking. No, that's not a social expectation. That's literally the …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 05:24 PM
1

And men become victims of violence (including domestic violence) at higher rates than women. So what's the point? Women also get approached and have success stories at much much much higher rates than men. No, the food is not poisoned and it's not a better analogy. It's just simple food vs delicacies. No one dies or gets hurt. We were talking about dating/approaching and that some suitors are "creeps". Assaults are crimes and get punished. And let's not forget that presumption of innocence is ig…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 05:17 PM
1

It's not at all like being sexually harassed. In this case a person makes unwelcome and uninvited moves. In case of employer paying differently - it's employer managing his own money and paying whoever he wants to pay as much as he wants to pay. Whatever they want. It's employers' money and they should be free to spend them the way they want. That gives more incentive for people to work and in turn become employers, because they know no one will control their money. Also, in such system, there n…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 05:06 PM
1

For all we know - they were and it does mean that. There was no BC back in the days. And no alpha would bother with a woman who fucks around and he doesn't know who the father is. Either way, you have no evidence and no proof that betas fucked but just didn't get to reproduce. You have no data, let alone good data, on people of that time.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 04:58 PM
1

Draft or not, there are troops fighting right now. And most of them are men. and once again, this is irrelevant. What's relevant is that men have expectations, like they are expected to pursue, or ask out, or pay, or give his seat in public transport etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 11:09 PM
1

Yes they do get approached. Putting themselves out there is not putting effort compared to the effort men are putting. All they need to do is create an account on a dating site/app. Yes, women have it. They have options. They will be hit by some guys they like sometimes. Or they can start being active and still had all those options that just come. No, it doesn't go both ways, not in what you listed. No one forces women to take fake friendships either. They know perfectly what they are doing. "N…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 11:06 PM
2

They weren't committed and/or she didn't care all that much if she could move on fast enough to get a high N-count from a string of relationships. ALso it doesn't matter if those were hookups or boyfriends. The end result is N. Hookups are your relationships if the duration of LTR tends to 0.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:54 PM
5

What evidence shows that? There is evidence showing that 1 man out of 17 reproduced.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:53 PM
1

Once again, stop. We already got it that you have no idea what you're talking about. There's the least amount of need for men you've ever had precisely because you have the biggest army you've ever had. This thread is not about the army. It's about hypocrisy and men having to do more.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:49 PM
1

No, you didn't get attacked 16 years ago. That wasn't war. That's nothing. Yes I do live in America now. And yes you do need to prepare for the worst. That's the whole point. That's why you have army, and that's why you have all those rockets and nukes you aren't using and probably won't even use. Just the fact that you have them decreases the chances you will have to use them. Either way, it's irrelevant. We're talking about men expected to do more stuff than women and having less options in so…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:43 PM
1

I wasn't the first one to use the word settling. Not, it appears to not be just as important, let alone more important, to the same girl for LTRs. That's exactly what I said in the first comment. It's just not what observations show. Exactly the same girl will sleep with some men without commitment while not letting other men that. For example, the story onclejulian repeated multiple times, like a girl was ready to date him but wouldn't have casual sex even thought she would have it without comm…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:37 PM
2

Yeah, I agree with everything you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:34 PM
1

This isn't a female privilege, it's a hot people privilege. It's both. Supply-demand type of thing. Yes, some hot men have it too. Most men don't, though, and most women do. That doesn't change the point. Sure, you have all rights. But you can't be complaining that you also don't want to pursue men because apparently that's something they are supposed to do. You wanted equality? Then be okay with being treated equally. So how does everyone not have equal rights? What would you like to do to chan…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:33 PM
1

How else are you going to get sex if she doesn't want to sleep with you? How does she get money/support from you if you don't want to give them to her even after divorce, and legally it's not robbery? Maybe somehow she can have sex with you and it won't be rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:13 PM
1

What about if you're going into it without open agreement but you're saying upfront and in advance that if a partner withholds sex and/or tries to controls your sexual life (using sex as a bargaining chip for example), then you won't consider it cheating to get it elsewhere?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 10:01 PM
1

That's is absolutely irrelevant. Once again, there's no child in the scenario I was discussing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:59 PM
1

I never said they settled. She's still sexually attracted to that 8. He meets basic requirements and even more. Yet, for casual sex it wouldn't be enough because she could get even more without requiring commitment. ANd it's not SMV+RMV. It's SMV for one and RMV for the other one. RMV does include sexual attraction but the requirement is not as high, even though it is still a necessary requirement.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:58 PM
1

Then invest your money in developing Vasalgel, so that handling your responsibilities may be made easier. Maybe volunteer for trials. Which I might be doing for all you know. It's irrelevant. It's a forum and we're having a conversation about ideas in this case.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:46 PM
2

For one, romantically pursue and approach women. Yes I can confidently say that. We have WAY more men in the military that we need. Wars are not fought with men anymore, we don't need near the same numbers of troops that we need to. We need 1 guy to drop bombs, not 100 men to carry guns. No, you can't say that. If the country is attacked, if the systems are hacked or control centers are destroyed, you will need men with guns. There's no way around it. If you need 1 guy to drop bombs, how come th…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:45 PM
1

There's no child yet. We're talking right after sex. Don't give me that bs. Everyone knows that if there's a child adults are responsible. Now we are talking about basically woman getting man's sperm and impregnating herself and then requiring him to pay. How come? He gave no consent to her not using BC.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:39 PM
1

No, A LOT of men don't. SOME men do. But the majority don't. It's not a legal right, yes. It just happens that women have that privilege. ANd yes, they are not equal just like apples and bananas are different fruits. Yet, you're still saying that you want to have both and men to only have one. No, YOU are comparing apples and bananas. You said: equate wanting to be romantically pursued so therefore they should give up their right to vote. . you can want equal rights and not want to be a man. You…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:37 PM
2

Ok you didn't, a lot of men did. The point here is that maybe they were looking more carefully, because they are the ones wanting to fuck women and not you? Just a thought. It's not about dating down. For example, a girl is 7. She has casual sex with 9+ and dates 8. She is still dating up, but what men are telling you is true - her standards for casual sex are higher. But the 8 guy is sweet and has sense of humor etc, so is more pleasant to be around so she dates him. SMV vs RMV. Exactly. why wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:30 PM
2

BS. yet we see the same woman having casual sex with way more attractive men than the men she dates seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:09 PM
2

Yet, more men can get LTR than casual sex from the same girls. No, in LTR you can make up for being not as attractive with your personality and how you treat her, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 09:07 PM
2

What exactly don't you understand? https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5rrlod/why_does_wanting_equality_in_the_workforce_or/ddak17v/ or this : But don't equate wanting to be romantically pursued so therefore they should give up their right to vote. That's ridiculous. Having an option of being successful only due to others pursuing you is bananas, having the right to vote (For example) - apples. You're saying - I have a banana, you have an apple. I want to have my banana and your a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:50 PM
2

Which is exactly the consequence of having a lot of men in the military. And of men fighting in the first half of 20th century. And no, you can't guarantee there won't be draft. You just don't know that. But the fact is, that men have way more obligations and expectations than women, so you can't say it's not hypocrite to expect more of them while wanting more options and freedom for women. That's not equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:44 PM
1

There you have it. That's exactly what this all was about. So if a woman lied about birth control - she should be responsible for it, not a man, who wasn't lying about anything. (in this scenario). Includes, for example, the case where his BC failed (just like hers could and she wouldn't be responsible since it's an accident), but she lied and didn't even use one properly.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:40 PM
2

It is and it was just one example. There are other privileges that only women enjoy. Whether they are legal or not. The point holds: You're saying - I have a banana, you have an apple. I want to have my banana and your apple, it's not hypocrite because they are two different fruits. No, that's not how equality works. Yes it is hypocrite. If you want equality, have equality. But don't pretend all those things are unrelated.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:38 PM
1

So all those troops in Middle East are volunteers. So IF something happens men won't be forced to fight, so there's no draft. You're out of touch with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:35 PM
1

Yes it fucking is, when it is DAILY. No it's not. People do daily things every day. They are supposed to take that pill every day anyway. Is it the "going somewhere" part that suddenly makes it suffering? Well, people go somewhere every day too - to work, to school, etc. Could open a thing there where you go to check in, for example. It all doesn't matter. The only question I"m arguing about is that how things should be in principle. Because it's wrong that only man has to be responsible for thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:34 PM
1

It's not magical thinking. We were talking about what in principle would be right or wrong. Not how to do those things in detail. What are you arguing with? Do you disagree that it's wrong if a woman lies about BC but then a man is forced to pay? Because that's one thing I commented on, everything else doesn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:31 PM
1

Half the stuff you have said is shaming people. Just because you don't say it out loud doesn't mean you aren't thinking it. It may also come out in your attitude towards people without you noticing. No, it's not shaming. You're not only putting word in my mouth, but now you're putting thoughts in my head as well. Do you really think it makes for a valid argument? You've no idea what I'm thinking and even if I was but wasn't in fact shaming people, then yes it means it's not shaming. it should ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:28 PM
1

Exactly, as it should be. However, it's not a right thing that they are telling business owners what to do with their money. Sure they can dictate what state companies do. Private? Should be able to offer whichever salary they want and a potential employee can simply refuse if he/she doesn't like it. How is that even remotely fair if you can't choose how to invest your money?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/17 08:17 PM
5

The asker would've spent half the money. The asker probably wouldn't go out if the askee didn't agree to go, actually. So no, I don't think it should be like what you said across the board.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 09:30 PM
9

Yes and 99.7% or something of combat deaths are men. Having to fight is not a right. Men don't want that, but they are forced to do it. There's almost no women in combat zones, there's almost no women doing other hard jobs - like mining or working with garbage. They happily let men do those jobs while still wanting to vote. No it's not ridiculous. You're saying - I have a banana, you have an apple. I want to have my banana and your apple, it's not hypocrite because they are two different fruits.…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 09:27 PM
1

That's his business and he pays as much money as he wants to different people. If all business owners do it - it's fair. How would it be fair if he was told what to do with his/his company's money? State jobs yes, they can be forced to pay equally to everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 09:18 PM
0

Then what's your problem? That there's unequal pay for unequal amount of work just like it should be?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 09:11 PM
1

Well it's not that simple. If ALL employers were paying women less (as they once did) I wouldn't really have a choice. If women would still work under such conditions, then why would anyone employ men?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 09:08 PM
5

lol right. No true feminist expects men to pay. No self-respecting feminist .. Sounds so familiar.. No true scottsman puts sugar on his porridge.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:39 PM
14

How aren't they hypocritical? Of course they are. You expect men to do more/have more inconveniences but want to have the same privileges. For example, the point of men voting was because they would fight wars and such if that'd happen. No idea why women can in most countries. ANd they it's ok. It's ok to want equal rights to vote and not want equal obligations to die for your right to vote. That's what they are saying and what you are pretty much saying in this comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:37 PM
1

So BCP would be like the methadone program, they make you front up to an approved pharmacist and take it on the spot? Like... DAILY? At the same time every day? How the fuck is this not making the innocent suffer? Could be delivered or whatever. THose are details and just an example. And no, going somewhere to take a shot or a pill is not suffering. I'm saying that lying about birth control is not rape. There are various other forms of crime I wouldn't mind seeing it defined as. But still, you a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:33 PM
1

Maybe not you, but why did you even join if you didn't read the whole thread? It all started from someone saying that it's a man's responsibility to use protection etc. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5q48b4/the_flip_side_of_deregulating_sexual_marketplace/dcw5cw2/ you should read everything else in that context.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:29 PM
1

but he doesn't need to sleep with his "platonic friend" because he respects her as a friend. How is that a contradiction? o_O
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:17 PM
1

Yeah, not everyone is going to be punished, but everyone should be. No matter the means. Also, the innocent wouldn't be punished or suffer anything. I'm not a chemist and won't come up with a new formula for BC. But it is in principle possible to make sure she didn't lie. Say, make her check in and take pills/receive shots in front of someone. So then court can always come back to those records and see if she took her BC regularly or lied about it. That's just from the top of my head. We aren't …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:09 PM
1

No and it never was. It was about how things "should be" and what they can technically be if there are certain precedents. And just because something is not illegal yet, it doesn't mean that it shouldn't be. And you can't blame a man if a woman lied to him about BC.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/17 08:06 PM
1

Your disgust for someone leads to you shaming them. It has nothing to do with the thing they did. Sex doesn't really affect people. What does is people saying they are wrong for having it, when it is just an opinion. No it doesn't lead to me shaming them. I can control myself and don't run around saying "shame on you" to people. Sex does really affect people. Do your research. Even if it didn't and the only thing that affected people would be others saying something about having it - that itself…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/17 10:41 PM
1

It is rape. If having sex with a drunk person who legally can't give consent is rape, if pretending to be another person is rape, then that's rape. But even if it wasn't, it still should be punished/be illegal. No matter how you call it. p.s. people go round calling calling psychology science or talking about "social sciences". They don't seem to care that words have meanings, and I won't in this case. It doesn't matter and it's not about the proper terms, but about fairness/unfairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/17 10:26 PM
1

We know that lying about such things should be punished, at least. We need to admit that. And then in principle if there's a way to track something - it should be done. That's a whole different topic, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/17 10:23 PM
1

Yeah, and those psychos may be punished with restricting orders and such. So it's still illegal, whether it's rape or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/17 08:32 PM
1

No, you can add something that has no side effect maybe. Assume, that's possible. Then nothing should be wrong about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/17 08:31 PM
1

Source then please. I believe shaming can harm people, but not really the partner count. Two people can have consensual and good sex with 10 different people and both be about the same regardless of gender. However, if someone shames one, that can change. First of all, if sex leads to shaming someone and shame affects that someone = sex affects someone. That's simple transitivity. Second, yes it affects people in other ways, there's correlation between the number of partners and stability of mar…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/17 08:29 PM
1

Obviously cheating has to have another dick involved. Being with another woman is not cheating. Most guys wouldn't care if their girl "cheated" with another girl, too. They'd even find it hot lol
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 11:14 PM
1

uh huh, I remember earlier you said you don't leave your house or take shower for months and weeks correspondingly :)
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 10:59 PM
1

So I am not allowed to compare two people yet you can compare two different roles on a team. That makes total sense /s The number of sexual partners does not affect the different genders differently. It can affect how you view the other gender but that is on you. It is no worse for a woman to have sex than a man. You shaming them doesn't change that. You are allowed to compare two people as long as you remember whether their sexes are the same or not. You can't compare two people without taking …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 09:38 PM
1

Alright, then they can come up with the way for it not to clear from blood fast. It can't be that hard to add some marker. There's no need to this now, because it's not a widely spread thing to check if a person was lying about BC, because who cares. The current (obviously unfair system) assumes that a man takes risk but a woman somehow doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 09:26 PM
1

Alright, then they can come up with the way for it not to clear from blood fast. It can't be that hard to add some marker. There's no need to this now, because it's not a widely spread thing to check if a person was lying about BC, because who cares. The current (obviously unfair system) assumes that a man takes risk but a woman somehow doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 09:26 PM
1

No. not necessarily. She could've happened to get pregnant by you days before sleeping with others without protection. It just so happened that she was already pregnant and you can't overwrite pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 09:24 PM
1

Same about pretending to be a specific person who is using birth control when she isn't. It's only fair, isn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 09:10 PM
1

That happens to reasonable people.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 07:37 PM
1

When they lied it wasn't illegal. So they didn't do anything illegal, so why would everyone be in jail? If you make it illegal and people can prove others lied - yes they should be punished. Not necessarily jail, can just make them pay a good amount of money. Either way - it's unfair to say that a man should be punished, when in fact he's a victim of lying. What exactly do you punish him for? And why do you reward a woman for that?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:57 PM
1

So it's his responsibility and she's just a sperm receptacle? If she lies to him somehow it's his fault that she got pregnant? Yeah yeah, the smart choice is to have sex with a trusted partner obviously. But then again - it applies to both. How is it fair that a woman is the only one to decide? If she has sex without taking care of BC - then it's on her to deal with the consequences. It's her body and all. They wouldn't make her responsible if a man got STD from her, right? He'd have to take car…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:53 PM
1

No, it absolutely isn't, since condoms don't give 100% protection. It also doesn't change the fact that the system is unfair to men and forces them to be hooked by a slut. Wrapping it up = trying to minimize the damage for yourself. But it's irrelevant to the fact that it sucks for a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:35 PM
1

Yeah thanks for explanation xdd No, it's just not the case here. The analogy doesn't apply, it just isn't justified by your "probably from a religion that is a against divorce". Sorry. Everyone divorces. And "probably" their sample was representative and covered all possible groups and took religions and such into account.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:33 PM
1

Absolutely correct. You can't make any strict conclusions.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:30 PM
1

Not relevant here.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:29 PM
1

So you have taken up the argument that someone else made. It doesn't really make any difference. I didn't raise the matter of STDs because it has nothing to do with STDs. No, I agreed that the thing happened long before STDs, and explained why and how. Yes, and you learned that behaviour! You didn't come out of the womb feeling this way! You will need to prove that. I learned how to respond to my instincts - maybe. But no one ever taught me how to feel about anything. No, I didn't, I explained t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:29 PM
1

They can remove it in the process. Or punch a hole in it like you said. Any type of lying should be illegal. Just because it isn't right now, it doesn't mean it's right.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:24 PM
1

Which is irrelevant, because no one was saying about religions. The fact holds - they are better wives if one wants a stable marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:23 PM
1

Shouldn't be that way, if she's the only deciding, she should be the only one obliged to support it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/17 06:22 PM
1

Yes, the origin is not STD. IT's paternity. I wasn't the one who mentioned STD. I replied to your comment to explain what was the real reason. But yeah looks like you aren't reading anything and don't follow. You just saw three big letters STD and replied to the letters, not to the comment. It was a different person who mentioned STD, you replied to him, I replied to you. No, it's not learned behavior. If it was learned, then it can be easily dropped. But it can't. The disgust to sluts as potent…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 11:34 PM
1

I'm not. I just have my observations too. And I can never derive that most couples are happy. Like, it's just antiscientific to say something like that, we can't know for sure. But then again, I have this thing about logic lol
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 11:28 PM
1

Pretty dumb, especially if she was getting fucked by other men and you just happened to be a father. Oh well, maybe there would be some other factor that'll make all this not so unfair to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 11:27 PM
2

I didn't know the singer's name myself. Just heard it in the car.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 11:25 PM
1

You don't "observe" anything. They appear to be happy to you, which could be , for example, because you wouldn't notice others or wouldn't see the signs etc. I have no idea how you don't see that there's no reason for you to think they are happy or that the majority of couples are happy as you implied. After all, they didn't say to you that they were happy. At least some men told you they were unhappy. Those didn't report anything. Come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:56 PM
1

No, YOU are determined to defend your beliefs rather than facing reality. That's why it's obvious to anyone that I'm making sense and you aren't. Yes, contraceptive pill blahblah. That's irrelevant, because I was talking about "As I said, stigmatising promiscuity in females massively pre-dates any knowledge of STDs." that quote of yours. So it pre-dates any knowledge of the contraceptive pill even more massively. Why do expect for anything to change? Instincts and genes were being programmed for…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:49 PM
1

I know. And you can't make the assumption that most couples are happy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:44 PM
4

http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/alessiacara/scarstoyourbeautiful.html That crap is all over the place. Even in songs - popular ones, too. All younger women are brainwashed into believing that and grow up like that. Don't even try to tell us you've never heard this song on radio or something. Or used in some video.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:42 PM
1

**get fucked by him/let him fuck her
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:39 PM
1

not at all
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:37 PM
1

a child is a human being with the right to support from both parents. if you don't want to be a parent don't put yourself at risk. simple! A child is not a child until he's born. Or at least formed. So definitely not first few weeks/month. So at that point he can choose to let her know in advance he won't raise it, and then it's up to her to abort it (with his contribution) or raise it all by herself. In the latter case, a child will only have one parent with the right to support from only one p…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:37 PM
1

No I never strawman, you need to stop putting words in people's mouths. Yes, they can appear to be very happy to you, but it doesn't mean they are and therefore you can't use that as an argument in the discussion where you used it. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/5q3iw4/patriarchy_gave_low_value_guys_an_inflated/dcw5na4/ A man is telling you how it is for most men, and yes we kinda discuss such things with other men IRL and can relate.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:34 PM
1

You are confusing the reason and consequence here. People who didn't care that their woman isn't promiscuous didn't reproduce as much as people who cared about raising their own child. That's natural. We might not be naturally monogamous. But we do naturally want to raise our own children. That's why a promiscuous woman is not something we approve of. A promiscuous man is less risk since his behavior can't lead to leading his potential partner to believe she's raising her child but no turns out …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:31 PM
1

lol not really
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:28 PM
3

Yes. To an extent he already is. Rape by deception is a thing and impersonating somebody to get sex is illegal. Depends on a place of course. Like, there was that state where only impersonating husband was illegal.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:25 PM
1

No, they initiate and do things to persuade women, but it's women making the decision to do those things. Are you saying that it's demand's fault that supply is out there? No, no one forced suppliers to make things and meet that demand, they could supply for a different market, but their greed didn't let them pass on possible profit.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:25 PM
1

AH you're talking like stone age? Well it made perfect sense until recently. And even though now they have paternity tests the system is such that men's rights on getting the results and getting them recognized in court are pretty limited and still at least 10% raise children of other men without knowing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:14 PM
2

Then rape by deception is not rape, then she's not entitled to child support if she got pregnant by anyone who she wasn't married to, because she consented to risks of sex. But it's not the case. She will get child support or single-mother support. This is hypocrite and unfair.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:02 PM
1

No pass it on whoever's fault it is. In this case - whoever lied about BC. If a man lies that he's on BC you can be sure he'll be paying.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 09:00 PM
1

I'm never strawmanning and definitely not again. That's what you said: You can't throw a stick without hitting a bunch of average looking couples who seem perfectly happy with each other. No, you can't use it as an argument. THey probably aren't perfectly happy with each other, especially in cases where they obviously had to settle. Like, why do you think all fat people pair up. Is it just a coincidence? Unlikely. So no, most couple probably are not "perfectly happy with each other".
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:59 PM
3

Yes, and therefore no one will ever believe feminists are for equality or fairness.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:46 PM
1

He was lied to. He had sex willingly only because he was lead to believe she got the BC covered. It's basically rape by deception.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:45 PM
1

so while that means yes there maybe some higher scoring majority people not getting selected, That's all you need to know for this discussion. But talking about it in detail deserves a whole separate thread. Details can differ in different places. it's not like the people who got in were unqualified to begin with. Never said that. I said they were less qualified then other people, but those other people didn't get selected while less qualified people did. That is DIRECTLY taking places away from…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:35 PM
1

I know and I was using I in a general sense as in I'm talking as a person we're discussing. But still, what was that about losing weight. Does it apply to dying/growing hair too? I don't understand why you can't admit that some couple are not 100% happy. And it's not because they think they could do better. It's actually because they didn't do better (whether they could or not). Finally, it's as unrealistic as assuming that all couples are happy and partners love each other. They could seem perf…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:31 PM
1

Right. So men try to do that. But it takes forever and it's not easy. And for some men it's impossible at all. That's why they are dissatisfied. And I disagree. I get satisfaction hurting satisfied, feels like delivering justice. Then again, what I meant was not just being nasty towards people. I'm talking about getting at them when something really depends on you. That rarely happens, of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:27 PM
1

I have no idea why you wouldn't pull out if you aren't using condoms either. I'm pointing out that it's hypocrite that a man is punished when he was the victim to start with. And yeah, it should be an excuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:25 PM
1

You're not the one to tell others what's juvenile. No you shouldn't make it a goal of your life to ruin their lives (unless you want it, and it's completely valid to want it). But sometimes you get a chance to do something minor, like when it's related to your job. In other words, being dissatisfied reminds you someone has it better and you should improve or make it worse for them. You can't just stop being dissatisfied unless you fix what makes you dissatisfied.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:10 PM
2

Absolutely, don't have sex is a solution. So no reason to pay for BC for women or men. Yes, those things with different masses and fat compositions are what I wasn't sure about. However, you can still calibrate the test for each body type. Or can add some chemical to all BC that can be traced. Well, and finally: she might have forgotten to take it one day or taken it at a different time. This right here is exactly what makes "She told me she was on BC" a valid excuse. In the quoted scenario it i…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:07 PM
2

I also don't think by providing incentives to minorities you're necessarily standing for limiting the options of the majority, although I understand the side effects of raising one group up can result in the others losing out. Yep, so yes they are limiting options of the majority. Basically, they are N spots, if you give give n spots to some, then others only get N-n they compete for. For example, if we take school that accepts 100 students, but you say let's have a 40% quota for women, then it …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 08:04 PM
1

I'm not arguing that. The point is that what you're saying doesn't relate to the real world. Where they want their tippiest top pick. So yeah, you can't say they aren't bitter that they don't get it. And why would I need to lose weight, right? Do I need to dye my hair, too, if I want a woman with the hair of a different color?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:45 PM
0

Which I bet is easy to verify by a simple blood test. Won't it show that the hormone levels are different if she wasn't lying? If indeed it failed, then yes she shouldn't be charged or anything. Yet, it's not a man's fault or responsibility. It's her side of BC that failed, so she should take care of that (like sue the company that made that BC or whatever). After all, if a man uses condom but it doesn't work - that man is made accountable for the pregnancy and is punished for having a condom th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:43 PM
1

Yes, and we try to adapt. But why would we stop being dissatisfied and stop whining? What does it do? It reminds you who has it better than you and who you should get back at whenever you have a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:39 PM
1

No that's not my source. I directed you where you can find the actual sources yourself, because I'm not going to do it for you. Do you always only read the first sentence? Go ahead and find it, I would simply show that the methodology is flawed. Or remind that both studies are kinda worthless anyway, since it's not science. But why talk about that, there's no such study anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:38 PM
6

"she said she was on birth control so I didn't use a condom!" is not an excuse But it should be. Lying about it should be illegal. When someone scams you to get your money - they are the ones getting punished. Suddenly, if they lie about BC the victim of lies is punished.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:35 PM
2

Yeah purely academic scholarships for women are a thing. For example, see http://www.aps.org/programs/women/ https://www.aps.org/programs/education/undergrad/students/scholarships.cfm https://www.aps.org/programs/women/scholarships/ What is your industry? I just went to the first stem thing that came to my mind, and surely it was there. p.s. I can't be preaching to the wrong crowd. We are talking about empathy in general. You asked why men who want to regulate women deserve empathy. I'm pointing…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:33 PM
1

See the sidebar of trp. Or stick around and they will come up sooner or later. Or google something like "relationship stability number of premarital partners". I won't do your homework for you. Sorry, but who are you for me to care enough to go out of my way to show you? I'm not getting paid for it, it's not a conference either so I'm not getting a name for it. I think you are more than capable of finding those things yourself. I know what I've seen, but I'd need to google to find it again.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:28 PM
2

Yeah lol. Just like those couples where both are fat. They definitely are each other's first choices and have no second thoughts and are completely happy with what they got, and would still choose the same people if they could choose from anyone. Right.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:15 PM
1

It's a proof that people are pressured to marry. WHat happened to equality? They let gay couples marry to get tax breaks. Why can't single people get them? Or how about no one gets them? Or maybe people should be able to marry anything since marriage is not about making kids anymore and is simply about companionship and sex. Why not let some people marry their hands or dildos? But no, that's the tool with which people are pressured to pair up.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:10 PM
0

Lol you need to get a book and read what probabilities mean and how they work. They don't predict anything for one woman. Women are more likely to commit to their first man, not every single one of them will. And yes, there are studies and such. And the divorce rate is the lowest among the couples with the virgin-wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:09 PM
1

Too much to get something others get easily and free. Sure, every man will try and stuff. But they will be unhappy about it and that they are forced to go through it. Not sure what you're arguing with. He told you why men are dissatisfied. What was your point? That they shouldn't and should just suck it up? It doesn't work that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 07:04 PM
3

But aren't we supposed to have empathy to women who want quotas, scholarships and special treatment = men's potential and achievements have to be regulated for the sake of less capable women?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/17 06:56 PM
3

This. Good girls don't date multiple people at once or with short breaks. They also don't start sleeping with someone new after just having a date with someone else a few days ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 08:32 PM
1

If 'Chads' are getting laid so easily, why not be one of them? Because: This is not what I want, it's not really what I'm into at all. And Ideally I'd like a deep connection, a solid healthy relationship. Someone to share my experiences with, someone that 'gets me' and I 'get them'. Someone to bond with and maybe even build a life together. . Then on top of all of that....why even go through all the trouble of say courting a good girl like 'Lisa' and jumping through all the hoops only to get a p…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 08:29 PM
1

Yep, we thought being successful and getting that PhD would help later.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 08:17 PM
1

But you need to make sure that he actually avoids casual sex, by which I mean - he knows he can get it and got it a few times, but chooses not to engage in that risky behavior. Because if he finds himself not having it while others do and it's all over media, he will feel excluded and a loser. Because that's what happens in real life when you are singled out. That is if he tries to get it and fails, of course. If he knows he can get it but doesn't, that's a good thing of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 08:12 PM
4

Because you would want him to be happy? My parents didn't focus on that and focused on other things instead. And then what? You have another guy with high GPA and degrees and stuff who can't get laid like others do. And who knows how it will affect things in future. All those thoughts as in "am I with her because I love her or because I have no other options anyway" can't be good for that guy's future family, I think.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 08:07 PM
1

So you can't argue that it's way easier for girls to have sex after the undeniable proof that can be found after clicking that link. And instead of admitting you just ignore and pretend that part of the conversation never happened? When it was the main topic, actually. Ew. Why do you even engage in discussions when you know in advance you can't ever admit or accept the point you're arguing with. Are you arguing just for the sake of it or why? So you are just butt hurt women tend to have guys ask…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 07:53 PM
1

Yes you are, you're a cuck who also plays around. Just a smaller subset of cucks
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/17 07:42 PM
1

No, what you said is when they say "pump and dump". Getting fucked casually is bad regardless of only using "fuck" in the passive form when applied to women. Seriously, it's just what it is. In some languages it still stayed that way, it's some English speakers who are trying to promote that a woman can fuck a man too (but no, she can't of course, unless there's pegging involved).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 10:16 PM
1

A man who allows his partner to have sex with others, without doing so himself.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 10:12 PM
1

Cuck = a dude who's SO is sleeping with other men. Period. Consent doesn't matter. It only distinguishes cucks who consented(like open or poly relationships and marriages, or fetishists) from cucks who are being cheated on.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 10:10 PM
1

This "women can only get fucked" mentality is really weird. It's not and is reflected in many languages where word "fuck" implies penetrating. It's not weird also because women are sexual selectors while men have to chase sex and work to get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 09:52 PM
1

In your case there's another good explanation though. He didn't commit to a girl who does casual sex. That and yes maybe he wasn't below your league and you overestimated yourself or underestimated him.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 09:50 PM
1

Nope. Yes, the proof is here. http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=144422591 You offer no argument, though. Just being in denial. Let me simplify again. Man = person, woman = person so yes the N count of a man and woman are the same. Why do you think there is a difference anyway? No, man = person, woman = person would work in the context where they are the same. Like, say, they are two employees so they are sexless in this context. Here - man = person with a dick who has to chase women…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 09:37 PM
1

No, you're wrong. Not messaging back send the message - I saw your message and decided to ignore you. It is an interaction. It's textbook stuff, literally.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/17 09:21 PM
1

No...it isn't... Uh yes it is. Sent you the link above. If she has options, any other woman does. Lol let me simplify. A man had sex with 20 people or a woman had sex with 20 people. In this case N=20 for both. They are the same. You are using a double standard. Once again. Write them down on paper next to each other if you're struggling with the screen. "Man had sex with 20 people", "Woman had sex with 20 people". X, Y. They are not equal. DOn't you see the difference? It's not N=20 for both, i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 10:42 PM
1

Yes to all. Absolutely you interacted. You rudely ignoring someone = sending the message. It's just like the absence of answer is the answer. That kind of thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 10:30 PM
1

Finding boundaries can be difficult for women too. If the goal is just to find them - then I don't see how it can be difficult. She can try anything sexual as in any sexual act with as many people as she wants relatively easy. Men and women havin general sex is measured the same. There is no difference between a high count man and woman when talking about the amount of partners. It is a double standard. No. Men and women are different and therefore the standards are different. They are literally…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 10:06 PM
1

It is. A one-sided interaction is still an interaction. Not an interaction is when none of the two messages the other one and they have no (attempt of) contact at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 09:55 PM
1

My point was that women also have difficulties when it comes to sex and relationships. Relationships yes, particularly enjoyable sex - maybe. But getting sex, finding boundaries? No. And I thought that's what we were talking about. Consent doesn't have to be spoken. Meh whatever also counts The point is orgasms tend to equal better sex. Lol yeah, and postcoital nonconsent is not a thing. Wake up, what planet are you on? Here on earth, only yes means yes and if a girl is drunk she can't consent. …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 08:51 PM
2

And they still ghost/ignore on tinder, for example. Where they are free to only swipe right to those they want to talk to. So a part time job isn't an excuse there.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 08:32 PM
1

You are still comparing two different things. Women don't want the same things as men for the most part No one ever said anything about wanting the same things. I compared the same things though - getting laid. You are the one who's trying to compare getting laid by one to getting a date by the other one - now these are different things. If you were just like whatever I fail to see how it was almost rape. I have also had sex that was bad and sex that was good that didn't end in orgasm. I find th…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 07:58 PM
1

Yeah that's why there are sites/apps where they have to message first or match first so a guy can message. And still ... :)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 07:52 PM
1

Oh of course. It's just hypocrite, that's all. And in this case it is a double standard - some users get banned for not making "positive interactions", while others don't. "“As a site that promotes positive interactions between our members " is how they called themselves in that article.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 07:43 PM
1

Yeah it's rude. Like if you come to a person on the street to ask the direction and he just ignores you? No, it's rude af. Using your logic - there's nothing wrong with explaining why he didn't like you. She's not entitled to not get something like that. Yet, the guy gets banned while millions of people who ignore others are considered to be in line with "“As a site that promotes positive interactions between our members ". Ghosting is definitely not a positive interaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 07:42 PM
1

My point is that women in general want different things than men. You can't compare both the way you are it won't work. Yes you can, it very easy, look. It's easier for women to get laid. Boom. Just did it, no problem. So if it wasn't enjoyable why did you stay? We also, as you keep putting it, are talking about sex. Not masturbation. Sex with an orgasm is superior to sex without it in almost every case Because I was drunk and like "whatever". On the other hand, I had sex that was way more enjoy…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 07:34 PM
1

Oh, disgust is definitely a part of it. Also, see the sidebar for a bunch of graphs and studies that were posted here multiple times - and yes, correlation is enough. But now, it's not what it makes her. It's just an analogy to help you understand why the N count itself matters, and not just the intensity of getting it. The absolute value matters - for someone it's disgust, for others it's the likelyhood of her being able to commit, etc, for some it's a combination of all. Doesn't matter. What m…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 06:24 PM
1

I don't understand why he was removed. He just explained why he wants nothing to do with her. That's way more polite than ignoring messages like most women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 06:18 PM
1

But it's not. Again, I spent most of my 20s in the US, so yeah - still applies. The point is - if a woman is trully dating to find a husband, but yeah it's probably not the first or second guy she dated, then technically you can call her a serial monogamist. However, if that's her intent - she will only have long/meaningful relationships and her N count will never reach the slutty territory. Otherwise - I got bad news for her. It applies everywhere. Don't try to say that's it's not slutting it u…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 06:13 PM
1

But you know that genes don't care about "modern environments", right?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 05:55 PM
1

I don't know the reasons every woman sleeps around. I can tell you why I did for a little while, and it wasn't really entirely because of the sex. But the reasons of every individual woman don't matter really. It's the trend that does. They can rationalize it in different ways, but the truth is plain and simple - they like it, that's why they're doing it. If they didn't even like the idea, they wouldn't even start. Rape is an entirely different situation. I am talking about consensual sex. Oh th…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 05:54 PM
1

Or they are some of the lucky ones who can orgasm through sex? Who knows? There could be many reasons. There are, but the ratio is very low. And they still keep doing that, so apparently it's worth and is enjoyable enough? To find someone who is good? That makes no sense. If the probability to find someone good through hookups is so low and it's so hard to find someone good like that, then why not do the other thing (e.g. dating, LTR). It means it was good enough. No it doesn't. It means it was …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 04:42 PM
1

Yeah maybe. The point is, settling down is encouraged for both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 04:37 PM
1

I am, but have been living in the West for a while now.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 04:36 PM
1

Women enjoy the process if it is good Yes, that's what I'm saying. But it doesn't necessarily include the orgasm. Otherwise, why do they still become sluts? They must like the process that much. My point is it is harder for women to find good sex, most aren't looking for random easy lays because that isn't what they want. You want something different, you can't compare the two well. And why do women date or hook up? Because an orgasm with someone is better than doing it alone most of the time, i…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 04:07 PM
1

You don't need to do all those things. Just don't have sex. Because numbers 1 and 3 make you look like a bitch and an unpleasant woman to date. It's the 21st century after all, equality and all. And why would a man want to keep investing his time in a woman who won't give him attention or make steps towards a relationship too. That sends him message that you aren't interested and he should move on. See, I wouldn't pump and dump, but when I'd date my future girlfriends, they wouldn't become girlf…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:59 PM
1

They weren't I think, especially not Putin, cause what can happen to him? It's not like anyone really counts votes in former soviet union anyway, so it's not like he wouldn't get elected again. But people who aren't that high can seriously be given shit for that, like be passed for a promotion and stuff like that. There was even data somewhere showing that and that being a family guy helps.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:53 PM
1

No, I am. N-count IS what shows a slut in the end. Your frequence or N per unit time only matters for girls who didn't have much time, say, she barely started having sex a year ago and you're considering her for a relationship - then she might not get a high N but still be a potential slut. Other than that - you look at the N count. YEs you do expect a person to have sex in a relationship. You also do expect a person who claims to be relationship-minded to have it only in a relationship and at t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:50 PM
1

And doesn't want the std risk involved with you sleeping with other people. OR finds something you don't like and finds a guy on the side for that. Ok, so she requires you to use condoms or get tested if she doesn't trust you or breaks up with you if she doesn't want to deal with all this crap and looks for somebody who's into the same stuff as her. I will reword it. Men get orgasms from most vaginal, oral, and anal sex. Most women need more than just those things to orgasm. So it is incredibly …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:44 PM
1

There are no social penalties for it. None. I have been there, and no one cares if you are fucking tons of women. That's not entirely true. Even top men get shit for it sometimes. Like, when Putin was having something with that gymnast, or like people were giving shit to clooney until he married (someone mentioned it in the sub a few days ago).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:38 PM
1

But why would men be willing to invest in a woman knowing that other men get it easy and without having to work. Especially if other men got it easy from the same girl who now expects this man to invest in her? Now that would be low value and desperate - paying full price for something used others got on a sale.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:23 PM
1

Men seem to get off on "the chase", and they want to feel like they "earned" sex. Don't get it wrong though. They only get off to this if a girl wasn't easy to anyone else. Because "earned" sex implied that she's not "easy". If they'd know for a fact that the girl wasn't easy but get sex fast themselves -they would still get off to this.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/17 03:20 PM
1

Yeah, if she's riding a car and if she's riding bicycle, then it's a whole different vehicle. The speeds are different, but she can still cover the distance. And that's what matters in the end. Personally I don't see how an N-count of 10 is even remotely that much especially so over an span of 10 years, knowing that it is that easy for women to get laid. As if we should increase the limit just because it's easier for them to reach it? That doesn't matter. It was always easier for them. That's on…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 10:19 PM
2

No, I expected to be given the chance to develop a relationship, or at least be privy to his feelings on the matter. So you were given a chance, he didn't like sex with you or how you acted after or whatever, so the relationship didn't develop. So girls have no other choice but to adapt and give the guy what he wants. If all that was true, then they would give it to any guy and couldn't afford being picky. So how come they only give it to a select few and others never get to experience that and …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 10:07 PM
1

You're welcome. You somehow "can't see" how she goes to a slutty territory with 1 man a year, so it wasn't an open door. For some reason you think it's about velocity, when it's actually about velocity times time = "distance travelled". With low velocity it will take longer time, sure, but she still can reach that point. If her velocity is 1 guy per week - it will take 5 weeks, if it's 1 guy a year - it will take 5 years, but it's still possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 10:03 PM
1

She wants to be exclusive and have sex but not do anal as an example. If a guy wants sex elsewhere the woman should also be able to. That is not a double standard. So she wants to be exclusive in oral and vaginal sex, but not in anal sex. Ok. Endless...infinite...basically the same. Sure, and compared to the options men have, it is such. OK so it is much harder for women, because we are often looking for quality sexy which can't really be found in a ONS often. Getting laid, not getting laid and …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 10:00 PM
1

A sexual encounter per year is hardly that much really. I can't see how a woman would enter "slut" territory that way. Easy, once the number of dicks she had is closer to 10 than to 0 - she's there.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 08:31 PM
1

It's not real data though. Real data is if somebody was actually counting their partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 08:29 PM
1

Because they are not "partners" and don't expect it from other "partners". They are "men" and "women", so yeah men expect women to not be available to lots of men and not take a bunch of dicks. YOu can explain it logically, using all those evolutionary arguments. But whether those are true or not, a part of it is disgust and an emotional reaction.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 07:55 PM
1

And if she wants to be exclusive? Also are you basically saying that if a girl wants something different in a relationship she needs to break up but if a guy wants something he can just cheat? That is the biggest double standard and shows more insecurity. Wait, so she wants to be exclusive but not have sex with her SO? And no, that's what I'm saying - if he won't have sex with her, she can insist on getting it elsewhere, too. And finally, no - there are no double standards in sexual relationship…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 07:47 PM
1

No I'm not. But good attempt trying to farm those upvotes, usually calling people names works, too bad noone really read that deep to see that comment of yours. Of course they would keep doing that if there would be no social and career penalties for that. And we all know how they would be looked at.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 07:20 PM
1

Ok then the boys who give you stares.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 06:48 PM
1

Not actually allergic, but she can dump a scumbag who makes it open without her agreeing. She can also get sex other places as well if she likes that it is open, and from my experience that doesn't always go well. Lol She obviously can get sex easily. That's the whole point. She can even get it right here in her LTR but doesn't want to, so he has to look elsewhere. If she just doesn't want sex - that's a solution, since she doesn't want it from others. If she just doesn't want sex with him, then…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 09:29 PM
1

If they say it does matter then it does. It matters to them, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 09:19 PM
1

Whores are not chads. Women want to get fucked by chads and get attached etc. Men don't get attached to whores, they don't want to commit to whores or get their commitment. Men go for whores because they are easy sex and they have no choice. They'd ideally keep sleeping with multiple women forever. Women don't need to go for chads for easy sex. But they have their choice so why wouldn't they.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 09:12 PM
1

I said really allergic as in a drip on your shirt they accidentally touch could hurt them. It was meant to represent that a lot of people are not cool with open relationships. Saying you'll find it elsewhere is not really an option in most situations. Yeah no, but you can't be allergic to open relationships, so yeah no. And ok, then you eat naked so that there's nothing they can accidentally touch. Really? I had to actually work for a long time to get the guys interested. It wasn't quite as easy…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:54 PM
1

Wanting to try and actually trying are different things. Talking or wanting to try doesn't make you a slut. Even trying something with your husband or whatever doesn't make you a slut (that's the whole point of marriage). Or marriage aside, if your N is 1 and you tried everything with that 1 - that still won't make you a slut. It's sleeping around that does.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:46 PM
1

That's because the slutty one will want to go with him faster. If a shy girl wants to go with him, too, he will take her. Or ideally - he'd take both. But then you'd call that shy girl slutty XD p.s. but in real life he won't take anyone home lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:42 PM
1

Whatever helps you sleep at night. He actually did :)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:40 PM
1

Please stahp. That dude that helps you with homework? He'd fuck you. That other dude that chats with you between classes all the time? So would he. That other dude that you're hanging out with just as friends? He'd be happy to get a chance AND would do anything for you sexually including learning whatever you want him to learn with you. You just choose not to get laid, but you can. I'm not gonna ask you for pics or anything, because you'll find the reason not to post them. But no, if you're gett…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:37 PM
1

I'm not forgetting. Of course they do that too until they are put in their place after 100% rejection rate for a while.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:31 PM
1

Well lately I haven't seen much of it on Internet, too. Has it happened to people I know? Maybe - how do you imagine I would start a conversation like that? "Hey man, does your gf do anal with you?" xDD Men don't talk about things like that. Has this happened to me? I hope not, but how can I know for sure? The whole point of those stories is that men discover the past being years deep in a relationship. My point is that it never happens the other way around, no matter how often or not you hear i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 08:30 PM
15

The ironic thing about this is, men ride the carousel with Staceys too. What? 5% of men? 20%? Most don't have that option. And those who do - marrying anyone but not Stacey is the opposite of settling down. The last girl will have everything Stacey got sexually + commitment etc. After all, we hear tons of stories where men don't get sexual best and discover how their wives love sex and certain sexual acts, just not with them. But I can recall 0 stories like that with the roles reversed. Also: ht…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 10:40 PM
2

I'm not upset and dgaf. But he called you out legit.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 10:35 PM
2

But you are. You are getting hit 1-2 times a month AND getting stares all the time (as you mentioned). You are constantly reminded that you are liked and are sexually attractive. That's nothing like what guys go through - dry spells, feeling invisible to girls (hitting on them? there're even no stares), 0 tinder matches, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 10:34 PM
1

Yes, my point is that some things are acceptable, some things are fun, and somethings are a definite no for people. When I find a guy who is awesome in a ton of ways but doesn't like one thing I like or want to try, I accept it. It is like dating someone super allergic to peanut butter. You don't eat it for fear that the oil could cause them pain. I don't do things that are hard nos because I don't want to hurt people, even if I want to experience said thing. I expect the same of my partner You …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 10:32 PM
1

Being upfront with the desires and acting on them are two different things, though. Having desires or talking about them doesn't make you a slut.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 10:23 PM
1

Yep, we'll never know for sure. But the thing is - if a man is choosing a partner, why would he settle for somebody who won't give her sexual best/ doesn't see him as somebody she wants to have porn-like sex with? I mean, almost all men have no troubles with providing comfort and all that. That's the easy part. But just like sardonis said many times, if there's no raw sexual attraction, then what's the point?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:59 PM
1

Yes it is. And yes - any person, but we are talking about women right now, so why would I generalize it? Yes, some people are upstanding enough etc. But they still technically can cheat. And some cheat but pretend that they leave before having sex with a different person etc. There's no way to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:55 PM
2

Uhm the burden of proof is on you. He can tell you shit until you post a pic or something (which still could be not yours). In fact, he can't even know if you're a woman at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:44 PM
1

But not really, because men dont' want to marry stacy. Moreover, knowing that a girl is talking to somebody else at the same time as she's talking to him is a stop signal for many many men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:34 PM
2

I get hit on MAYBE once or twice a month if I'm lucky. Lol are you trolling? Or is it not enough for you? Because most men get hit one or twice a decade xd or stay in your own league. THat's true, you should only go for girls or guys with the same or similar MMR in LoL or WoW.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:30 PM
1

Lol yeah but there could be sexually unsuccessful polygamists :) So that's the only way for them to get sex regularly while still get new partners every now and then. Just saying it is possible, not saying it's good or bad or common/uncommon.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:09 PM
2

It doesn't. Only for some men. While many many men spend their late teens and all 20s doing just that - partying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 09:05 PM
3

Eh and the prohibition of slavery was against the owners' and their children's interests, so? If we are all about justice and fairness, we must give men an option to know for sure. Maybe we shouldn't test it just in case, but we should have like a checkbox where they can choose to pay for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:50 PM
7

And I'm sure that a big chunk of men who were cheated on would think the same way. Not saying that you are wrong, just saying that it's easier to cheat and hide it then to catch a cheater.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:45 PM
1

Any woman might cheat, some don't and some do but just don't get caught. So if someone seems to be a type that wouldn't cheat, it doesn't mean that they are. Why leave it all to trust if you can check? At least if the baby was yours. Unfortunately there's no test yet to make sure she only had sex with you :(
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:44 PM
1

Leonard had more women than most men will have in their lifetime :) Especially those men who chose the path of graduate student - PhD in physics. http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Leonard's_Women 8 names here AND some are REALLY hot (minus 2 he didn't really sleep with, but definitely would if he was willing to cheat). And most of them were in early seasons so he wasn't even 30. People who are objectively more attractive and fun sometimes are much less successful. Just saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:22 PM
1

No, I saw statistics showing that domestic violence is distributed differently - it's pretty much equal but men are victims more often when it comes to things like murder and severe injuries. So you're wrong here. Common sense also doesn't say this.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:08 PM
1

Yeah, it doesn't exist to fucking. It exists to committing. Because biologically speaking, fucking = reproducing and you want to maximize your chances. BUt you also want to minimize chances of raising somebody else's kid and thus committing a genetic suicide.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:04 PM
1

It may not be directly enjoyable enough to cause an orgasm but it is still enjoyable. It can be sexy, fun, interesting, and a good time for the person giving the oral. Some things are not enjoyable at all for some people and I respect that. You seem not to. Exactly, same can be applied to anal or any other sexual act. Oh so you don't have much trouble then. With getting laid casually and exploring my boundaries and completing my bucket list? Yes I do. And what if they are just in to bigger girls…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 08:02 PM
1

Nice. Also shows that they require betas to settle - cause they should be happy with somebody paying less money then they can/used to. That reeks of entitlement XD
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/17 07:52 PM
6

Funny how you use will for one and can for other. An angry woman can kill you too. And an angry man most likely will abuse/shame you, but not kill you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 09:49 PM
1

No instinctual revulsion towards fucking sluts, you mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 09:46 PM
1

Lots of things are done for a partners that are also enjoyable. Oral is one example. I shouldn't have to do something uncomfortable for a partner just because he wants it. Oral is not directly enjoyable. It's enjoyable for a partner - they can orgasm due to stimulation of their genitals. You can't orgasm due to stimulation of your tongue. Like, in this case, tongue is interchangeable, you can stimulate genitals with anything else. That example is making my case stronger, actually. That's exactly…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 09:35 PM
1

Any, not my. And yeah there's more than looks, but that's what I'm saying - I have more than that going for me lol But yeah, I agree that n is a good measurement. And my n is below average I think. But see - that's the thing, the average is skewed by your top 1%. Plus, there are people who marry early or only do LTRs for whatever reason. Another reason for N not to be that great is that it's an ongoing thing, so it doesn't really reflect attractiveness. I can start late even though attractive, o…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:04 PM
1

wait lol, do you mean, basically, that air is delivered to their lungs directly so they can breathe?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:00 PM
1

Not relevant? It is a reason. That should be good enough. Nope, still not relevant. What's relevant is what was done, not how it was rationalized. She could've broken up if she didn't like it. But no, she did because she wanted him happy. It's like the case of giving oral sex - it's done for a partner. Exactly. Everyone gets ghosted so quit whining about it. Oh and guys go through all that shit too? Great. So we are on equal footing. And we were talking about getting laid? Great, then what I wan…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 07:59 PM
1

I don't underestimate the power of idealization. As in, I want that and it's not that idealization is not allowed. Yes usually she does I guess. However, all them scary stories people discussed here and on trp? Yeah, I don't need my girl to be "the hottest", however I will act like she is including giving my "sexual best". If she does the same, then it's all good. Like, I won't say "i'm not like that anymore" if she wants something new.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 07:50 PM
1

why?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 07:41 PM
1

You mean, where men dying to protect women?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 11:19 PM
1

The only person being restrictive here is yourself. Not her. It's you. Absolutely, yet you want to do it without having to lie or dump her. Because if you're in a relationship, you are there because you're in love. Yeah and you can be in love and then stop being in love when some issuer arise. People stop being in love all the time. Yeah you're in a relationship cause you're in love and all that. No you are not entitled to pussy. Yet, you are entitled to choose a partner however you want. That i…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 11:18 PM
1

Maybe she did, maybe she was guilted in to it. You don't know. Maybe it was just expected and she still didn't really want to do it. Maybe the taste is just super unpleasant Not relevant if she was guilted. All that matters is what she did. It is easy. Lower your standards or quit bitching about other people who have standards. Maybe I am looking for my version of a soulmate. I wouldn't find that looking for ons on tinder anyway so I never joined. If it doesn't work, try in real life, lower them…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 11:12 PM
1

No, it doesn't. It says pretty much what you linked. So you compare one to "another" one, which means they have to be of the same type. So in our context, men and women are different, because the context is sexual and they are two different sexes. If we were talking about, say, male and female cashiers, then yes they would have the same set of standards as workers.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 10:30 PM
1

Why? Why don't you like peanuts or something? I just find it disgusting. It's not logical and doesn't have to be. If she gives it up easy for everyone, that won't make me feel as special as if she had high standards (and it would be implied I met them why not many other men could), especially if I'm supposed to work for it and she WILL sometimes withhold it and all that. I assure you, I'm not below average in any metrics. Or at least not much below average. Especially living in the place where w…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 10:27 PM
2

well yes, roleplay consensually is one thing. I'm talking about her legit fighting not to get raped and like being not aroused and dry and stuff. Maybe someone is into it, I just can't imagine that lol
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 10:24 PM
1

No, I did and they said I was right.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 09:51 PM
1

No, not everyone. Most males do not cycle through hookups. They wish they could. Not wanting to get something you don't want is not insecurity. Wearing safety belts is not insecurity. Those relationships wouldn't be good for me, because I can't feel respect for a woman who let multiple dicks inside her or can't refer to her as a girl of my dreams. I'd rather stay single, thank you very much.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 09:10 PM
1

Yeah, but her brothers with knives and shotguns do.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 09:08 PM
1

But no, you don't know and you demonstrated that you don't know what they mean. You keep mistaking double standards for different standards. And you are the one who's absolutely wrong. It's in the definition. That word "another" means that you compare things "measured" in the same units. You can't compare meters and kilograms. YOu can't compare cats and dogs, and you can't compare men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 09:08 PM
1

I really don't even think that example is something that happens all that often though. I think it is more likely that she never really liked it much at all but was "expected" to do it. I have a friend back home who has said that to me. She was expected to give bjs she didn't really enjoy and now she doesn't really do them with her boyfriend because she doesn't have to. They seem happy enough so there is no problem. Are you basically suggesting cheating to get the thing you want elsewhere? Most …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 09:06 PM
1

Some part of it. It's not cowardly when you want to avoid the undesirable result. It's pragmatic. And it's not that I'm afraid, I also don't want to be anyone's plan b when I wasn't anyone's plan a. Can't I choose how I want my life to be? I don't want to be settled for and get someone's sloppy seconds. Either way, cowardly or not - I see you understand that it's a valid thing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:55 PM
1

No, not explained wrongly at all. Men and women are different - therefore the standards are different. Now if you have different standards for different men - that would be double standards. Or if you have different standards for different women - that would be double standards. But you can't call it double standards that women's bathrooms don't have urinators.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:35 PM
1

it doesn't have to have a causal relationship. Correlation is enough to avoid it like the plague
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:31 PM
1

I believe BB is not just about money. It's about comfort too. And about giving her more to get something others got for free, and sometimes not even all of that something.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:23 PM
1

Your "lots" doesn't mean much as is. Name the percentage of all men. Everything else is completely irrelevant to our argument, sorry. Most men are getting anywhere only if women select them. Men can't get pregnant. etc. Men and women are two different sexes and have different standards. p.s. just the fact that some men have different n counts DOES NOT say anything about it being due to life choices. I want to choose to have a high n count, but it's still low, because only top men can get a high …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:21 PM
1

You left him, had a meaningful relationship with another man, and then he agreed to get back together. Definitely alpha. cuz real alphas don't care and all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:18 PM
1

Good for you. And most of us had 0 result doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:11 PM
1

That makes sense. Can't imagine how somebody would get aroused by a woman actively resisting and not wanting to have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:05 PM
3

They can abuse in other ways. Like get pregnant from another man (Or even the same). In some cultures it's not unheard of men of her family coming and forcing a man to marry after defiling their sister/daughter.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:04 PM
1

Just because you call it a double standards it won't become it. The example you quoted was explained manytimes already. Men and women are different sexes, therefore they have TWO DIFFERENT sets of standards. Not double standards. Double standards is if you have two women doing the same thing, but judging one of them. Or two men. But when you have two different sexes (man and woman), then two different sets of standards apply to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 08:00 PM
1

There's nothing to debate. They are two different sexes, one of which is a sexual selector and the other one has to chase, one of which has high costs (can get pregnant) and the other one lower cost (takes minutes to "recharge"), etc. It's all been mentioned here over and over again. They are not different enough if they work as cashiers, let's say, then yes they should have the same standards. But sexually they are different - therefore the standards are different. Sexual dimorphism is a thing,…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:57 PM
1

Tastes aren't allowed to change? Yeah they are. It's just funny and not suspicious at all how they change back from liking something with other people, but not with the new guy that she has when she's older and wants "stability" lol. But sure, they are. If your tastes change, though, you won't require another person to stop eating something, though, right? Guys can easily get girls if they want. The guys on dating sites often barely try at all. Yeah, 5% guys or whatever. Otherwise - not true. Ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:55 PM
1

That's the whole different argument. Your argument was - why do something if it won't stop what you're fighting with. And yes, what a slut does harms my situation on the sexual market, of course. But again, it's a whole different argument, that I believe somebody else is already having in this thread. My point was that your argument I replied to was invalid.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:48 PM
1

No, it would apply if you were talking about two men or two women. But you are talking about a man and a woman, who are different and man is not "another" woman or vice versa. Would you name a woman hypocrite if she sits down to pee but criticizes men for it? Of course not.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:46 PM
1

It would be explosive XDDD But seriously, if both mouth and dicks are in the air, they aren't in vacuum and it would feel as usual :) And if they both are, you can't create a pressure differential without the air and atmospheric pressure. You can still slide in and out of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:44 PM
1

Yes, and "another" have to be of the same subset. If a man engaged in some behavior and criticized OTHER MEN for doing that - he would be a hypocrite, no questions about that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:41 PM
1

There's unfairness in your first scenario. She didn't mind other guys fucking on the side, but won't be okay with you doing the same things if she wants her bb. She didn't require that from them, but requires it from you. Also, sheer difference in numbers, if she slept with 50 guys and you slept with 5, why wouldn't she want that number to become equal? :) But no, people will come up with some bs that past is past. And yes, you say it yourself in the next paragraph. That's the thing- she was ope…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/17 07:40 PM
1

that it doesn't matter in this discussion and you shouldn't ask his view on that, because it's irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 11:24 PM
1

You are basically suggesting force feeding someone who doesn't like a specific type of food because they tried it before. A girl who has tried something before is allowed to not enjoy it. No, I'm saying that they can try the same thing with other ingredients. Or them not being opposed to you eating it elsewhere and with someone else. Do you even read? Yes, they are allowed to not enjoy it. However, I brought up another example - where they didn't just try it once and didn't enjoy it, but where t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 11:06 PM
1

No. And I assumed we were talking about women being deceitful to men, regardless of how men are, which is irrelevant anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 11:01 PM
1

Does it also mean that she won't be able to relate and understand how it is to love and appreciate one person and work on sex and other things with that person? How it is to commit to one person instead of hopping into bed with everyone you like?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:59 PM
2

This is just a bad analogy! Bad analogies in no way justify abusing people. If you choose not to mate with 'sluts' that's your choice, but abusing women because of their sexual choices is obviously fundamentally wrong. How is it bad if women are gatekeepers of sex and decide if sex happens? (similar to a lock "deciding" which key to be opened with).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:53 PM
1

What's the problem with people using the word slut or slut shaming. If you don't want girls to be slut-shamed why won't you recommend them not being sluts if they don't want to be slut-shamed?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:51 PM
2

But, sluts should understand that they are not sucking cock in a vaccuum. Interesting fact, you can't suck anything in vacuum.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:43 PM
2

Absolutely not. Just look up the definition of hypocrisy, will you? Do you even logic? To get a certain number she needs to sleep around. Sleeping around is defined as getting a certain number.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:12 PM
1

That's assuming that denominators are actually equal and all sexual relations are heterosexual and 1 on 1. Which I think isn't necessarily true since women get to experiment more with other women and with more than 1 man at a time (= +1 average count for team man, but +3 for team woman, for example). But yeah, the averages should be about the same. It's the medians that one should look at. Averages don't say much.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:08 PM
1

Average will be roughly the same of course. What you wanted to say was median, I assume.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:06 PM
1

lol and most women can't handle weak/short/fat men. It's all about insecurity, not disgust, you're right.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 10:03 PM
1

Fighting cancer or aids won't stop people dying from it either any time soon. Does it mean we shouldn't do anything? People who want something to stop and believe in their cause should be free to do something about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:57 PM
1

Why should it be and how is it relevant anyway?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:55 PM
1

They can have it with whoever they want. Then they shouldn't be surprised that they will be shamed, since most men are discriminated against when she's choosing who to sleep with. I'm fine with any slut as long as she's not lying or pretending. No she'd still likely be shamed as a bad marriage candidate. Yes I would say they are bad, because they are taking advantage of the system and becoming rich which automatically means the resources distribution is skewed. They are still relatively good com…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:55 PM
1

I really don't think this is true. You have a very negative opinion of the average woman and I'll just have to agree to disagree with you. Mm I saw papers and screenshots. But sure, believe in whatever you want. It is hypocrisy no matter what anybody thinks. Dude.. facepalm. No, hypocrisy is whatever is written in the dictionary no matter what you think. Are you really that illogical. Go tell your professor on the exam that the earth is flat no matter what anybody thinks. Or something else that …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:51 PM
1

A meal can be cooked perfectly and someone could still not enjoy it. So yes in this context it works. Sometimes people just don't like something. Alright. Then they might enjoy that meal with a few ingredients changed - since different cooks with have different recipes. If they don't like it at all because of allergy or something and won't eat it with me, then they wouldn't mind if I eat it with another friend who likes it. Also, it implies that they never tried it more than once. In most storie…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:46 PM
1

Things can go perfectly and still not be enjoyable. Not in our context. Perfectly = enjoyable among other things. My point is that I'd rather have someone who knows what they like so we can figure things out more quickly and not have to stumble as much. I would still date someone inexperienced, and work with them, but it is a bit harder sometimes. N-count often has nothing to do with preferences from what I have found dating both types of person but knowing preferences in advance can save some h…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:11 PM
1

You're talking about a few posts maybe? No, most men are just disgusted by high count. And yes, when women choose tall men, most of them are disgusted by short men. Or fat men. Or small dicks. etc. Most TRPers think that their high n-count wouldn't make them undesirable for a long-term relationship, yet they believe that about a high n-count woman. That is what I consider hypocrisy. That's not hypocrisy, that's delusion if they are wrong. Or realistic thinking if they are right. In the end it co…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 09:05 PM
1

lol in this very thread people would shame for wanting casual sex or for wanting specific sexual acts from SO. "Is relationship all about sex for you?" Please..
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:58 PM
1

They kinda did. It takes dedication and self-control to be in shape. Why do you think most can't get there? It's not as easy as just eating right for most people. We really have to go out of our way to not be obese, let alone being in good shape. Not gonna argue about it, just saying. Going multiple times a week to the gym for a while didn't do much to me. I need to do it for years I guess, maintaining that schedule and diet to be in just decent shape.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:56 PM
1

The difference is that it's easy to read books for everyone. Being a slut = giving sex to some but not to others. Idk, it's like - it's easy to not share when you're rich? It's kinda shamed. Or it's easy to hurt those who are weaker - and that's shamed. The point is, there are different types of easy. Being a slut is not just about being easy, it's also about in-your-face type of doing, getting and giving things others can't have.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:52 PM
1

No, it's not ALL about sex, but it is ABOUT sex nevertheless. If not, then monogamy wouldn't be such a big deal, right? If it was just because of values and lifestyle etc, she wouldn't mind that I'd sleep with others like she didn't mind her casual partners slept with others, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:49 PM
1

Again, your mind is one thing, but the dictionary is another. What you said doesn't make one a hypocrite. Just like that girl pointed out - she wants a tall man even though she's short, etc. Even simpler - a man can want a woman even though he's not a woman. What makes on undersirable is not being desired. If a person pursuing high n count is undersirable, then it's all good. If he/she is desirable then it's also good, right? Doesn't really matter what you or I think about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:48 PM
1

Really? You've never done something that went perfectly ok that you didn't enjoy? I have had a guy slap my boobs back and forth saying "oh yea you like that" over and over. It didn't hurt me, he enjoyed, it was fine enough in the situation, but I didn't enjoy it at all. I wouldn't do it again. It was just not my thing, it was weird to me. Things fizzled out because of it. If a guy did that to me again I wouldn't enjoy it. I wouldn't even want to attempt it. Why is something that a person doesn't…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:30 PM
1

Well if you don't like, that's sad and could be a problem for you. But it doesn't make them hypocrites.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 08:03 PM
1

Anything higher than Age/2-9 :) Very known formula, it even was in the Bro Code. But really, anything that's closer to double-digits than to 0 is already. No boy dreams to be someone's number 10+. Sex. Sex being the contact between mucuous membranes = if dick goes anywhere inside - it counts. Yes, anal counts. Rape counts too. Nonconsensual sex is still a subset of sex. Guess, she can say the count is N, out of that N she was raped n times and only gave a blowjob m times? Anything like that work…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 07:56 PM
1

But what if it wasn't rough? What if it went perfectly well but you just really didn't like it. Why should it be forced on you again? How can I not like it if it went really well? And it wouldn't be forced. I have a choice to say yes or no. If I trully love her and it went perfectly well before, why would I say no? The girls who haven't tried anything clearly already have limits or they would have tried more. It isn't about rehearsed moves it is about knowing what they like and bringing it and t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 07:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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