TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

avocadolanche3000 Archive

View 1 post and 1,236 comments by avocadolanche3000 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,236 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I actually really like my job. Maybe it’s the framing of “having to work.” Toiling under capitalism sounds like much more of a chore than having unenthusiastic sex. If I had to do it forty hours a week it’d probably be equally soul crushing.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 08:00 PM
3

Regarding your last point, people have sex for all kinds of reasons. It is their unimpeachable right to consent or refuse consent for whatever reasons they want. Treating other people’s consent like it is open to interpretation and critique implies that the individual isn’t mentally competent to make informed consent, or know whether they consented. The threshold for deciding whether or not someone else’s consent counts should be reserved for people who actually cannot consent, like minors and t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:07 PM
2

Why would that comparison be better? Edit: or, to clarify, are you saying having to work is the equivalent of getting fucked in the ass?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:22 PM
2

Would you still be ok with duty sex… I think as far as hypotheticals go, it has to be “all things being equal.” If the question is “would you rather have injurious duty sex or work an injurious job” then as long as the injuries are equivalent I would probably take duty sex. I’ve had plenty of duty sex. I’ve done it to be nice to an unattractive stranger, I’ve done it as relationship maintenance when I felt pressured by a partner, I’ve done it when I had a migraine (admittedly that time k had to …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:10 PM
4

The appropriate analogy would be slavery, not voluntary work, since we’re talking about something non-consensual. I’d rather have duty sex, which I do not enjoy and do not want (but do consent to) than work (which I also consent to). With slavery, that depends a lot on how torturous the slavery is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 01:36 PM
2

The “evil vampire,” isn’t a bad guy. He’s a misunderstood good guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:16 AM
-2

Because social media platforms are peddling it to them as rage bait. Same with the general rise of fascism across the globe. I don’t think people in authoritarian countries are better off, but I think authoritarians do a good job convincing them to fear those who are different from them, and that it’s in their interest to seed power over to the ruling class to protect them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:48 PM
5

I think “oppression” is too strong a word, but that this is by design. I think it is essentially meant to stoke culture wars by getting progressives to complain about it in click baity ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:18 PM
4

It frames heterosexual relationships as inherently adversarial and transactional, which harms people. It disempowers women to make choices about their reproductive rights, which harms people. It enforces social constructs at the expense of free expression, which harms people. It stigmatizes gender non-conformance, which harms people. It discourages cross gender empathy, which foments gender war rhetoric, which harms people. It creates double standards for men and women, which harms people. It no…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:15 PM
9

Agreed. I think it’s fine to be able to apply a feminist lens to things. But it shouldn’t be your only lens for understanding the world. You should be able to apply a critical race theory lens, or a humanist lens, or a sex positive lens, or a Marxist lens, or whatever other kind of lens to critique different things. I think when people find one lens and then use that exclusively, and allow everything they perceive to be filtered through this one perspective that confirms their bias, they get rea…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:05 PM
16

I saw that the CompHet argument has been banned as blackpill, largely because blackpill appropriates CompHet into something delusional and insane (an assertion that women do not actually desire men, and that they only go along with heterosexual relationships, basically because they lack the ability to make decisions for themselves). But it’s worth noting that this push for “Nuclear Family Month” is an expression of Compulsory Heteronormativity, and a good example of what feminists are addressing…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:44 PM
2

“If people weren’t so vulgar, the government wouldn’t have to impose censorship. We just need to encourage people to watch what they say so these 1A laws stop being necessary.”
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:19 PM
2

I think this is actually just a miscommunication caused by what we mean when we say “important.” I think sex is a healthy and important part of living a full life. I do not think it is “important” that people love their sexual partners, or only have sex with people whom they truly love. The anti-choice people think the opposite. But you could say we both think “sex is important,” or that neither of us think “sex is important,” depending on whether you mean it in like a spiritual/moral way or not…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 02:41 PM
9

How is it incoherent? They’re saying that people overstate the risk of getting into a bad relationship and minimize the benefits of being in a good relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 01:48 PM
2

True. Different people respond differently to different meds. But I think that it’s common to experience a huge drop in libido, and a significant fraction of people are in them. But I listed that possibility after because, while I think it could contribute, I think the cultural elements that prevent people from deconstructing their internalized sex negativity are probably a better explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:56 AM
0

Kinks are different for everyone. My ex was a cuckqueen and I think for her it was more about how other women being attracted to me made me more attractive to her. It’s mimetic desire, if that makes sense. I think for a lot of cucks it’s half about having a desirable woman and “showing her off.” For some more traditional swinger couples it’s about the one partner sort of pulling the other out as a power thing between them. But even for more traditional hotwife/cuck couples I don’t think it’s alw…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 10:08 PM
6

I agree with all this, but also feel that a lot of it is bot driven activity intended to sow division between men and women and foster sexist societal attitudes, which play into a conservative agenda. Edit: so it isn’t just that people are more online, like you say, but that the algorithm they meet online is intended to create hostility towards the people they’d date
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 08:29 PM
5

I like that there was immediately an example of what I added in my original comment: The common “that makes you a misogynist” rebuttal to any point challenging benign sexism also reinforces this point by tacitly implying that women need an “automatic win” button wherever gender politics are debated. As if women aren’t capable of understanding their own hypocrisy or sexism coming from other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 05:50 PM
9

Ah I did. I need my espresso
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 05:18 PM
8

I disagree that “women are just as capable of STEM work as men” is an example of benign sexism. Men may select into these roles in greater numbers or more men have a natural proclivity toward them, but there’s nothing about a woman’s womanliness or a man’s manliness that changes whether their math is right or wrong, and no reason a woman can’t win a Nobel prize in physics or something. Otherwise I agree that most pro-woman content supports basically coddling women and implying a handicap, which …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 05:07 PM
3

Who knows what that’s about. It’s probably a combo of things. Growing up under #MeToo, growing up online with very little privacy, and feigning disgust and discomfort around sex to fit in until it became a reflex. I theorize that basically everyone is raised sex negative, since it’s just easier to instill in kids a sense of discomfort and fear about sex than it would be to disentangle everything in a sex positive way. But a side effect is that as people mature into their sexual selves, they have…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 04:42 PM
-1

I think that is the root of most people’s cuckold fetish. But also, so what? People swing, and honestly it’s a cheap insult to throw around and who cares if a couple wants to screw around and can handle it. I think marrying one person and only fucking them for the rest of your life sounds boring.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 04:24 PM
4

It is scary how few women recognize that an ideology telling them that they’re society’s victims and that everything is men’s fault is obviously delusional propaganda. And it’s weird to me that so few take offense to the infantilizing and disempowering implications of believing that they’re powerless in their own lives. I sort of feel like the powerless feeling a lot of feminists seem to adopt (I.e. “what? It doesn’t matter, it’s just my opinion) is reflective of increasing wage disparity making…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 04:14 PM
3

FWIW I’m a very sex positive dude. I feel like I see sex negativity more from women than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 03:50 PM
–

But that’s just not how happiness works, generally. The idea that your happiness is contingent on your partner’s contributions seems like it wouldn’t even benefit the abuser, not long term anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 07:25 PM
2

Why would that be true at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:21 AM
5

What is SheraSeven’s message? I’m not familiar.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 11:01 PM
0

Misogynists can’t exist without misandry. Both require a buy in of gender essentialism, meaning you can’t really believe one sex is superior to the other without internalizing a bunch of sexist beliefs about both genders.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 10:42 PM
–

Well, when I got out of that relationship I got really into kink. I went on kinky dating sites and met partners for the express purpose of doing kinky things together. And I learned a whole lot. It s given me this perspective: kink is a dark reflection of dynamics that already exist in the vanilla world. It’s an exaggeration, subversion, or inversion of the gender roles and expectations that come with regular dating, like a man paying for dinner, a woman blowing a guy she’s excited about, spooni…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 10:33 PM
-1

*Except it reinforces patriarchy by framing sexism as a valid feminist principal, and encouraging people to accept sexist narratives as reasonable mainstream beliefs. This person’s post wouldn’t exist if the average feminist wasn’t more “anti-male” than they are “anti-sexism.”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:59 PM
-2

I appreciate your response. If I can elaborate a little (since I tried to keep my original response short and sort of failed). I recognize what is being discussed with “duty sex” as a valid issue that plenty of women experience. The issue I take with this framing, with the scope and severity of what is being talked about. Typically, when a question around this comes up, plenty of women will say “look I’m not always in the mood but I’ll sometimes have sex with my partner because I love them and i…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 12:09 PM
0

I’ve had plenty of arguments with feminists in this sub arguing that feminism is specifically not egalitarian. Feminism changed when it was co-opted by radical exclusionary feminism. I’m not sure how familiar you are with radical feminism, but rather than opposing sexism, it essentially leans into it, weaponizing sex based discrimination to harm men. But if that sounds too abstract, here are some of the radfem ideas that have gone mainstream: “Man vs bear” (what’s radfem about it? It legitimizes…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 11:40 AM
1

Not all women are feminists. It’s currently an uphill battle because for a long time feminism was associated with liberal feminism and egalitarianism, basically a human rights movement. Now, kids are growing up under a feminism that rejects egalitarianism and progressive values. Progressive values will always be popular with younger generations. The women acting like sexist hypocrites, shrieking about porn and kink and age gaps, and bashing men will almost certainly fall out of fashion as kids g…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 11:21 AM
1

To answer your original question a little more in depth, my first LTR in my mid twenties I dated a barista graduating college. I had a corporate job and loved treating her to dates and movies. She loved it as well, and she loved little trinkets and things. A ginger ale from the corner store even lit her up. I didn’t think of this as a sugar baby style relationship. I don’t even think of us as “kinky.” I stayed making more money than her for the vast majority of our relationship, but got an oppor…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 12:28 AM
1

I enjoy this sub, but I think it skews reactionary/conservative. Misogynists will hate you for being a “gold digger” and misandrists will hate you for disempowering women by giving up your financial independence (which it doesn’t sound like you’re doing). I think two consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want, and the only people who should get a say are the people in the relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 07:37 PM
2

This is, I believe, the correct answer. It’s also true that generally speaking dudes have a physiological advantage in defending themselves, and that they could easily disproportionately harm a woman attacking them. So even if in principal they’re “just defending themselves,” they should almost never resort to hitting back. So from a dude’s perspective, yes it is an injustice but you just have to recognize why it exists and do your best to avoid women who might exploit social perceptions that wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:40 PM
1

Not a fan of slut shaming. Also, I’m a man and I certainly don’t prefer “virtuous” women. I prefer fun, free spirited women. Especially those who have sex for fun and pleasure. I couldn’t marry a sex negative woman
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:14 PM
1

People like to police others’ sex lives. Especially where love and romance is concerned, they find it icky if someone’s relationship style deviates from a heteronormative script.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:44 PM
8

Yeah, there’s a strong “sex = sin” undertone
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:42 PM
1

Purity myths (like that women really are chaste little saints who only reluctantly and trepidatiously explore their sexuality) are being pushed. You don’t have to explore sexuality very long to realize that women are equally freaky. Everyone’s different, but men don’t have a monopoly on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 01:03 PM
1

I like this logic because I search for women who are less virtuous and moral than me.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:48 PM
1

I didn’t say it’s “because you’re a man,” you’re reading too much into it. This is trolling. Your comment relies on gender roles and gendered language to suggest that men who recognize misandry are too sensitive and also too aggressive somehow (I o the extent that they should have their brains studied), and I don’t believe that you are unaware of that. While I enjoy Espresso, the subtext and regular text playfully mock men pining after her. The subtext of Please Please Please is also misandrist,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 11:40 PM
1

I think that it’s both a larger share of women having less romantic contact with men in favor of women, as well as heterofatalistic messaging encouraging women to present as (and possibly respond to surveys as) less straight. I think it’s a bit of a feedback loop.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 10:50 PM
1

As mentioned elsewhere, I like those songs and don’t think the artists shouldn’t have written them, I just think they’re a good barometer for where we’re at culturally. Espresso is a song about exploiting men’s asymmetrical emotional attachment to her to such an extent that they can’t sleep. “That’s Me-espresso.” Please Please Please is a song about worrying how another shit man will reflect on her socially. Carpenter and all the above artists have hits that are accurately described above. I thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 10:44 PM
1

What evidence would you require? This is an epistemological question. How does anyone know anything? How can anyone “prove” anything? Like yeah that’s a path we can go down that philosophers have discussed for millennia. We don’t need to reinvent the Cartesian wheel to be able to recognize and comment on phenomena, or use logic to come to conclusions. Does it not logically follow that actively excluding the opinions of someone might result in hate?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:26 PM
1

I don’t buy it. I think most people who “decenter” the opposite gender start down a sexist path and tend to stay there to the extent that they decenter. I think it’s generally just a way to frame their sexism as a self help journey.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:20 PM
1

I don’t see what that has to do with my post or discussion in this thread. I’m not arguing that “decentering doesn’t count unless you cut off even your own family members.” I’m arguing that “decentering” is the first step towards hate for a lot of people, and that sexists often frame their hate as mere “decentering.” Do you have counters to either of those points?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:43 PM
1

That doesn’t address any of the points I just raised. Regarding your point, I don’t think having relatives prevents a person from being sexist. I think making a conscious decision to stop caring what the other gender thinks is an obvious inroad towards sexism, and that this makes a lot of intuitive sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:02 PM
1

Not everything has been scientifically studied. For proof, I’d point to the rise of sexism for both men and women, the rise of gender war rhetoric, and how it coincides with “decentering” messaging. It also logically follows that sexists start by rejecting any influence the opposite sex has over them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 12:45 PM
0

I disagree. I think both men and women who decenter the opposite start down a sexism rabbit hill by making an active decision to exclude the opposite gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 11:49 AM
6

I think certain women suggest negative sexual experiences are more common than they are as a way to tar men. It’s an easy third rail issue, and they can just pretend that anyone questioning it is sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 11:47 AM
1

I almost included Othering in my post. I’d argue that people who Other the opposite sex typically start by “decentering” them. I.e. someone declaring that they’re decentering women will probably be delving into the manosphere soon. A woman soft bragging about decentering men probably holds some pretty noxious views. “Decentering” is seen as a healthy withdrawal from the opposite sex, but in online discourse it’s more often a spiteful retreat. And the modern toxic gender politics are partly to do…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:34 PM
-1

Sure. But I think that just gives cover for people who end up hating the opposite sex to present their hate as a kind of self help lifestyle choice. I think misogynists and misandrists start down sexist rabbit holes by framing their disengagement from wo/men as a self help journey that decenters the opposite sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:26 PM
2

Wait, so as someone who doesn’t date you’re just assuming that people who decenter wo/men are actually doing it in a healthy, self care way. And not creating sexist echo chambers. And it has no relation to the actual dating market reflecting greater and greater sexist hostility due to social media echo chambers?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:23 PM
1

I think that all gender war grifters act like this, presenting themselves as disaffected while waging war on the opposite gender. That is my point, and that is why I don’t buy “decentering” as a healthy, innocuous choice to just stop caring about the other gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:15 PM
0

I think you can do all that without cancelling any sexual or romantic aspirations. You dont need to decenter people to have a good career, ignore sexism directed at you, and not shrink in relationships. Plenty of people do all those things while creating and maintaining healthy relationships with individuals and the opposite gender at large.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:01 PM
0

I think you can not be sexist without dating at all. I think “decentering” entails consciously resisting the opposite gender’s influence on you. I think that people who consciously resist being influenced by the opposite gender often fall into echo chambers that exacerbate sexist stereotypes. I think forming a community around not “needing” the opposite gender typically results in unfettered sexist takes. You don’t have to agree, but that pattern is pretty self evident in any community that dece…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:56 PM
2

I like that argument, but it still ignores the meat of the discussion, which is that deciding to disassociate from the opposite sex is a good starting point for falling into an echo chamber that hates the opposite sex, and defends sexism. “Decentering” is good cover for framing a sexist mindset as a healthy self improvement thing, but I don’t think that’s actually what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:49 PM
0

But the woman isn’t actually centered. She’s decorative, replaceable, and doesn’t have a voice in the relationship. The red piller has already “decentered” women, as in decided that they hold no power or influence over him.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:46 PM
2

No. I don’t think it’s sexist to reject an individual. I do think it’s sexist to make a conscious decision to disengage from the opposite sex. I think it leads to reinforcing sexist world views while intentionally avoiding conflicting perspectives from the opposite sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:43 PM
3

Yeah, but that just doesn’t reflect reality. Gender war rhetoric has exploded over the past decade or so, due in large part to a narrative that convinces people that it is weak, and bad, and mentally unhealthy to be romantic. The most sexist people on the planet act like they have one up on people who care to be appealing to or understanding of the opposite sex. Myron Gaines obviously doesn’t give a fuck what women think. Yeah, his entire insecure personality is built upon showing off arm candy …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:41 PM
1

I believe red pillers and radfem pipelines both start with decentering the opposite gender. I think it’s a prerequisite for developing a mindset that automatically dismisses the opposite gender, and that it is typically a bad faith ploy to get people to fall down sexist rabbit holes.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:35 PM
0

I agree that normativity isn’t always automatically good. But in this case we’re talking about normativity vs sexist radicalization. Sexist radicalization is worse for people’s mental health, and for society at large, than romantically engaging the opposite gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:33 PM
1

I guess I should have included 00’s movies, but I’m talking about movies like the American Pie series, Eurotrip, Van Wilder, Miss March, and basically all of the ones that you look at today and think “hmmm, bet that hasn’t aged well.” Some have and some haven’t. I agree that red pillers don’t actually end up decentering women. Just like 4B fixates on men in its adversarial way. My argument is that decentering is the entry point for these echo chambers. They present decentering as a healthy disre…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:31 PM
0

Fine. Put it this way: I think the vast majority of people who “decenter” the opposite sex, talk about the opposite sex like it’s a bad old job they resented. I don’t think all of these people are retirement age, or that they dedicated 60-80 hours per week to reaping the benefits of engaging with the opposite gender. I think they’re 20-40, and I think their decentering of the opposite sex indicates an animosity towards that sex that expresses itself in sexist worldviews.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:15 PM
0

It’s an issue for both genders on a macro level because, despite the wholesome mindset that you describe, it’s the starting point for how sexist echo chambers are created and survive. A lot of grifters use very basic, easy to argue premises like “you should believe in yourself and work harder and write your goals down” to peddle more complex, ideologically driven narratives like “poor people are poor because they lack grit.” I think “decentering” is a good example of a seemingly healthy mindset …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:11 PM
1

The most sexist societies in the world segregate men and women. I think treating men and women as entirely separate species that aren’t allowed to interact publicly counts as a form of “decentering” them. At least, it’s like the maximum form of “decentering their voices.”
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:59 PM
2

Thanks. To clarify, I don’t think people only want sex/romance because they are socialized into it. I kind of just wanted to present where the “decentering” discourse comes from and the impact I think it’s had on cultural messaging. I think people are biologically predisposed towards finding certain things sexy, and then encounter environmental triggers that also partly inform their orientation as they develop into sexual beings.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:56 PM
1

Not at all. My post is very much about decentering being the starting point for these echo chambers. Rejecting fe/male voices is what causes echo chambers to be echoey. Also, it isn’t at all hard to understand how categorically rejecting the opposite sex would lead to sexism. Or do you have a better idea on what causes sexist echo chambers?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:51 PM
2

I like music and am not saying those artists shouldn’t have made it. But I think pop is a good litmus test for where we are culturally. I think their songs are striking a cord partly because they resonate along the same lines as gender war discourse. I think misandry is a downstream problem, much like misogyny. It doesn’t matter that one woman has shitty, unhinged takes about guys. It matters that a lot of men and women accept essentialist premises as their basis for how gender norms should be e…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:43 PM
1

Lesbians aren’t centering men to begin with though. Neither are asexuals. I think that’s different from actively disengaging from the people you’re attracted to, which I do think represents a step towards cultivating a biased perspective against them.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:36 PM
-4

I think this narrative has been peddled to people that if they were more self interested and less susceptible to outside influence, their lives would be better. I disagree with that. I think it’s normal to care what people think about you, and that decentering is typically used to convince people to reject the idea of considering other people’s perspective. Especially where it regards gender politics, I think men and women who decenter the opposite gender’s validation are typically doing so out …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:31 PM
-1

You think it’s ridiculous to believe that categorically rejecting the opposite gender results in sexism?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:25 PM
0

I believe that it starts this way. And similarly in the manosphere, it’s about getting in shape, taking care of yourself, and developing a strong mindset to earn more money.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:24 PM
0

“Decentering” is synonymous with “rejecting.” I know that red pillers and radfems present their decentering as a mental health/self help type journey. I just don’t buy it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:20 PM
-3

As described in the post, sexism is a consequence of categorically rejecting the opposite gender. This happens for the same reason that categorically rejecting the perspective of any group creates an in-group/out-group dynamic that leads to hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:06 PM
1

Why would any man be feminist when even feminists use “male feminist” as an insult?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 03:32 PM
1

Yes it is. The outcry about the male gaze and objectification is just how society slut shames men. Implicit in that shaming is the fundamentalist belief that male sexuality is inherently harmful to female purity. When you say that blue pill has a lot in common with red pill (which it doesn’t, unless you count sexist blue pillers. Which I don’t), the commonalities you are references are an alignment in sex negativity and sexist beliefs. Radfems and red pillers hate sex workers. Radfems and red pi…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 02:24 PM
2

I understand you perfectly. What you are saying blue pill and red/black pill have in common is gender essentialism. I call that sexism. It’s sex based discrimination that relies on an understanding of sex as inherently harmful to women, which gives red pill men license to act like domineering provider/protectors and it gives blue pill women license to never own any accountability. That is what I am saying I fully reject, and the explanation above is why I reject it. I’m blue pill because I belie…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 01:43 AM
0

No. I fully reject that argument. It’s puritan bullshit on par with saying “women ruin themselves with sex.” Women who screech about objectification have the same logic as men who act personally attacked by women being “slutty.” It’s just indoctrination
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 12:07 AM
2

I think problematizing all male sexuality by calling it objectification definitely contributes to young men turning to red pill answers. Genuinely, why would you listen to someone who tells you that your sexuality is inherently predatory, coercive, and bad?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 11:43 PM
2

Word. Good luck not letting the sour voices sour you. It honestly can be difficult not to. I genuinely think gender essentialism is the bane of our times and the principal thing to attack to deescalate gender war rhetoric. If men could have a way of discussing gender politics that isn’t de facto framed as misogyny, then most men would side with gender equality politics.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 04:45 PM
4

Just want to say as a liberal progressive dude who understands the interplay of hostile and benevolent sexism, you’re 100% right. It’s a shame that so many women clearly do NOT understand why regurgitating hostile sexism reinforces a broader culture of gender essentialism, and why this would push men away from feminism/liberalism. Another consequence is basically that progressive men dont have a voice in gender politics, so it’s just radfems vs manosphere gurus. Obviously young men will skew tow…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 01:39 PM
0

SWERF arguments often do. Funny, that
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 05:54 PM
4

I don’t buy it. Hate is hate and people saying “men created misandry” make regular feminism look hysterical, hypocritical, and unpopular.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 04:05 PM
1

Correct, I think framing sexism as an appropriate feminist response is hypocritical, because feminism is necessarily founded on principals of gender equality. I.e. misandrists co-opting feminism does a disservice to feminism, because it undercuts feminist messaging. Edit: I think the appropriate response is for anti-sexists to call out sexism from misogynists and misandrists alike.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 03:47 PM
2

No. The appropriate response would be to call out sexism without reciprocating it. Responding to sexism with equal sexism in the opposite direction undercuts actual feminist messaging by reinforcing patriarchal gender ideals. I.e. it presumes gender essentialism is valid
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 03:00 PM
2

Not to be pedantic, but I’d say that the script you’re describing is more of an approach to sex, a better understanding of what sex is. By that I mean it isn’t “spell the ABC’s with your tongue,” “start with rhythmic, slow thrusts and build to deep, hard grinding” or anything physical. And it isn’t even just “do chores and the dishes so she’ll find you attractive,” either. I’m a male slut, and the variability is real. Some women like nipple torture while others hate any attention given to their …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 12:28 PM
2

I don’t think it is. But I do think it’s more common for women to struggle to achieve orgasm for a variety of reasons: A greater percentage of women face physiological impediments. Women have more variability in what gets them off, physically and mentally. The default heteronormative view of sex expects men to “just know” how to get women off (despite women’s higher variability in what works for them) while women are socialized to withhold critique (e.g. faking orgasms. But this contributes to a…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:06 AM
1

People already center orgasms as the purpose of sex though. Most people’s sexual health would improve if they decentered orgasming (at least for themselves) rather than stressing it as the purpose of sex and implying that sex is only valid if orgasm is achieved.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:26 AM
9

That Gallup poll found that “28.5% [of Gen Z women] identify as LGBTQ+, compared with 10.6% of Gen Z men. Among millennials, 12.4% of women and 5.4% of men”). That’s a sizable portion of the dating market. The increase for both men and women is probably best explained by heterofatalism online. Gender wars have resulted in a large amount of men and women falling into sexist echo chambers, and consequently decentering each other. With women being more sexually fluid, a larger percent of them are h…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 10:47 AM
1

Where are you meeting them? Because I’ve met plenty. The vast majority of women in Only Fans aren’t full time creators. Only 1 - 5% do it 40+ hours per week.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 12:01 AM
2

I think that transactional dating is common enough that if you date around, you’re bound to run into it. But the thing is, even if that’s true, what you said is right. Just don’t date transactional people if you take offense to the idea that she’s only eating with you because you’re paying, or that he’s only paying because he wants to sleep with you. Or do go into those relationship dynamics if you want to. Date the sugar baby/daddy type knowing that it’s transactional, and stand the emptiness i…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 10:55 PM
6

Precisely. A father intimidating a boy interested in his daughter is being “patriarchal,” in the same way that society is patriarchal. It’s a trope. But obviously when everybody accepts that type of behavior as normative or even good, the. You have a society that treats women like they are teenagers and that treats men like they are de facto predators. That’s patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 06:14 PM
5

Define “patriarchy.” Edit: I think to respond properly I need to know what you mean, and what you think red pillers mean. In the recent post about most people having antiquated, traditional views on porn, you have mostly “progressive” women arguing for the abolition of porn. Those women are arguing from infantilizing, sexist assumptions about women to curb their rights. That is a “pro patriarchy” stance many blue pillers hold. So to discuss deconstructing patriarchy as defended by red pillers, I…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:29 PM
21

I just think “patriarchy” gets misunderstood. “Patriarchy” as a cabal of evil men intentionally devising plans to make women submit to them isn’t a realistic understanding of how the world works. Those men exist (like the architects of project 2025). But that misunderstands how patriarchy permeates day to day life for average folks, and more importantly it misses why those men exist and believe the things they do. Patriarchy is the result of sexist stereotypes about men and women that result in …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:25 PM
0

Because people with friends in the industry don’t talk about them like they’re victims. Your views are conservative because anti porn views are conservative, whether or not you are otherwise a progressive. Wanting to take away women’s rights is fascistic, even if you think you’re going it to protect them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:26 PM
1

Perhaps not, but they’re entitled to pursue ti for any reason they like, and they don’t need people jumping up to say them at they don’t enjoy it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:19 PM
1

I think when your ideas about an industry you have zero friends in or experience with comes from a conservative narrative under a fascist regime, you should regard black and white criticisms of it skeptically.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:06 AM
2

Probably a similar proportion to the amount that get into film or music or any other entertainment to make money.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 11:07 PM
1

I don’t believe you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 11:05 PM
2

“I hate stopping people’s personal choices” Oh do you now?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:54 PM
2

There’s like 4,000,000 creators on only fans. It seems like some people want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:42 PM
0

Yeah, they move to grifting. There are plenty of sex workers who enjoy their professions and have to spend their time battling SWERFS and MAGA conservatives to dispel all the misinformation.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:41 PM
1

There are a lot who just do it as a side thing because they feel like it though, and because it brings in cash on the side. It’s similar to being in the regular entertainment industry where the vast majority might not make a ton of money, but they should all be allowed to try it if it’s something they enjoy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 09:20 PM
1

I think if someone elects to be in the sex industry, and other people are saying that they actually don’t want to be in the sex industry or are in it against their will, the burden of proof is on the people putting words in the sex workers’ mouths.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 08:09 PM
1

I think it depends how you mean “have no desire to do it.” If they perform intimacy for $15,000 a month, they have the desire for $15,000 a month even if the desire isn’t romantic desire. There’s still “desire” in the sense of “willingness” to perform.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 08:07 PM
1

Sure. But the flip side of it is that her mindset shouldn’t just be that her job is to lay there and take it. I mean that can be it, but she’ll be a better lover if she recognizes that even as a receiver, she is a participant in the performance. And if she wants to come more that involves treating sex as more of a dialogue between two people than a thing that is happening to her.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 03:57 PM
6

It’s a matter of topping/bottoming and the roles that go with that. Bottoms typically want to be pampered and want the top to know what they’re doing. They don’t want to have to ask and they want the top to be assertive and decisive. Which is fine, but it can create a dynamic where the bottom relies on the top intuiting what would work to make the bottom orgasm. Being a good lover requires you to communicate your wants and needs, beyond just pleasing your partner. It’s not enough to just get you…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:23 PM
–

So what? Does that make them bad movies? I don’t think so. Horror uses sexual tension to build general tension and then shock the audience into a scare. It can also be a way to provide social commentary and get the audience thinking about social mores on a subconscious level. You aren’t supposed to walk away from Halloween thinking “I’m sure glad Michael Meyers killed all those sexy teens.” Instead, it gets the audience sympathizing with the victims and feeling uncomfortable about the way Meyers…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 10:36 AM
–

I’m left and I watch horror movies and erotic thrillers almost constantly . Artists should be allowed to say whatever they want fuck they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:53 AM
–

Did you see that other movie or tv show where a bad thing that shouldn’t happen in real life happens?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:03 AM
–

I guess it depends specifically what you mean. I think the link community is very sex positive and discussions around gender politics are typically more respectful, because they aren’t trying to yuck anyone’s yum, but also they’re historically (almost definitionally) marginalized as sexual deviants. So I think they resist horseshoeing into something exclusionary, without denying the reality of people who are affected by conservatism. But also, I view liberal feminists (those feminists who do pri…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:53 PM
–

It always kind of boggles my mind that people view red pill as a reaction to “mainstream” dating advice, which they assert is “blue pill.” Main stream dating advice is basically traditional dating advice: that women should hold out in order to ensure romantic commitment from provider males. As regards men, red pill advice is that women prefer financially successful, assertive, dominant men. That’s all very red pill conservative, and those ideas permeate most media, if not as an overt theme as su…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:17 PM
1

I agree. It’s a shitty place to be if you’re a leftist dude, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 10:39 PM
–

I’m confused which opinions you can’t have on this subreddit. Is it just transphobia?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 10:29 PM
–

I like how you start by saying not wanting to date them doesn’t equal hating them, and then you immediately compare them to prostitutes in a derogatory way.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 09:26 PM
3

The point of the man vs. bear thing was to normalize sex based hostility toward men as a feminist position. And it did work. To get Donald Trump elected and flip all three chambers conservative. Online feminism lost the plot and became more about attacking men than promoting any semblance of gender equality. The “secret weapon” that Trump likely alluded to in the run up to the election was the hard right pivot that young men made in the months leading up to the election, in response to broad spr…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 07:53 PM
–

Personally, I think it’s an offshoot of capitalist messaging handed down from the “Protestant work ethic.” But I first read about this idea in an Aldous Huxley book where he was talking about the Manichaeans (religious dualists who separated basically every behavior into good/godly and bad/sinful) and how that dualism had worked its way into capitalism by framing the purpose of people’s lives as being industrious for industriousness’s sake, as opposed to being spiritual. Anyway, a lot of people …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 07:42 PM
–

I’ve never understood men who hate women who like to have fun, but I think a lot of the men who hate fun women also hate fun people, generally. They’re anti-hedonist, and think everyone should be more responsible because that’s how they want to be. Their resentment of women who club is a projection of their internalized belief that abstaining from pleasure should be rewarded.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 06:26 PM
5

“Kill all men” is overblown, but the underlying misandrist sentiment is evident in a lot of feminist rhetoric. Defending the man vs. bear thing, for instance, is insulting on a few levels, not the least of which is that it assumes men are so stupid that they can’t understand when they’re being insulted, or can’t understand how that feminist position is obviously meant to hurt them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 06:21 PM
1

I’m curious why you think… Here is a nuanced elaboration on that: I love sex. I’ve made it a big part of my life, choose partners at least partly based on sexual compatibility, and I’ve taken the time to learn about it and practice it. It’s like a hobby for me. This “orgasm gap,” conversation is rooted in reality. A lot of guys don’t invest the time and energy to be good in bed. But it also gets twisted. It takes two to tango, and sexual performance isn’t exclusively the realm of men, even if a …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:39 PM
1

I’m very kink forward, and (unlike everyone else here apparently), I happen to love anal. I reserve my right to break up with a woman, regardless of the reason, and not feel ashamed if the reason is she can’t or won’t satisfy me sexually. But I think the fear that the reason a partner won’t perform a specific kink is it’s you is because they don’t like you enough is fundamentally and correctly identified as an “insecurity.” It’s never the right move to make someone feel bad for not sharing your …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:30 PM
1

I think as many women internalize this idea against men, and talk about male sexuality advances as inherently predatory, unwanted, and disgusting. As an example. I think there’s a lot of truth to that “how to talk to women” meme with the top panel being a fat guy saying, “hi Debra, you look great today,” prompting the woman to call HR, and the bottom panel being a handsome man saying the same thing, causing Debra to coo and say “aw, you’re sweet.” Girlboss feminists like Iliza Schlesinger play o…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:10 PM
3

I agree, that’s why it sucks as a man who supports gender equality to see feminism redefined into something that forces people to the right.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 02:37 PM
1

That’s exactly right, just more elaborate and focused on how sexism views male sexuality. I’d say “Sexism” itself is mostly an interplay between how people view male sexuality as defiling, degrading, and predatory, and how they burden women with the responsibility of keeping the “cost” of sex high for men, while viewing women who aren’t discriminating enough about sexual partners as “gender traitors” crossing the picket line.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 08:41 AM
1

I think you may have misunderstood my earlier comment. I’m saying “women who talk like this (framing everything as a male performance skill issue), ironically enough, tend to suck in bed (because they’re selfish lovers and don’t consider their side of the sexual performance important.” I’m not saying I don’t like humorous women. I prefer them too. Good on you for bringing your female lovers to orgasm 100% of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 04:24 PM
1

Does that metric include female partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:04 PM
3

I know because I’ve slept with a lot of women, I make my partners cum almost every time (though I don’t mind if they don’t finish. I also don’t mind if I don’t finish. It’s not exclusively about cumming). I, like you, love pussy. More importantly I love sex. I’ve made it a big part of my life, choose partners at least partly based on sexual compatibility, and I’ve taken the time to learn about it and practice it. It’s like a hobby for me. This “orgasm gap,” conversation is rooted in reality, bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 01:56 PM
-4

I love casual and I’m certain I’m better in bed than most men. I resent the idea that if I’m not some chivalrous waiter I can’t be good in bed. Women who talk like this ironically tend to suck in bed. They think you should be grateful just to fuck them, and they think it’s all about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 12:20 PM
49

I have a large dick, and have had similar conversations. But I wouldn’t leave a girl for having done things with an ex that she won’t do with me regardless of why she doesn’t want to do them, because I’m not insecure
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 09:17 PM
4

A lot of the stigmatization around it comes from racism and an intentional push to conflate “sex work” “prostitution,” and “trafficking.” Most people can’t articulate the difference, and the ones who use trafficking as a synonym don’t want people to be able to imagine that those students of yours are full people. They’ll swear up and down that they have those girls’ best interest at heart, but they’re the ones who would take away their bodily autonomy, financial independence, and if they ever tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 11:19 AM
2

I think guys like to imagine that other dudes who are more successful with women must have dark triad personality traits. It’s how they cope
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 02:52 PM
4

I agree. To add some nuance, I believe u/whiskeymyers75 when they’re talking about the women who want romance, effort, consistency, emotional availability, and that sort of thing. Which is all well and good. But wanting someone to do all the chivalrous gestures can be basically coded as “performative masculinity.” I’ve even seen femme lesbians projecting that role into their butch potential partners. As a kinkster, I see that dynamic as very D/s coded. If you’re going explore it in a sexual/roma…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 04:02 PM
5

Exactly. Despite what this sub (and especially red pill) says, most women want to connect with a guy who views them as a full person, not as some weird little prize to salivate over. Some women do like the chivalrous stuff. Absolutely that’s true. And most women like the softer benevolent sexism stuff: paying for dates. Treating her special. But almost no women like feeling that the guy they just met is sycophantically fawning over them. They want a guy who views himself as at least an equal. So…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:28 PM
7

Yeah. But benevolent sexism is tied to hostile sexism. It encourages and reinforces views that simultaneously infantalize and pedastalize women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:04 PM
10

I think the majority have at least internalized the puritanical view outlined above. This is reflected in the way a lot of guys talk derisively about women with high body counts, women giving it up for “Chad,” and the conquest language you pointed out in your post. A lot of sex negative women also talk about it this way, which is why they treat any sexualization, even women choosing to post sexy vids, as “objectification.” They operate under the assumption that sex is harmful to women (and benef…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 01:04 PM
17

They internalize sexist messaging that, based on traditional values, men earn status by sleeping with women, who are the gatekeepers of sex. Men and women who think like this basically believe that by giving away easy sex, women are “devaluing” sex itself and devaluing themselves. Because most people are at least a little sexist, if not fully sexist, the language around sex continues to frame it as an act of degradation done to a woman rather than an experienced shared with two people.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 12:26 PM
15

The issue with Nice Guys is that they believe “fair” in this context means that if they perform benevolent sexism it entitles them to sex and romance from desirable women. I agree that this is the just world fallacy at play. However, it matters that from women’s perspective this “justice” isn’t fair to them. They don’t owe intimacy of any form to someone just because that person performed chivalry at them. Especially if the guy responds to rejection like she’s a barista who got his order wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 12:21 PM
1

The reason that “you are not entitled to sex/a relationship” was decidedly a win for women’s sexual liberation is because to say the opposite is to promote rape culture and to enforce patriarchal gender norms that infantilize women and undercut the concept of women’s bodily autonomy. If we treat women like they couldn’t possibly want sex outside of marriage, or like women who do like sex must be broken or stupid, we give license to people who question the validity of women’s consent and challeng…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 04:53 PM
4

Men don’t owe a woman commitment just because she slept with them, just like women don’t owe men sex just because they go on a date. There’s nothing stopping a woman from saying “I won’t have sex with you unless you promise yourself to me,” just like there’s nothing stopping a man from saying “I’m not paying for dinner unless you fuck me.” Or rather, the thing that stops people from saying that is that, when said out loud, it’s obviously unreasonable, transactional, and misguided. It’s forcing p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 02:58 PM
4

A huge amount of women read a relationship that isn’t there into the early stages of dating and then feel misled, just like a huge amount of guys read romantic intentions into the early stages of friendship and then feel “lead on” or “friend zoned.” In both cases, there are some people who do actively exploit that dynamic in exactly the way that the rejected person fears (that’s why people are so afraid of it) but in most cases that’s not actually what’s happening. The rejected person is just bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 12:58 PM
0

Being romantic, having sex, and engaging the opposite gender like they are people.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 08:19 PM
2

I assume not. I think anti-romanticism/anti-intimacy/anti-men/anti-women rhetoric is a psyop and generally bad for people’s mental health
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 03:53 PM
6

No. I’m saying the messaging has shifted from “do things to get women,” to “do things to spite women, because committing to women make you less manly.” Basically
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 02:19 PM
3

Not OP, but I think it’s an extension of misogyny more generally. They’re sort of swept up in their sexist echo chamber, so the message becomes “40% of men who get girlfriends reduce their time at the gym” instead of the ostensibly self improvement message, “go to the gym so women like you.” I see a lot of memes about this very thing, but it’s also part of a greater effort to push men toward conservatism by getting them to hate women, IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:57 PM
3

But that‘a exactly what you’re claiming this post does to women, so you understand how someone saying “I wanna take my ball and go home” can be trying to punish people I don’t think you’re wrong. I think both men and women who withdrawal from the opposite gender do so as a way of at least trying to punish them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:35 PM
1

you think it’s speculation Yes, we’re both speculating on what the consumer sentiment would be if a male birth control pill were widely released. I think if the side effects were equivalent, a greater percentage of men would adopt it than women, and that it would be a cash cow for whatever pharmaceutical company created it. I think it would be easy to market to men. Sex sells, especially for men, and they have less stigma around casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:34 PM
5

Excuse me, are you against women taking birth control pills for the same reason?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:18 PM
3

Good luck slut shaming me lol
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:11 PM
1

Yes it is. They both use decentering as a way of punishing the opposite gender. It’s like they want to use “setting boundaries” as a way to punish their exes, but in a societal level.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 12:02 PM
2

I disagree with so much of the speculation part, though. Women are generally discouraged from being sexually, at least openly and especially casually. The pill having the side effect of tempering women’s menstrual cycle is an obvious benefit to women, but it also gives them cover to be on the pill without having to defend that decision. This is especially important for young women whose parents (and peers) may not approve of them being sexually active. If sterility were the only benefit, women w…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:52 AM
2

Yeah, if it means having raw sex without the risk of pregnancy definitely.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:07 AM
–

Whatever your hobbies are, dig into them and be social at them. Height and vocal issues will be issues, no doubt. But if you find your corner of the world and excel in it, that’s attractive to people. Don’t force yourself into concerts and bars because that’s where dating is supposed to happen. Find the girls who like the things you like and take them to the places you’ve feel comfortable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:54 AM
15

I always found it weird that BC is researched and marketed at women but seemingly way less effort has gone into targeting men. The “they don’t have a pill for men because men couldn’t handle it!” arguments always sounded so stupid to me, not just because of the inherent sexism they rely on, but because, if anything, considerably more men seem to be into the idea of consequence free sex. I have to assume there are legit medical hurdles to this, as a safe and effective birth control pill for men w…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 01:49 AM
1

I disagree. I argue with women all the time and never assume they’re all the same, or above judgment.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 12:17 PM
0

Not a conflation. Attacking male sexual attention as a way of implying female superiority is something women who hate men do often. Edit: approaching in real life has worked for me plenty. Also, I’d refer you to all the posts from guys being like “I stopped listening to blue pill advice and tried red pill, and it worked.” I think this is a misrepresentation of “blue pill advice” as a blanket term for misandrist takes. I don’t see gender equality as excluding men, or as teaching men that they sho…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 05:21 PM
0

I think it’s more obvious that women who hate men often use complaints about cold approaches to imply a superiority over men generally. It’s a kind of humble brag they do to suggest that men are beneath them for daring to approach them. That isn’t a hamstrung theory. It’s just something that a lot of women who hate men very obviously do.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 05:10 PM
4

It is absolutely a red pill take and a common complaint on this sub. I.e. “why do women blame men for their bad choices when they won’t even date nice guys like me.”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:52 PM
-1

I think women who hate men often complain about cold approaches as a way of trying to make men feel bad, or like they’re attraction toward women itself is bad (similar to complaints about the male gaze). I think they’re basically trying to convince men that this is a universally held female opinion, even though it is irrelevant to the men who cold approach women and the women who like men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:34 PM
-1

So? Framing cold approaches as hostile, insulting, or aggressive is also invalidating, not to mention delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 03:44 PM
–

Yes, they are diametrically opposed. Red pill is traditional values dating advice. It’s “men should be strong pursuer provider protector types and women should be coy, deferential submissive types, because that’s nature.” Pink pill is red pill, with a faux-feminist bent. It strongly enforces patriarchal gender roles with the intention of using them to hurt men instead of women. Girlboss feminism, “cakeist” feminism, and forms of feminism that are often called out as hypocritical for endorsing se…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 03:12 PM
5

Now I’m just picturing a scenario where a feminist man has to pretend not to respect you into liking him.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 01:44 PM
2

I think this post/thread is a good example of why men shouldn’t take dating advice from most women. They aren’t reflective of the attitudes of women who might actually be open to finding a partner. I got a number somewhat recently just by sitting next to a woman in a cafe and talking to her. All of these “I hate cold approaches under any and all circumstances” responses are bad advice, because women who are open to dating would have very different opinions. Edit to clarify: I agree with you. I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 01:19 PM
1

This is a lot to answer (especially with nuance) but I’ll try. Yes, I’ve had relationships with misandrists, be it coworkers, friends, or women I’ve dated. But like misogyny, it’s sort of scalar and differs person to person in how intensely they buy in. I had an ex who became a radical feminist, and I would say she was very sexist. But most people internalize at least some sexist stereotypes. I’d consider someone a misandrist if they consciously try to push a warped narrative that consistently f…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 09:55 PM
1

Good question. I think it illustrates a form of sexism that men almost unilaterally face, that often isn’t acknowledged as “sexism” because people aren’t primed to recognize it the way they are sexism against women. I.e. I think if a woman said that she’s had plenty of experiences where men made her feel sexually uncomfortable, people would generally believe her unless they are openly misogynistic. But when men say they’ve had plenty of experiences where women made them feel emotionally unsafe b…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 03:03 PM
3

So it’s a human trait, that gets filtered through gender constructs to present differently in men and women, then?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 11:50 AM
5

In general, men find a larger percentage of women attractive and women find a really small amount of men attractive, comparatively. What doesn’t get talked about, or what gets misrepresented I think, is that women’s taste varies a lot more. Even within friend groups women usually have pretty different opinions on which guys they find hot. But also, if a woman developed attraction towards you, you’re probably one of a handful of guys she even thinks of that way. So I say “yeah, if she finds you a…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 12:01 AM
-1

Nah I fuckin rock.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 03:21 PM
–

I think they put too fine a point on it, but agree that generally when people are lonely in this sense, they don’t mean that closer platonic relationships would resolve it. It should be noted that the the male loneliness epidemic is intentionally gendered, when the reality is that women face equal amounts of loneliness, and the framing of it “men complaining about sex to get sex” also isn’t really accurate, since it’s about romantic unwellness across both genders.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 11:37 PM
1

No, I don’t think it’s good advice, even generally. I don’t think it stands up to scrutiny.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 11:32 PM
8

“Work out,” is fine advice. “You need to work out because women are biologically predisposed to only find strong, domineering men sexually attractive because in caveman times alphas reigned over harems of submissive females, and that primordial urge to be dominated still resonates within their loins,” is red pill bullshit. “Be yourself,” is also fine advice. “Be yourself because humans evolved to desire heritable characterological traits that resemble their own” may be on as shaken evo-psych gro…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 10:18 PM
1

I think there’s a paradox with objectification, at least the way that it’s often discussed. A man who fears a woman’s sexuality (or who fears sexualizing her and think of it as some kind of spiritual offense) reduces her to her sexuality. And people who talk of objectifying women in a way that implies that women are inherently victimized by their own sexuality also reduce them to their status as sex objects while undercutting their autonomy and agency in sexual matters. Of course women don’t lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 03:35 PM
1

I guess this begs the question: is there anything morally wrong with objectifying women, if merely registering a woman’s sexuality counts as objectifying her? Also, do lesbians likewise objectify women? Is objectification just finding someone sexy? Why and how would a meta-commentary about objectification nullify a “self” objectifying performance?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 12:10 PM
1

This exact thing is going on in that newer post about objectification
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 11:52 AM
5

I was captain of my high school sports team, manager of my extracurricular club, published in literary and academic journals, and movie writer/producer. But for me, none of that has ever held a candle to being in a satisfying romantic relationship, or feeling sexually romantically desired. I really don’t like the way seeking romantic and sexual validation is demonized these days. I think it contributes to the gender war. But also, the same thing that drove me to be a great writer is what drives …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 12:15 AM
3

This is getting semantic, because it depends how you mean “objectification.” I should clarify for my definition above that I think what is problematic about objectification is the dehumanization and reduction. But a lot of people use “objectification” as a synonym for “sexualization.” The reason I draw the distinction that way is because it’s more in line with what Feminism was trying to address. Using objectification to mean “any sexualization of women specifically” confuses the discourse, IMO.…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 12:12 AM
13

Objectification: reducing someone to their status as an object. The key point is the reduction. Humans can be sexual objects, but that doesn’t mean that by engaging someone sexually you’re automatically degrading some quality of their being or stripping away their dignity. Sexualization: perceiving someone as a sexual being. Sexualization alone is neutral. It’s just recognizing or portraying how someone could be titillating in a sexual way. That’s different, IMO, from reducing someone to only th…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 07:44 PM
2

It’s the personality advice that I don’t get. My personality is who I am. It’s not a mask I put on. Hard agree. Two thoughts on this: firstly, I think young adults have a more malleable personality. They’re more impressionable and still trying to figure themselves out, so a 20 year old millionaire telling them they need to capitalism-max their mindset appeals to them. It makes them think they can fix their personality in time to be a winner by adopting red pill ideology. But I also think it’s ir…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 01:45 PM
–

I agree with u/acephalicdude and think that’s a very cogent way of looking at it, but agree that it feels like it’s missing something. When we’re talking about that “ineffable sense of the totality of their being,” I think what we’re really talking about is identifying with someone else. Recognizing ourselves in them and theirselves in us. That’s why when you’ve been together for a long ass time and then you break up it feels like a giant part of you has been cut away. You’ve started to develop …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 11:45 AM
-2

Red pill logic on display /j
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:49 AM
6

I think a lot of feminists misunderstand red pill in both its ideology and its insidiousness. That manosphere documentary that came out does an okay job highlighting the cringiest parts of red pill and why they are problematic. It did not do a good job, IMO, in conveying the actual message of red pill and why people fall for it. And I think that’s intentional, because if you steal-man red pill arguments they’re quite in line with how we, as a society, view men and women. A steal-manned red pill …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 10:32 PM
1

I think this is a really interesting question. I love movies and TV, and that’s where I get my female narratives mostly (aside from having women friends). I’ve watched thousands of them, and I’ve made some. I do want to caveat that I disagree that genre romances are an inherently inferior medium for understanding people, though I’d concede that a lot of romcoms are poorly done or tacitly espouse traditionalist gender constructs. But a particularly well done horror movie can drive home real chara…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 09:32 PM
3

It’s a little contextual, but that’s basically my point. You don’t have to respond just because somebody messaged you, but if you’re talking to someone it’s decent to respond. When I say “contextual” I mean decency is contingent on the rapport you’ve built up. For instance, an internet stranger has no obligation to reply to your first message and only an asshole would take offense to a complete stranger’s non reaction. If you’ve been messaging a little bit and the conversation falls off, that’s …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:33 PM
1

I’m optimistic on OLD in a way that most here seem not to be. I got a lot of dates regularly and mostly enjoyed them. When things didn’t work out, the majority of the time I still felt like I met a nice person and am glad to have had a decent dinner or whatever. My rules for myself were basically the opposite of what you posted here, because my underlying dating philosophy was “dating is fun and enjoyable. I’d rather get my hopes up and my feelings hurt than sit life out.” 1: the apps are a game…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:12 PM
3

Same.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:36 PM
3

It’s okay to enjoy sex. I think women get told that they don’t like sex or shouldn’t want sex in the way men want sex. I’ve been with plenty of women who do enjoy sex like that, who like feeling desired or who jump my bones the second I walk in the door, and for us that’s perfect. Conversely, I’ve had relationships where everything else is there (even handholding and snuggles, as others have identified as “physical touch”). That’s hard but I need more in a relationship, and it doesn’t mean that …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 08:05 PM
–

Self improvement is no issue. I go to the gym specifically to look and perform well in bed. I think it’s kind of a dumb fad to pretend that people don’t go to the gym to look and feel sexy. I think there’s purity culture on the right and the left, and what you describe is an extension of left purity culture. Purity culture on both sides frames sex as inherently harmful to women, and implies male sexuality is dirty and degrading while female value is tied to their sexual choices. I’m a sex positi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 07:21 PM
3

I’m sure men vastly outnumber women, but sex workers do get women as well. A while ago I was in a sex positivity sub and connected with Sinn Sage on something, and she recommended me her podcast. I find it really interesting. She (and many of the pornstars she has on) are more attracted to women, and they’ll occasionally discuss their female clientele. It sounds like they do get a lot of women coming to them, probably for similar reasons the guys do.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 11:32 AM
7

there are webcam models or other sex workers, and women are are not their clients, even lesbians. Sex workers do get lesbian clientele.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 11:12 AM
–

That line was my favorite part lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 06:50 PM
1

Consider two axes: 1); Boys vs girls. 2): Sexists vs anti-sexists Red pill is sexist boys. Pink pill is sexist girls. Blue bill is anti-sexist irrespective of gender. Purple pill is sort of soft on sexism. I think it can kind of mean a lot, but generally it’s people who don’t fully agree with red pill but concede that it isn’t fully bad or wrong (I’m blue pill because I oppose traditional values and think it’s important to deconstruct gender norms and disavow them when asserted as intrinsic trut…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 06:39 PM
–

Almost every sentence in this post is inaccurate. I mean it’s all an opinion, but to pick apart each point would be tedious. I find a lot of this is the opposite. Women don’t care who they’re fucking? For women, it’s entirely physical? Yeah right.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 06:32 PM
1

Red pill is basically gender essentialism though. In this sub, you are “pink pilled.” A feminist who agrees with red pill (I.e. a radical feminist who believes in female superiority, by subscribing to the same sexist beliefs that red pill subscribes to).
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 11:49 AM
3

Ah. In that case yeah, I fully agree. I think people will always seek romantic partnership, romantic failures will always be recognized as such, and that the current heterofatalism is pathological in its intensity. I don’t think it will last, not because incels/femcels won’t have children, but because young people will always find people who can’t get laid cringe.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/26 02:39 AM
2

Political beliefs aren’t genetically heritable. While “social contagion” is maybe a useful term for describing the flow of ideas through people, nobody who is currently anti-Natalist is the spawn of anti-natalists. That said, I’m not convinced anti-natalists (as in people who are strongly, ideologically opposed to propagating on philosophical grounds) are common enough to have a detrimental effect on population. People who don’t want to have kids won’t, but that doesn’t mean that the kids who we…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 11:50 PM
1

I don’t think we’re seeing the end of enlightenment reasoning. I feel like fascism is masquerading as the final form, but we’ve had this argument before and democracy beat it out. At the end of the day people prefer it, and fascism is self defeating.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 08:34 PM
1

Are you bringing these issues up as a rhetorical strategy to derail conversations and tar men?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 07:20 PM
1

I don’t hear that often. I much more often hear people on varying degrees of the Kinsey scale say that they are queer, and my gay friends and family talk about queerness. At any rate, I’m not letting gay people gate keep “queerness.” It isn’t that deep.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 05:22 PM
1

I agree. But I think OP’s perspective on this misunderstands “equality” in the philosophical sense. Everyone should enjoy the same rights under the law and their value as people should be judged based on their merits, not on the basis of their race, color, national origin, sex, etc. not just because it’s mean to be bigoted, but because the metrics we’re talking about (I.e. intelligence, strength, loyalty) are the qualities of an individual, not a demographic. Men may be stronger than women on av…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 05:15 PM
1

I disagree. You can insist that, but I don’t agree that this is the way “queerness” is used in common parlance, or that it’s an innate quality of the concept of queerness. My definition is better.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 04:54 PM
6

The point still stands that OP is equating the two, whereas u/lemon_gecko is illustrating why the nuance matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:43 PM
8

You’re a gender essentialist. That’s at odds with gender equality, IMO. This post is a good example of exactly why. Rather than challenging gender constructs, you take them at face value, assert them as universal truths (like literally tied to god or something) and then your analysis of men and women becomes this dick measuring contest that presupposes gendered traits can prove one gender as objectively better or worse than the other. Sexism is stupid. Trying to argue which gender is intrinsical…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:24 PM
2

No it isn’t. Queerness is deviation from heteronormativity and the aesthetic associated with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 12:06 PM
3

I don’t mean it as a dig at women, but it does seem like one area where guys reflexively loath these type of dudes (we see it because were socialized around them), and women more often don’t see it because it resembles confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 04:25 AM
1

In addition to what u/Flaneur50 said, if you put two asterisks before and after the section you want bolded, that works. Depending on what kind of editor your Reddit is set up with that is much easier, IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 09:21 PM
–

It has to do with how sexism works. Young boys/men are taught that male sexuality is predatory and bad, and by extension women who pander to male sexuality are sluts. Those boys internalize this messaging and view sexually forward and sexually successful men as having “bad intentions.” The sexually insecure and romantically disadvantaged come to think of themselves as the “nice guys” who finish last. So it becomes a weird dynamic where unsuccessful men think lucky hot guys have automatically mis…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 09:17 PM
23

I don’t really know how to answer the settling thing because I think it’s a loaded term. I could be out pursuing other women, but I’m with you, so I’ve already chosen you over them. When I think of men that I hate, that women sometimes seem oblivious to, I think of guys who don’t apologize on principle. The salesy, smarmy type guys who need to win every social interaction. The kind of guy who crushes your hand when you shake it, because it’s important to this guy to assert dominance. The guys li…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 09:11 PM
2

Not them, but that isn’t the message I got from their comment. The wording took me a second, but they’re saying that Trump getting elected made feminists inclusive of sex-negative “feminists” with reactionary conservative values. It made them INCLUSIVE of EXCLUSIONARY feminists, basically.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 11:55 AM
2

You’re preaching to the choir.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 01:12 AM
13

I think a lot of the issue stems from misandrists recognizing the utility of pivoting to rape/SA/DV as third rail issues, which they can use to simultaneously malign men. And some definitely do so as a conscious rhetorical strategy. The drawbacks in terms of gender equality is that it’s inherently bio essentialist and sexist. It flattens arguments about why it’s sometimes acceptable to treat male and female experiences differently. That isn’t a conversation that should lack nuance. The other iss…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 09:54 PM
1

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think the people who call teasing, banter, and assertiveness “assholish” are up there on the agreeableness chart.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 02:19 PM
13

The premise of your post fundamentally misunderstands what women are looking for much the way that red pill assumes “women can get sex whenever they want” while refusing to acknowledge that sex in and of itself isn’t as valuable and validating to them as it would be for men. Most women want a fulfilling relationship from a man they respect. That is what women who are bad at love can’t get, even from desperate guys. A woman punching above her weight class can absolutely end up in a cycle of entit…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 02:33 PM
11

Internalized misandry doesn’t really get talked about (except as toxic masculinity) but this is basically what it sounds like. They’ve internalized this idea that they’re “not like the other girls,” who are all sex-crazed abusive bastard men. They disbelieve that other men are just people like them, and they can’t imagine themselves inhabiting many of the same issues that they perceive other men to have. I.e. they think they’re nice and protective but can’t see the ways in which that can amount …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 01:24 PM
–

Divorce rates don’t matter at all. If Gen divorce rates are low, it typically just means that people are staying in unhappy marriages due to the legality or stigma of leaving. People with higher body counts are probably just less religious/conservative and therefore less likely to stay in unhappy marriages.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 07:24 PM
–

Why do you assume she’s average?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:53 PM
1

Obama didn’t send ICE out to break up protests, antagonize communities, and threaten opposition. He didn’t openly position them as a force meant to specifically harass people of color. Pretending it’s the same is disingenuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 05:30 PM
0

I don’t think anyone should be “idolized” per se, but there’s nothing wrong with being a “man whore,” and if guys want to date and have sex they should get advice from men who know how to date and have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 01:10 PM
0

Have you ever dealt with a doctor in any context outside of a hospital? Half of them are narcissistic manbabies with the entitlement and anger issues of a three year old. I’m sure there are plenty of good ones, but someone being a PHD or MD doesn’t automatically make them “a good person.”
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 01:07 PM
2

I agree with everything after your first point about He/Him. I was literally schooled to use He and Him to refer to any person of unknown gender. Also, reading any book before 2000 you’ll see the authors using He and Him to refer to any hypothetical individual unless the hypothetical person is pointedly a woman. They/them was sometimes used informally, but assuming male gender was used for formal writing until academia made the effort to push They/them as the default. And I think that was a good…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 12:46 AM
1

This is an interesting perspective, but it clashes with my experience in university in the 2010s. Most if not all of my professors were feminist, and maybe it was because I was a student and they only expressed their softer views, but the refrain was toward gender equality, deconstructing gender, and calling out double standards. It just felt like a different environment, where the target was societal preconceptions of gender (I.e. a big talking point was reforming language to not use He/Him as …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/26 12:04 AM
1

I mean, I think that the same visibility effect happened to red pill and feminism. I do think that incels became more visible first, and that red pill misogyny flared before radical feminism did. Radical feminism existed forever, but it wasn’t taken seriously even within feminist circles. Valerie Solanis was quoted as a joke, for instance, in shows like venture bros (a super progressive show that’s humor would probably send people typing up manifestos today). To me, the tipping point was when “d…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 10:50 PM
-1

Yup. Horseshoe theory works, because the radicals on both ends agree to punish the opposing party, resulting in illiberal policies and broad sexist hostility towards everyone. Everyone agrees to less freedom because they think it’s more important to hurt the enemy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 03:14 PM
1

You’re misunderstanding my argument. I’m stating that I don’t think that 20% figure would change if, because of social pressures to “self improve,” every man or the vast majority of men suddenly looks maxed.if everyone is siding it, the 20% most attractive would still be the ones that women find attractive. (I don’t want to get derailed from the point above, but also that 20% isn’t settled law. Women may be more selective in who they find attractive. But not all women find the same 20% attractiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 02:14 PM
-5

Agreed. There’s been a lot of backsliding in terms of gender equality because people don’t view being sexist as problematic anymore, as long as their willful ignorance is facing the right direction.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:50 PM
1

Yep. Even if it doesn’t start as active hostility centering the opposite sex, it always lands there. What starts as “self help” and “protecting my peace,” become a reactionary justification for prejudging the opposite sex, centering sexist stereotypes as universal truths, and then the main thing fueling it becomes hate-based camaraderie
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:50 PM
1

I feel like this misses my main point, which is that if everyone is doing it, the collective change won’t make people appear more or less attractive. Attraction in this sense is relative to the average. For instance, while it may be true that women generally find taller men attractive, humans used to be shorter. Sexual selection for taller people and improvements in nutrition have increased the average height, but men in general aren’t all more attractive to women because women are perceiving th…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:50 PM
2

That logic doesn’t hold when we’re talking about everyone though. When everyone was skinny and tan because they worked in fields, pale, curvaceous bodies were in because they indicated abundant wealth. When everyone was working under fluorescent lights eating highly processed foods, skinny tan bodies were in because they indicated the leisure class who could afford Pilates, tanning beds, and abundant resources. Skinny/fat/tan/pale aren’t objectively beautiful or ugly. We’re just socialized to fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:12 PM
-2

Pretty much. I don’t think women fell for it before men though. I think that red pill misogyny prompted scorched earth feminism, which became exclusionary and contemptuously bad faith. I also think it’s more or less inevitable for sexism to fall out of fashion and become cringe to younger people who like sex, like the opposite sex, and are interested in romance and dating. The lame asses hung up on misogyny and misandry will sound like brainwashed parrots.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:08 PM
7

That’s dumb as shit. Attraction is subjective and relative to the options available. If everyone self improved nothing would change because people wouldn’t feel more or less attracted to each other. They would still perceive the least attractive as unattractive and the most attractive as “catches.” To answer directly, “no. I don’t listen to women (who say that the reason they don’t date/can’t find men/hate men is because men aren’t living up to their standards).” I think those women are projecti…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 01:00 PM
2

I don’t think there’s as strong a correlation between loneliness and self improvement as you’re imagining. Also, the question of what “improvement” means is subjective. Most women aren’t avoiding dating because men aren’t strong or handsome enough, and it strikes me as a very masculine idea to focus on improving those things rather than what women might actually like.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 12:24 PM
2

I think there’s two parts to it. 1): sexist attitudes 2): fascist ideology I’m a guy and the sexist attitudes don’t really affect me as much. But the prison camps for immigrants, ICE as modern gestapo, jingoism, and broad spread fascist rhetoric will and I think should carry a stigma to it. Though a lot depends on how old people were when they supported it and how far it actually goes.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:54 PM
5

None of those three examples explain away getting over a decade into adulthood without exploring your sexuality. Plenty of people pursue careers and have sex. Plenty of people take care of their ailing parents and have sex. Plenty of people “don’t find the right one” and have sex. It’s like saying “would you hire a 30 year old with zero work experience?” No. Probably not. Things happen but it’s a huge red flag if someone has never had a job, and you can reasonably assume incompetence. It’s also …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:58 PM
7

I’m not asexual and wouldn’t want to partner with someone who doesn’t have sex for fun and pleasure because she likes it. If she’s sexual but intentionally abstained until her thirties, that tells me she cares more about social repercussions or religion than self actualization, which seems cowardly, inauthentic, and unrelatable to me. I’m an adult and wouldn’t enjoy dating someone with the sexual acumen of a middle schooler. Or if she’s just that unattractive then I’m sorry but I probably wouldn…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 02:08 PM
8

Nah. That would be a dealbreaker for me
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 01:34 PM
2

It seems like a weird challenge. I don’t know why it’s incredible that someone would introduce mutual friends, even if the introducer isn’t personally attracted to one or more of them. And IRL introductions probably do work the majority of the time (or at least more often than OLD)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 01:34 PM
–

I don’t think that’s true. The companionship plus the romantic and sexual benefits far outweigh having to compromise sometimes. I don’t want kids so that part doesn’t pertain to me. I don’t think it’s that much of an investment to have a partner compared to what I get out of it, and I think the vast majority of people couple up for the same reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 01:56 AM
–

Nope. I’m perfectly fine being single. I can go out and get laid, have complete freedom to do whatever I want all the time, and enjoy life on my terms. And that’s great. But none of that holds a candle to loving someone or being loved. I much prefer companionship, romance, and regular sex. Especially because with a long term partner the sex can be richer and more interesting as you learn how their body works and what they actually like . IMO “being single is so much better” is a psyop to keep me…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 01:37 AM
–

I love my honey to death, but I don’t really care if he cheats. That’s how I am. If I’m with someone it’s because I want to be with them. If they betray my trust or overstep my boundaries, I’m not mad at them, it just instantly kills my interest in them. And the weird freaking out is because of patriarchy/mononormativity. Men are positioned to be aggro/protective of their babes, whereas straight girlies are encouraged to take offense to porn, instagram models in his feed, and have any fears abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 12:46 AM
1

Oh yeah that must be why…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:06 PM
1

You can disagree all you want, but you’re wrong. Red pill is repackaging the same trad con bullshit it always has (which is why it’s heavily associated with conservatism).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 06:15 PM
1

I think you’re misinformed on what “traditional values” means. it’s seeing through traditional values advise and seeing the reality of sexual dynamics. How? By reinforcing the idea that men win women’s affection through provision and protection? By reinforcing the idea that men who bag hot chicks are the picture of success while women who sleep with a lot of men are broken whores? By casting marriage as a duty that a submissive woman performs to keep her patriarchal husband figure happy? That’s …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:52 PM
–

The response I typically see for “women only want the top 20% of men” is “okay? Why can’t everyone just be free to set their own standards? Do you want to make someone who isn’t into you date you? That’s weird. Why would you even want that?” I think if red pill reframed a lot of their messaging to be less sexist, racist, and homophobic (thinking of H.S. Declaring himself all of those things on the recent manosphere documentary) they’re message would be palatable to people who aren’t maga. But th…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:26 PM
2

I strongly disagree with that take. Red pill espouses traditional values, which are treated as the standard dating advice because they stress traditional gender norms. Most “dating advice” aligns with “traditional values/norms” (e.g. “women should play hard to get,” “don’t put out too quick or he’ll think you’re a slut,” “girls dont like guys, girls like cars and money,” “women want a 6-figure, 6 foot guy, with a 6 inch cock.”). Blue pill pushes back on these ideas because they presuppose sexist…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:18 PM
1

I actually disagree that marriages for love are a new conceit. I know I’m in the minority in that, and I’m no anthropologist or historian. But it feels like a narrative pushed by (mostly) conservative historians to me espousing a patriarchal understanding of what love and relationships are. Aka it trips my bullshit detector. Here’s why: We love the way we do today because of millions of years of evolution. People fell in love and partnered up for life before we were even people. And I don’t need…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 05:14 PM
1

Honestly, I’m a cishet guy, but most of my LTRs have been with queer women. The thing I appreciate most about them is that it feels like gender comes secondary to our understanding of each other as “people.” From my POV, the more heteronormative relationships end up feeling objectifying and fetishizing. For instance, I love being appreciated for my gym body and I absolutely love kinky, dommy sex. I like being appreciated for doing “man shit” and I like having a subby girl to spend my time with a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:49 PM
1

I really don’t like the narrative that men aren’t capable of platonic relationships with women, especially at work. Firstly, it isn’t at all my experience that my “work wife” has any effect on my love life. I’ve had attractive and unattractive female friends my whole life. I’m perfectly capable of not fucking someone I’m attracted to if I’m in an exclusive relationship. And anyway, if I do want to fuck other people, I can. I just have to have a conversation about it, which can be uncomfortable b…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:17 PM
-2

There’s such a weird jealousy from red pill. They’re like “how come sex positive feminists want what we want?! You’re supposed to be ashamed of that.” And the only reason they disagree with it (despite wanting it so bad) is because there’s the caveat that women still expect respect and understanding from men who want the same things as them. I swear to god I think that’s the one thing preventing them from just being sex positive feminists. It’s absolutely delusional, like they require the hypocr…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 04:04 PM
1

Why not marry for love? What’s wrong with living with someone you trust, even if you don’t necessarily want kids?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 03:59 PM
1

I think that’s somewhat nullified by their update. I think they are saying that if you have gone so far down the rabbit hole that you can’t trust another man or woman because they are a man or a woman, you are the asshole. And with that, I agree. I don’t think it’s the same as but trusting someone who subscribes to a particular ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 12:44 AM
–

And if a spouse doesn’t know deeper stuff than that, there’s something wrong in the marriage. My hot take is that most people settle for unfulfilling sex lives, and to add to this, plenty of people settle for unfulfilling partnerships. To be clear, I agree with you that your deepest connection should be with your spouse. I just think many people fuck up early in their relationships and then ride out the dishonesty, and never know what it’s like to have a completely honest romantic relationship, …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 10:26 PM
–

I actually agree with the premise, I just think they overstate the case. It’s not nearly the majority of men or women, but there’s an undercurrent of this in heteronormative culture which is reflected in the truism that “women’s value comes from their sexual desirability while men’s value derives from their proven accomplishments.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 12:47 PM
–

Comphet is a thing, but it’s still a crazy take (or wishful thinking on some people’s part) to think most women are lesbians but pretend to be straight to appease men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 12:40 PM
2

I think it’s the same. It’s using your own insecurity as a justification to control your partner. I consider it abusive and would never date someone that insecure or uncomfortable with sex I agree, women watch porn and there are toys for men. I don’t think in any case that people should police their partner’s masturbation habits
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 11:15 PM
4

Yeah it’s dumb as shit. I consider it the same as a guy not allowing a woman to use toys
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 09:51 PM
–

10 really isn’t that many unless you grew up religious/conservative.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:05 PM
3

Let me try to apply what you’ve said to what I asked. It is not wrong to say “homosexual relationships are normal” when the targets of those relationships (I think you mean gay people in relationships?) say otherwise. Or maybe I’m just confused by “say otherwise” because there’s kind of a double negative going on. But it sounds like you’re trying to say “it’s the people in age gap relationships who are the ones telling us all how bad and unfair they are.” Which just isn’t true. No one in an age …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:44 PM
5

Is it wrong to say that “homosexual relationships are normal” or that gay marriage is “what people want?”
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:33 PM
2

This seems hyperbolic. I’m circumcised and while I basically agree with the philosophy of why it shouldn’t happen, I’ve never had issues experiencing pleasure, I don’t remember the operation any more than I recall my umbilical cord getting snipped, and I’m personally thankful that my cock looks nice and that I don’t have to clean under the foreskin. I understand that it’s cultural, but to me uncircumcised dicks look gross (but to each their own). Also, hearing these discussions is sort of like h…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:32 PM
5

That is gross if that’s what they’re doing, but I’ll say as a cishet kinkster I kind of understand why, in a room full of queer people, you might be like “I’m really more heteroflexible than anything.” Especially as heteroflexible isn’t well defined. I’m basically 100% straight but queer culture is a lot more relatable to me than heteronormativity. I’m sure there are guys who would consider me queer compared to them, but that goes back to compulsory heterosexuality. For some guys, receiving a ri…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:19 PM
5

What does the action of “normalizing” really mean in this context? Shaming/stigmatizing/bitching about people who have age gap relations, homosexual relationships, polyamorous relationships, or any other alternative relationship is the active thing. Leaving people alone is not active, so it really isn’t the same thing. You’re encouraging people to take a negative action and socially harm others.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:01 PM
10

Framing it as “normalizing” is bullshit. What you’re really talking about is stigmatizing people for the sex/relationships that you aren’t a part of. Everyone should oppose hostility towards sexual preferences they don’t understand and that don’t affect them.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:52 PM
1

I don’t believe this is true at all. You’re just saying it as if it’s a truism.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:19 AM
1

Except that’s not why people have sex. They have sex because it’s fun and it feels good and it’s nice to be desired. Stigmatizing women for that is disgusting. And how do loyalty and respect even come into it? It isn’t disloyal to anyone (wxcwpt a future husband)? And it’s not disrespectful to eat someone’s pussy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:36 PM
13

Why shouldn’t they care about a sexist double standard? Most sexism derives from this antiquated bullshit Also, sexism aside, why shouldn’t we call out hypocritical faux morality?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:40 PM
4

You could try using words, seeing as this is a debate sub. If you don’t have a rebuttal (and you don’t, because I’m correct that there’s nothing inherently disloyal or disrespectful about mashing your genitals together on a first date), you can just say that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:37 PM
8

It just makes her a misandrist. Most slutty guys don’t lose respect for the women they sleep with. This seems like bullshit peddled by women who get rejected a lot and incels who see sex itself as disrespectful.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:08 PM
2

Maybe some women just have unappealing or smelly pussies, so those women globalize this “men don’t like oral” thing. I’m almost always happy to go down on a woman, especially if it’s our first time. And I can’t imagine too many guys would resist eating a beautiful woman’s coochie.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:04 PM
3

I appreciate you saying something. As a sexual guy I think there’s a lot of weird, baseless rhetoric about “fuckbois” being bad in bed. It makes no sense. I’m sure they exist, but on average guys who sleep with a lot of women are definitely more likely to care about being good in bed, have taken the time to get good in bed, and they’re sure as fuck better than some trad pilled dipshit whose afraid that if a woman isn’t a virgin she’ll have something better to compare him to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:00 PM
5

Whose behavior? I treat women respectfully whether they sleep with me or not, but if we do have sex I recognize there’s an added responsibility not to hurt her feelings afterwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:55 PM
6

Except it isn’t true at all. There’s nothing “disrespectful” or “disloyal” about having sex on a first date. Some of y’all are just insecure af
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:51 PM
–

Why are you calling people “cucks” in this conversation when you’re the one sitting in the corner crying about all the sex women have and inviting all the emasculating insults hurled at you? Questions: who told you sex is bad, and why do you believe them? Also, why do you judge women so bitterly for wanting the same thing you seem to want so bad? If I could wave a magic wand and cure you of this idea that it’s disgusting and bad for women to have sex, you could have a whole different, way more f…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 12:02 AM
–

The virgin claim is one thing (which I also disagree with) but to say “no good woman is on social media” is fuckin bonkers. Like, go be Amish I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 11:42 PM
4

Making sexist statements is sexist. It promotes hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 09:33 PM
–

People labeled SWERFs are full of shit and I’ve never talked to a sex worker who appreciated being told they can’t consent or that their profession is just them getting “pay raped.” Swerfs are just a hate group like any other.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 07:57 PM
6

I agree, and was thinking about this while watching that manosphere documentary. All the manosphere influencers had “one way monogamy.” Each time they tell Louis about it, there’s a sort of cheeky smile they have about it, like they know that they’ve appropriated the “woke” language of ENM to trick their partners. It’s frustrating watching these scenes as a blue pill male dom because the whole time you’re thinking “just admit it’s a kink! Stop pretending ‘fucking 2000 women’ is some “natural ord…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 11:57 AM
1

I see it all the time. But these terms also get overused to the point of just being a blanket insult for anyone who doesn’t fully decenter the opposite sex. As if everyone has a moral obligation to never give men/women a chance or try to understand them or like them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 01:27 PM
–

I don’t think it’s really a skill issue. I’ve had partners who cum easily just from vaginal, and I don’t think we had all those other things you mentioned aside from the equipment. But they’re few and far between. And between them I’ve had long term loving relationships with women who just need oral, manual, or toys. I do think probably a lot of women probably learn one way to cum and just focus on that, and then it becomes a sort of feedback loop where it’s the only way they can finish. But I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:49 PM
–

OP’s argument, if I’m understanding it correctly, is that non-coital orgasms don’t produce the same pair bonding, because the brain activity during orgasm doesn’t fire as prominently around neural pathways associated with pair bonding (a “neurons that fire together wire together” argument). I think a better explanation is that women who cum from vaginal penetration are happier because men are more likely to pound pussy, because that’s what most guys like. NOT because clitoral orgasms aren’t as s…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:02 PM
–

I think there’s an obvious reason women who orgasm from penetration are more likely to report relationship satisfaction. They’re more likely to have frequent orgasms. I don’t think that implies that the orgasms themselves are stronger. I think it implies that men are more likely to perform the sex acts that get them off. You could also look at women who cum from anal, which seems like it would follow similar physicality to vaginal penetration, but IMO feels more intimate because of the added tab…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 10:11 PM
0

You avoid them, but I’m still not clear on if you find them more or less attractive based on their sexual past. In either case, I don’t see how your attraction or aversion toward people should impact the way they are treated in society. My point was, “the idea that sex empowers men and disempowers women is the root cause of all other sexism and the underlying social mechanism used to justify controlling women under the guise of protecting them.”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:49 AM
0

Are you saying that you find women who have a lot of sex less attractive and men who have a lot of sex more attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:11 AM
0

I don’t see how any of that is relevant to your estimation of someone’s worth, especially as we live in 2026 and practicing safe sex is relatively easy
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 10:54 AM
4

How are bi men irrelevant, especially in the context of assessing how performative masculine men are expected to be? That seems relevant to red pill
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:47 AM
–

I feel like the 0 upvotes 200 comments thing goes back and forth between men and women. Like it depends on the day. I also feel like progressive men don’t have a voice in gender politics. Most feminist spaces are exclusionary of male voices much more than literally hateful voices like TERFs and SWERFs, so anti-sexist men don’t really have a platform. This is a space where I can challenge red pill without having to blindly agree with blatantly misandrist takes or stuff that amounts to hate speech…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 10:10 PM
–

Fat women aren’t my preference, but there’s a difference between finding someone (un)attractive and treating them shittily because of that. Heavyset women absolutely get treated like shit, mostly by men but also by society at large, and I think it’s fair for them to take issue with that. I don’t think taking issue with that requires them to also be attracted to fat men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:56 PM
3

They could also mean “Chad” vs the less conventionally attractive guy who learned how to pick up women
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:34 PM
4

Just to put it out there, this is, IMO, the original sin of sexism. The idea that sex empowers men and disempowers women is the root cause of all other sexism and the underlying social mechanism used to justify controlling women under the guise of protecting them from their own behaviors.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 11:37 AM
17

Not to split hairs, but I think the female equivalent would be closer to “you can never have loved another woman.” Occasionally you do see that type of sentiment from women, but it’s obviously immature for the same reason. I wish fewer men would tolerate guys shit talking women for wanting the same things they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 04:16 AM
3

The premise that women devalue themselves by sleeping with men is sexist to begin with. No doubt, plenty of men and women buy into it, but that’s an extension of broader sexist attitudes in society, largely stemming from men’s Madonna/whore complexes. The idea that it’s healthy and normal to worry about your partner’s sexual past and that it’s unhealthy and abnormal to have a sexual past is ridiculous. People should sleep with who they want, and everyone else should shut the fuck up about whethe…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:36 AM
1

Yes, I know. My point is not that men should malinger in these relationships (I think that’d be closer to the red pill take: “just never be vulnerable with your partner”) just that this is an example of how sexism prevents men from being vulnerable in relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 11:36 PM
1

I feel like there’s some misreading of that comment. I just mean he can’t allow the disagreement about the frying pan woman to be the reason the relationship ends. He has to wall off and find a different reason, or she can character assassinate him as a misogynist. Genuinely, if you were a man, do you think it would be safe to break up with a woman for being a misandrist?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 11:29 PM
4

Vulnerability relates to gender war stuff. Would you be vulnerable with a man who, when you brought up a customer who was beaten and blinded by a man, launched into an attack on that women and rationalizing why the man was maybe justified in attacking her, and suggested it was misandrist of you to even share that story? Absolutely not. It would showcase to you that the man is protective of “men” as a group and of a narrative around men, and that he feels owed allegiance in that protection, and t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 09:47 PM
3

I agree, leave. But that sort of ignores that she has created a dynamic in which an honest relationship can’t exist. By reflexively blaming the dude who got frying panned as an abuser and the perpetrator as a victims, and implying that to not share this interpretation would be misogynistic, she’s created a dynamic in which the guy can’t assume vulnerability will be met with empathy. That positions the man to either acquiesce on everything or leave, which unfortunately denies her the emotional ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 08:02 PM
1

Also, the ex SWers complaining about it are mostly women who had an OF for like a month and didn’t make enough money on it. Actual sex workers will tell you they face the most hate from SWERFS.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:48 PM
5

Great answer. My only difference would be that I think the best way to address the loneliness epidemic is actually to tone down the gender war rhetoric. Less radicalized men and women equals more healthy relationships equals fewer misandrists and misogynist. Stoking the gender war does the opposite, and feeds into the fascist machine in a divide and conquer way. It just makes people into reactionaries who want to make the world less comfortable for those who fall outside of heteronormative ideal…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:44 PM
0

I studied people’s belief in a just world long before it entered PPD discourse, so I want to clarify some points. I consider BJW a theory in the sense that gravity is a “theory.” While it explains victim blaming, it’s more than that. Conceptually, BJW describes a heuristic. It’s a mental shortcut that makes calculating most outcomes unnecessary. It is culturally heritable, like language, and similar to language in that almost no one lacks it. One way of conceiving of BJW is that its absence is t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:17 PM
7

Fair enough, and this is a good point to bring it back home. I think this is emblematic of the point OP makes about how women exclude men from vulnerability: good luck explaining that there is a reasonable anxiety and shyness there, because women are going to disagree AND find it mad pathetic AND maybe even sexist. I mean, I genuinely ask you to reread our conversation and see the ways that, from a man’s perspective, those things are happening in our dialogue. It seems like the idea of having to…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:46 PM
1

I feel like you’re minimizing the impact this could have on a man’s dating prospects, and also his personal and professional reputation. I think if you were a man you would absolutely care to preserve your reputation as a safe person, and I’d be surprised if you knew even one woman who doesn’t care about a man having an unsafe reputation.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:35 PM
1

I don’t understand what you aren’t understanding. If you were a woman, would you date a man who had a post about him in AWDTSG or tea app? If not, then that is the answer to the question “why not just break up with her?” It’s why it would be risky and naive to openly break up with her for being sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:13 PM
2

That’s exactly the issue. Outside of gender politics, her “feminism” is just the inability to see men as full people. She can’t conceive of her own gender politics as playing into the gender war.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:09 PM
2

I think there’s a heightened danger when breaking up with someone sexist, especially when kink is involved. Also, respectfully, I think this is the equivalent of a guy saying “women really have no reason to think men are dangerous.” Would you date a guy posted about in AWDTSG?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 04:20 PM
6

why would you want a relationship with someone who would hate you if they knew your true feelings? That’s my point entirely. Hypothetically, imagine you’re a man in a perfect relationship with a woman. She’s funny, smart, sexy, and matches your kink and libido. She makes a lot of misandrist jokes, which you take in stride because she obviously doesn’t regard you as a “straight man” that she makes the jokes about. You’re the exception. She loves you and looks at you with a mix of admiration and r…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 02:25 PM
4

While I generally agree, I think there’s a big contingent of young christian values men with Madonna/whore complexes, and that’s basically what OP is calling out.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:52 PM
0

Real love is found where people make exceptions to the dating game framework and see each other as “people” rather than “men” or “women.”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:42 PM
8

I think OP is spot on with this being why men bottle up though. You can’t be real and raw with someone who will label you a misogynist if misandry is a dealbreaker for you. That puts you in a position where you aren’t allowed to require empathy or vulnerability in a relationship. You just have to wall off and find a different, acceptable reason to break up.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:19 PM
14

Hard disagree. Misogyny almost never goes unchallenged in leftist spaces while misandry almost always gets a pass, if not an endorsement. The result has been that leftist men don’t have a voice in feminism or gender politics more broadly, so it’s just red pill vs radfems. This pushes young men to the right because, on the left, applying the same logic you use for women on men is seen as oppressing women. ETA: so tolerating misandry has not led to LESS misandry. It just creates more misandry and …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:07 PM
4

I’m probably in the minority here, but I actually think that even if people could choose to flip their gender preferences a lot would find the grass isn’t greener. I’m sure some things are easier, but plenty of bi people try switching teams and come back.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:51 PM
2

Agreed. When it comes to people suggesting that almost no person of the opposite gender is attractive, or that their own gender is so obviously superior and more desirable, it’s reasonable to call into question the sexist’s orientation. Not because there’s anything wrong with being queer, but because their opinion isn’t relevant to heterosexual dating if they aren’t attracted to the opposite sex (and if they are attracted and just saying it to stir shit, then they’re opinion still isn’t relevant…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:36 PM
8

Or to have the freedom to sleep with other people without owing anyone an explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:16 AM
10

I think the thing I’ll never understand is: why would you even want to remain in a relationship with someone you can’t be honest with? Like what are you even getting out of it if you have to pretend to be someone else? Don’t you want to feel loved for being who you are? Maybe some people just feel entirely unlovable. And that’s understandable, but it doesn’t justify betraying someone else’s trust rather than simply being honest with them and dealing with whatever fall out.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:07 AM
10

I can’t relate to this sociopathic way of thinking. But aside from that, I’m not worried that my life will be worse if I am open and honest with my partner, nor am I worried that I won’t be able to find another woman “worthy” of me if I decide to leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 10:04 AM
16

In that case why not divorce? Also, the effort of trying to repair a marriage after adultery is greater (and less expensive, btw) than the fort of trying therapy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 09:27 AM
18

You could take this one step further and say being honest about your wants/needs before is a good thing. I disagree that sometimes you have to commit adultery. Why not try other things first, like opening the marriage?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 09:22 AM
1

I disagree that feminism is inherently sexist. Liberal feminism is explicitly anti-sexist, and framed the debate around equality for men and women, and did a pretty good job achieving its goals for western women. There may always be crazy misandrists, but it isn’t crazy to imagine the backlash to this iteration of feminism will be a version that’s less idol focused and better articulates the tenets of intersectional feminism to include all people.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 01:59 AM
1

Sorry for being so long winded
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 01:54 AM
1

Go for it. I know it’s a bold take and maybe it’s overreaching. Also, I added a little parens that includes some buzzwords but that I feel is relevant. Lastly, you seem to have a background in feminism, but an interest in effecting social justice (which I share). So I want to put this out there: Because the people in this sub aren’t strictly feminists, misogynists, or even necessarily interested in gender politics in any philosophical or academic sense, incels and radfem arguments don’t work her…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 01:54 AM
2

It depends how you mean “you guys.” I’m a sex positive, blue collar leftist. IMO sex sells. The only thing you need to do to get men on board with feminism is cut out all the illiberal, sexist, sex negative parts of it. It is not hard to sell “women should be allowed to have sex without being socially (or literally) policed” to men. It is not hard to sell “kinky sex is fine as long as it’s with consenting adults.” It is not hard to sell, “a man’s whole status shouldn’t be reduced to the number o…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 10:40 PM
1

For two: women need to get on board calling out exclusionary feminism and creating safe spaces for men to discuss gender politics with women who treat men and women equally. Without that, men have no reason to discuss gender politics with women, so they turn to the men who will discuss it amongst themselves and get radicalized (much like women who only discuss gender politics with other women).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 11:18 PM
2

Misandry is the biggest instigator for young men to be radicalized. It is validating for young, romantically unsuccessful men to hear misogynistic takes and to be provided red pill “tools” to help them better navigate dating. These “tools” are often sexist ideas like “women don’t like sex because it is inherently harmful and degrading to them,” “sex is a transaction in which women mete out physical intimacy in exchange for material provision and status,” “a man who sleeps with a lot of women is …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:26 PM
1

I wouldn’t call it “artwork.” Also I love the implication that Marge isn’t good enough for… Homer?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 08:55 PM
–

Yeah, cause I’m not a sexist hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:33 PM
1

Reducing a man’s worth to his productivity and a woman’s worth to her reproductive potential. How utterly red pill/radfem.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:46 AM
–

Fetishes typically play off of existing power dynamics and social preconceptions. Examining the underlying stereotypes involved in race play of any kind is always uncomfortable. No doubt, in the west Asian men are seen as comparatively less masculine, probably because on average they aren’t as hairy and have smaller builds. I don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with getting off to a big white guy pounding the fuck out of a tiny Asian man’s asshole, or vice versa. People don’t pick what…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:37 AM
8

I don’t buy into red pill. But when a woman is using you it’s typically obvious. It’s things like only ever meeting for dinner, and only if you’re paying. She acts like big asks are casual and isn’t impressed if you oblige. If you find yourself wondering whether or not she’s using you, she probably is. Side story on this: I’d been dating a girl for a couple months. We had mutual friends, had sex a few times, and then I started to feel some distance. Three weekends in a row we met for dinner and …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 02:01 AM
–

I think you misunderstand me (in fairness I have a couple typos in there). I’m saying that the idea that giving up on women/dating is “the best decision they ever made” sounds completely wrong. Opening yourself up to love teaches and creates growth. Shutting love out creates comfort and atrophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 03:36 PM
–

Seriously. I read the “this was the best decision I ever made part” and think it’s probably the exact opposite. Hey probably shut themselves off from growing as a person, learning how to live and be loved properly, and fostered an uncrossable abyss between themselves and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/26 01:57 PM
-1

It is largely affecting both groups though. So when you say, “how come women say they are too independent to be impacted by the epidemic but also claim to suffer from the epidemic?” The answer is “the women who claim to be impacted are correct that it affects both groups, and the women who claim otherwise are either mistaken or lying.”
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 05:05 PM
8

I view becoming a tradwife as sort of like guys becoming “entrepreneurs.” Both are sort of leaning into the patriarchal ideal of what success should look like for a maximally masculine man and maximally feminine woman. It’s not like no one should be allowed to do that, and I don’t think there should necessarily be social stigma against it. But it’s unlikely to work out, and even if it does work out it will not be the life of luxuriant leisure so often advertised to you on social media. It seems …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 03:09 PM
5

The sources I find have it at 67% women studying social sciences in college (so twice), with 75-79% of psychology and sociology students female. That tracks with what I observed when I was getting my degrees. Other sources show the 60-40% split you reference. My point isn’t to say that women can’t do stem or that men can’t do social sciences. Just that it is true that social sciences are pretty female dominated, at least in the U.S.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 04:53 PM
3

Twice as many women study social sciences as men in college
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 04:23 PM
2

Hard agree. Though I think the expression of those masculine cliches loses its luster pretty quick. Like I totally get why a teenager might get swept up in the mystique of her dreamy, all-or-nothing, gang banger boyfriend. A woman in her 20s should probably have a healthier skepticism of his willingness to use intimidation and violence by that point. If she’s still into that in her 30s, she’s probably right there with him in terms of living on the edge and willingness to recklessly harm people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 04:22 PM
3

Wordplay. They are saying the response was performative “edgy.” Like saying “don’t get dizzy looking down on us from that high horse.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 04:03 PM
2

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 12:08 AM
–

Your political analogy is actually perfect, because conservative elites are always tricking their base into voting against their own interests. They convince poor people to vote against raising the minimum wage. They convince them to hate education and social safety nets and reframe everything as if change is the impediment to poor people becoming millionaires. Why raise taxes for the rich? Aren’t you going to be rich one day? Similarly, the manosphere are the ones telling romantically disadvant…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 10:41 PM
3

Yeah! Get out of here with that thinkslop
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 10:05 PM
3

“Be hungry, not thirsty.” Yesterday I was in a cantina and a gorgeous woman sat a couple seats to my left (I would say out of my league, but once in a while you punch above your weight class, y’know). She knocked over a cup of ice cubes, and I offered her some of my napkins to pick them up. I was actually trying to pay and leave when this happened, but the bartenders were inattentive and she started chatting me. She asked which gym I go to, and when I returned the question she said she doesn’t g…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 09:56 PM
8

I don’t feel like doing research, but a good example is when RP insists that women *prefer* serial killers and rapists (and they’ll name like Charles Manson or whoever the fuck) as part of an argument for alpha fucks beta bucks or some shit. It’s an absolutely delusional take that I see RP insist as a truism, and I don’t think I’ve ever seen them provide a coherent rationale. Though it’s true that I can’t imagine a rationale that would move me at all on the idea that women prefer violent psychos…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:37 AM
2

I think there’s a place in debate for science and data, but man is it frustrating when someone uses it as the final word rather than a supporting argument. Especially because scientists and scholars know that it is not hard to twist statistics, which means it’s actually more important to challenge and critique methodology and to understand the biases that the scientists themselves may bring to the table when designing studies.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:32 AM
0

*compelled
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:30 AM
0

You wanna reread my comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 04:26 PM
–

That’s how I am. I recognize that had I been born into a different experience with a different body, I’d have experiences that are different than mine. That doesn’t mean everything is 100% excused but it does mean that I put myself in others shoes in a kind of “there but for the grace of god go I” way.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 02:01 PM
2

I’m saying that women probably do assault as often as men, it just doesn’t get treated with the severity that male violence does because it isn’t as consequential. Furthermore, I’m saying that pointing to “violence” as proof of female moral superiority while ignoring the way society genders violence to be male is ignorant and sexist. It’s akin to pointing to poor communities and saying, “there’s more crime there because criminality is an inherent quality if poor people’s genes.”
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 12:34 PM
1

That misses my central point, which is that people are socialized not to recognize female on male violence as violence. It doesn’t get reported or treated as an actual crime by perpetrators, victims, or police, so statistics comparing female to male violence can’t be accurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 12:05 PM
–

I don’t think it’s that different really. I am generally more focused on the woman, so the male performer matters less. Most porn is shot with the woman as the focal point which makes it easier to project yourself onto the giver. But if there’s a guy who looks like me or whose dick looks like mine it’s easier to imagine being him.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 12:00 PM
–

I think that the pornhub analytics sort of reveal it to be true
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 11:33 AM
1

I agree, but hate radical feminists. I view the key distinction between radical feminism and liberal feminism as inclusivity. Radicalization occurs like a tipping point, where the goal of feminism shifts from being equality to hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 02:24 AM
0

Both are sexist statements. I’m suspicious of any statistic or metric used specifically to cast one gender as socioculturally superior to the other. Are men more violent? I actually don’t know. I’ve never hit a woman, but I’ve been punched or hit in the face three times. I don’t know that there are more Chris Browns than Taylor Frankie Pauls. Even in that case, the guy offers to go to jail instead of her. I think men’s violence is more often consequential, but this sort of overlooks psychologica…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 02:11 AM
–

Not exactly. Identical twins DNA aren’t actually strictly identical. They have a handful of mutations that occur independent of each other. But aside from that extremely small difference, I don’t think it’s possible for them to have identical experiences their entire lives. E.g. they can go to the same school but only one can get picked first or last for soccer, or have someone ask them out. That kind of thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 01:38 AM
–

True. But I think that’s partly reflective of the dating market today. People go out into the world, experience sexism as it relates to romance/sex/dating, and then come here to discuss it. My take would be that Men vs Women is only one axis and people neglect the other, more important axis of “sexist vs. non-sexist.” This gets further complicated by blue pill being the default “non-sexist” position, but harboring basically all of the people who are sexist against men, resulting in benign sexism…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 12:01 AM
–

I’m not them, but I’m also a blue pill determinist. Simply put, my argument would be that your actions are determined by your neurochemistry, which is the result of chemistry, which is the result of physics. You can always go smaller in explaining these physical reactions (e.g. molecular, subatomic, quantum) and what started them, but none of the explanations leave room to introduce an element of “free will” as we think of it. On a related note, brain diseases and TBI also kind of disprove the c…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 11:06 PM
–

I think a huge difference is how old you were ten years ago. I had a similar experience in my 20s. We didn’t really on apps because our friend group included a lot of single people or couples that had been together a few months who might not work out, so you sort of end up dating around your friend group (hence drama). So a lot of it is just your age bracket and how people meet, I think, since that doesn’t at all resemble dating in your thirties. That’s not to say dating hasn’t changed. Things a…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 10:55 PM
4

I like your flair
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 09:24 PM
2

As a man dating women, the “lady in streets but a freak in the sheets” is mostly a front. I guess from my own life, last year I was dating a gorgeous woman who was compatible in just about every way other than being a little cagey, especially about sex. It was painful. We dated for about six months and it became increasingly clear to me that the little flirtations and hints at freakiness early on weren’t real. I wanted to please her, and believe she wanted to please me, but by the end I just kne…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:58 AM
-1

I think it’s fair to criticize people for literally objectifying women by comparing them to objects (of low value because they’re used). It’s at least fair to criticize the logic of some dumbass lock analogy
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:43 AM
10

I strongly disagree. Early feminist thought explicitly attacked what would be thought of today as benevolent sexism. It basically called attention to the infantilization that occurs when women make themselves small, cute, and demure to be doted on by men; how that feeds into a perception of women as incompetent and irresponsible. Early feminism was a lot more about women’s right to an education and an argument that women can be every bit as competent as men, or at least that presumptions about a…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:40 AM
3

That’s funny. I think it’s possible for someone to have a lot of sex and remain bad at it, or conversely for someone to have a natural proclivity towards it. I also think sex is partly subjective, and some people just mesh better while others don’t. But in the whole people who have more experience are much better, in my experience. And experience aside, people who don’t like sex are bad at it and people who enjoy sex are better at it. Edit to add (because I always think of something after hittin…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 04:11 AM
0

I think the first talking point is incorrect, for the reasons you stated above. Being good at anything requires practice. For the second one, there’s going to be an obvious correlation between how much a person enjoys sex and how good they are at it. Inverting that correlation feels totally made up. It’d be like saying “just because someone never watches or plays sports doesn’t mean they aren’t athletic.” Yeah, it kind of does. Even if they have some natural talent they are actively avoiding dev…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 03:06 AM
3

Ah sorry, I misinterpreted that part. I agree that there are absolutely women who enjoy sex basically the way men do, and that by and large women aren’t as sex averse as they’re often framed to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 03:01 AM
-1

Every argument you’ve made is against sex workers. Your framing men’s expectations as their fault because you disagree with the porn they choose to make. Your weaponizing their vulnerability as the justification for bashing them, implying that criticizing Blue and Phillips’s sexual choices somehow protects lower level sex workers, when in actuality all it does is embolden more people to feel comfortable dog piling on sex workers for making “bad choices.” You’re implying that the aesthetics of se…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:57 AM
0

What sex negative liberals, conservatives, and angry people online have to say about sex work should be everyone’s concern, because the arguments used against sex workers are the same arguments used against queer and trans people. There isn’t an ethical justification for policing someone else’s consent, and down the line that not only impacts the LGBTQ+ community, but it impacts women, because a society that tolerates policing people’s sexuality opens the door for policing women’s bodily autonom…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:30 AM
1

Even in swingers clubs, straight guys are certainly less welcome than bi or straight women, and there is some sex negativity to straight men in bashing “unicorn hunters” in the ENM community more broadly and literally framing seeking a female third as predatory and constructing an argument that it is automatically unethical, even though there’s no other equivalent argument for any other ENM pairing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:24 AM
2

Looks like new sex negativity talking points dropped. Lately I’ve seen “men who have a lot of sex are bad at it” and “just because a person (almost) never has sex doesn’t mean they don’t like it or are bad at it.” This is just cope for sex negative types to get ahead of people starting to dislike cringey prudishness.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:15 AM
1

I disagree. They move the Overton window on sex work, which excites a lot of anger from the anti-sex crowd, but benefits women overall by normalizing regular sex and women’s ability to make their own sexual decisions free from judgment. Sex negative arguments that women should self police their sexuality for the benefit of all women are basically mirroring religious arguments that girls need to not work the boys up too much, and that it is incumbent upon women to not excite men sexually or risk …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:04 AM
–

How is wishing away the past ten years of vitriol, hyper sexist political movements, and weaponized dating strategy “obsessing over the past.” It’d be like if Trump cancels the next two election cycles saying, “yeah, maybe we had elections ten years ago, but that’s a thing of the past and will never come back. We didn’t have them three hundred years ago, so why are you pretending democracy is an option.”
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 10:09 PM
–

I also feel this. I think the new season of Live is Blind actually showcased this so well. The one couple was an alpha bro and maga princess who had a fake relationship that ended with vitriolic rejection and complete apathy at the altar. Another couple the guy was clearly head over heels, but the women was a proud misandrist and he left her after she blacked out at a wedding he was the best man at, cursing him and attacking him. I wonder if young people realize it wasn’t always like this, and d…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 09:37 PM
4

You took issue with “sexually successful men aren’t assholes, they just stopped simping” and then threw in a bunch of loaded language implying it’s normal for them to lie about being promiscuous. It’s not the 1800s. I fully expect my partners to be sleeping with other people until we have a conversation about it. That doesn’t make me an asshole, especially when they do the exact same thing. Gendering it is sexist bullshit, and the sex negativity underlying all your takes is threadbare (especiall…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 02:03 PM
1

Here here.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 01:58 PM
3

I’m sex positive, which makes these conversations tricky because I’m as often arguing down feminists as much as I am misogynists, and because feminists have become increasingly sex negative while red pillers have become increasingly sexist. No doubt, the idea that a sexually successful man is more valuable is toxic, partly because it’s tied to the idea that a sexually promiscuous woman loses value. But the main impetus for sex negativity is the inverse idea: that sexual reliance on the opposite …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 12:27 PM
3

Your attempt to villainize promiscuous men clearly comes from a belief that it is a moral failing though. Also, it makes statistical sense that people who sleep with more people mostly sleep with people who sleep with more people. In what way is a gross generalization? Theres nothing offensive about that. There is something offensive about the idea that you put out, which is that they’re assholes because they deceive women. By implying that the only way men could sleep with many women is by dece…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 12:13 PM
3

People who sleep around a lot are typically sleeping with people who sleep around a lot. I resent this narrative that a man who sleeps around must be deceiving the women he sleeps with. Yes, I had a roster of women I’d be talking to at any given time. Guess what, I was still probably going on fewer dates and talking to fewer people than the women I was hooking up with. They were doing the same thing. And we both knew it and neither of us felt entitled to interrogate the other’s sex life or press…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 11:54 AM
1

I don’t think it’s all that uncommon, almost every couple that enters therapy has a dynamic like this, with one partner attacking and the other withdrawing. But I don’t think it’s as gendered as OP’s post suggests. It’s more a pattern that couples fall into when one partner is more assertive, direct, and superior and the other feels less confident, less confrontational, and inferior. One attacks, and the other shuts down, which makes the attacker feel neglected and resentful.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 09:34 PM
1

I know two couples like this, but agree it’s toxic and a sign of abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 09:09 PM
5

For sure. Experienced subs are also more communicative. I don’t think I’ve ever had a sub who was into dirty talk who didn’t have certain words that icked them. I.e. it’s never a blanket “I like every version of this.”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 07:14 PM
8

I’d still say on average kinksters are better at discussing consent and boundaries. In vanilla dating, there’s more of an expectation of mind reading (which can be dangerous).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 06:39 PM
–

Good luck. I haven’t fucked up my back totally but often feel a twinge after working out. Back pain scares the shit out of me
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 04:57 PM
–

Good take
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 10:07 PM
–

That’s not cool. I’ve slept with plenty of women, but that doesn’t make me a bad person. I just enjoy sex and sought partners who felt the same and who were capable of engaging casually. It’s unfair to make a bunch of assumptions about a person based on their sexual history.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:46 PM
–

Thank you for being sane
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:18 PM
–

I’m sorry that happened to you. I feel like this post is a little too general. But one expression of what you’re talking about is toxic masculinity, basically telling guys that if they have emotions or aren’t coping well, that it’s because they haven’t perfected the art of dissociating. You don’t know what someone’s background is. Telling someone who was raised to suffer in silence that, actually, because they are a man suffering in silence is exactly how they should deal with their problems as …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 12:20 AM
1

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 10:55 PM
9

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:59 AM
2

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:43 AM
3

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:39 AM
1

I’ve been in love (and might be now). Originally I feel in love before online dating, and always sort of wondered about it until I was single again in my mid thirties. A simple breakdown: red pill believes women trade sex for male status and provision. Pink pill believes the same but in a ma hating way. Black pill is people who believe in this market economics of dating, but are who are romantically homeless and unfit for love. The main thing you should know about the dating market of today vers…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 02:50 AM
2

“Violent men are good for society but sexual women are bad” is an ass backwards take. You’re basically saying male violence should be encouraged but women should be sexually disempowered.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 12:55 PM
15

You are using blanket statements for most of your post, so I’m confused why you suddenly care that a commenter isn’t using them. You also clearly state most me, and their qualified response is that the vast majority of men aren’t doing that. It’s as if you’re saying “because some men do this, that means most men do this which might as well be all men.” How do you respond to the commenter’s point that 90% of men gas women up? Does that matter when talking about the other 10% of men dragging them …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 11:36 AM
20

I think that’s an interesting comparison. But there’s a general social unsavoryness in the way people discuss kink, which you don’t really get with sports and games. If more people understood it the way you just explained the analogy, they would actually have a better conception of what kink is and why people are into it. It’s fun and exciting
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 12:37 AM
5

I agree with this. It’s surprising to me to see so many women question the idea of being taught how to treat men, when I was taught my whole life to treat women with respect, to be strong for them, to show them grace when they’re upset. I don’t think it’s at all alien to men to be taught to treat women well. But I agree that it should be less chivalrous and gendered, and more about being kind and empathetic to your partner. Partner relationships are different from regular relationships. They req…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 12:34 AM
1

Yep. And it’s worth noting that the problem is that these often reinforce negative stereotypes. People who are accepting of the bigoted logic underlying the positive stereotypes also promote the negative ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 08:21 PM
10

Benevolent sexism is a well understood and researched social psychology construct. Benevolent sexism correlates strongly with hostile sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 01:08 PM
3

They raise a good point about ingrained bigotry being considered common knowledge, and you failed to refute it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 11:38 PM
2

I really appreciate this. I get that as men were supposed to take it in stride but a woman calling you an “ugly f*ggot” for talking to her at a dance club isn’t doing so because she’s afraid of being misunderstood. And it really is kinda fucked up when you see women defending rude rejections as “probably because of a bad experience,” “probably didn’t feel safe” or other assumptions that minimize the verbal smack you feel in those situations.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 11:35 PM
–

I’m not exceptional. Most men can go through life without attacking women’s (as a group) looks and down punching.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 11:14 PM
–

I don’t. I find it disgusting. And I don’t need to shit on women (especially ugly women) to find a decent one.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 11:11 PM
–

The women who do agree with her (I.e. the bottom text of this thread) do so because they believe that they exert some control over the dating market. I’ve noticed this weird trend, which feels like an extension of Marxist feminism, where the collectivist messaging suggests women should be unfair to men (as a group) as a means of lowering the bar for what men will accept while raising the bar for what women accept. Her aim isn’t to directly get a hot guy to go for her, it’s to convince other wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 11:09 PM
1

I’m confused. Are they dependent on men the way children on their parents because they aren’t as capable as men? What specific things can men do that women cannot? Or is it that, because of their gender, they are physically, mentally, and emotionally less fit on some essential level? Is their gender the principal concern, or should I be pressing charges against my breadwinnibg ex because she was a exercising coercive control when we had sex (which my stupid boy brain thought was consensual, but …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 04:06 PM
3

So your argument is that they are like children in the sense that they lack the ability to consent because they are fundamentally less autonomous than adults (or adult men anyway)?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/26 03:09 PM
1

It’s been a while since I wrote it out, but here’s my take on your position (which I agree with): Red pill is an ideology crafted around a “traditional” understanding of men and women. More than just a lay understanding of male and female gender roles, it’s the cultural, scientific, academic, and institutional ideas that reinforce gender roles as normative and good. These are ideas like… Worth defined by sexual prowess/discretion: A woman’s value is determined by the worst man she’s willing to s…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 08:53 PM
2

Sounds good to me
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 06:59 PM
2

Aw, I really appreciate that. I’ve felt the same way about your comments. I feel like there’s a few of us here who would probably make good friends
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/26 06:19 PM
1

My ideal “good girl” is sweet, loyal, high sex drive, super party oriented. A fun loving sexual woman sounds great to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 11:20 PM
10

Additional context for the titanic is that there had been a similar shipwreck not long before where almost all of the survivors were men (at the expense of women and children). When they returned, the survivors (and by extension the ruling class they represented) were raked through the mud for the craven act of self preservation. This was very much in the cultural zeitgeist at the time of the titanic shipwreck, and most certainly influenced the crew and passengers. (Note: I’m not a historian, so…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 10:58 PM
4

I for sure have. There was a post a few weeks ago that basically asked “women, would you rather have a nice guy with these qualities. Or a materialistic asshole with these qualities?” The qualities listed for the nice guy included “shy/introverted.” Some people in the comments called that part out (including me) but there were plenty of defenders of shyness as a virtue. Also, shyness is coded as “nice” in a lot of media and extroversion is coded as “asshole.”
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 02:22 PM
6

The reason r/niceguys exists as a sub is because a lot of guys classify themselves as nice. And it absolutely is a thing that the men in this subreddit often frame being introverted as “nice” and being extroverted as “cocky,” “arrogant” an “asshole.” This especially holds true when talking about unapologetically sexual men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 02:01 PM
–

Agreed. Also, from my perspective as a 100% atheist guy, when men become religious it is typically for *reasons.” E.g. to get sober/stay out of jail, they think it’s good for their family, they like the community religion brings.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 01:53 PM
3

No. There’s a multitude of factors that play into the one-sidedness of sexual violence. Men are physically more imposing than women and have higher sex drives (on average). Men are socialized to view sex with women as a proof of their virility, social status, and their masculinity itself, whereas women are socialized to view sex the opposite way, negatively. Whether men are more precarious by nature or nurture is relevant to your question, because if it were entirely socialization, then it might…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 12:46 AM
7

Yup. I find this whole thread of guys and girls claiming the other’s desire isn’t valid immature. Talk to a woman in the honeymoon stage of a relationship: she desires him. Talk to a man who just got back from a gorgeous first date he clicked with: He desires her. There’s something so sexist. It’s like these people can’t help projecting some ulterior motive, or can’t help believing that the opposite sex’s desire is genuine, so they have to recast desire as “validation” or something icky and offe…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 01:00 PM
–

“Attractive” isn’t an inherent, objective quality a person. It’s a social construct that a person projects into someone else, so it’s subjective. Women may be more attractive than men to you, but that doesn’t make them more attractive to a straight woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 12:11 AM
8

In fairness, a lot of the discourse around leagues treat them as a fixed science instead of a guideline used to explain certain phenomena way more often than it’s used in the sense of “who is desired mixed with the qualities one seeks.”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 02:33 PM
-1

Because the relative toxicity of how you engage your living mate is highly relevant to the conversation. You can adopt a parental role and treat your roommate or partner like a child, but that just ruins the relationship and living situation. Alternatively you can just hold yourself to a higher cleanliness standard than you hold others to. Edit: assuming you live and respect your partner, why would it NOT matter if they enjoy living with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 12:54 PM
-1

I don’t doubt that. Would your partners and roommates describe you as “easy/fun/nice to live with?”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 12:43 PM
5

The key to living with roommates is just to hold your cleaner standard to a higher level than you hold you roommate. Same goes for partners. If I want something cleaned, I clean it. I don’t frame it as a moral failing of my roommate or partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 12:35 PM
2

Maybe. But at this point I do want the women who hate men to stop dating. I’m trying to stick to women who don’t have such a bone to pick with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 01:04 AM
4

Meant to add, I agree nothing is set in stone. Like for me with my work, I’m no capitalist stooge but I came around to sticking it out in a career I really like. Also, what are your thoughts on ways to identify and mitigate the harm caused by whatever is responsible for the uptick in PCOS, Endometriosis, etc (or is this the kind of thing where we already know how to do something, but it’s more profitable to do nothing)?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 01:02 AM
2

I’d buy that. I also think there’s a veritable case that anti-depressants were overprescribed to an entire generation, but one of the side effects for most SSRI’s is that they inhibit sexual desire (and regular desire). And that’s compounded by other things like social media amplifying sexist messaging for engagement, a feedback loop of fascism making people more tribalistically sexist, and an increasingly bleak future that makes everyone feel less sexually adventurous.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:58 AM
2

I think romantic/sexual desire does drive most decision making subconsciously. I don’t see that as being at odds with bluepill. I think u/LaFrescatrumpeta makes a really good point. But aside from that I also think sexual attraction does override a lot of experiences. I also think it’s normal to go through some heartache and not totally write the other gender or romance itself off. Like, that’s a normal part of being a human and in most cases it’s healthier than abstaining from relationships for…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:40 AM
2

I actually think the wishful thinking is the other way. I remember when I was younger being real caught up in anti-work memes. I bought into it and left some jobs over some pretty small slights that felt big at the time. I’m pretty highly qualified in a few fields but I was trigger happy to stick it to corporations. I remember reading a thread (I think during the great resignation) where someone commented that it’s pretty misguided to recommend to all these young people to fall in the sword, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:22 AM
1

I feel like the person you’re responding to has given good reasons that it makes sense for men to listen to other men’s advice over women’s dating advice. I don’t listen to every red pill take. In fact, I battle red pill takes (and especially black pill takes) a fair amount. But I know that my advice about how to date would be more beneficial to most men than most women’s advice would be because I pick up a fair amount of women. Also, because I am a man dating women, I understand what red pill i…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:13 AM
1

I disbelieve it because I’ve known women who talk a big game about not needing men, but who are super fucked up and lonely deep down. I understand that it’s a front they’re putting on in public and that it can be convincing, but missing out on romantic connection in life is pathetic, and I think women face more pressure to pretend to be okay with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 11:44 PM
-1

It’s pretty obvious from men’s perspective that this is exactly what it is lol. We’ll see where those women are at when they’re your age.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 11:13 PM
0

I think it’s half this (e.g. instagirly grifters preaching misandry, but obviously swooning for their dudes IRL) and half women who’ve bought into heterofatalism so hard that romance threatens their worldview.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 10:12 PM
1

Option 3 easily.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 01:18 AM
3

It’s sometimes frustrating that people don’t get this most basic concept: just because a group trends one way or another doesn’t mean that your assumptions about an individual in that group are correct or even valid (e.g. the biking example). I’d add that, specifically as it regards dating and romance, don’t you want to feel connected to your partner as a human? Don’t you want to understand them as like a soul inhabiting a corporeal frame, rather than just as a “man” or a “woman?” Part of that i…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:27 PM
1

Sorry, I was looking for the term “memetic desire.”
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:34 PM
1

I may be blanking in the term, but it’s the one they use for the guy in White Lotus season 2.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:31 PM
9

I disagree with the narrative that any man with options is going to treat women poorly. If anything, knowing how to treat women well makes you more attractive (the idea that women prefer to be mistreated is the most misguided, inaccurate tenet of redpill ideology, IMO). Any person with options will have an idea what their league is and probably put more effort into winning the affection of people who seem like “catches” to them, but I don’t think that’s gendered at all really. I do think women t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:26 AM
1

That’s been my experience. Different people want different things out of relationships. Different people move the relationship at different paces. I think one thing people who don’t date a lot miss is that to people who do date a lot, there’s nothing odd or off putting about fucking on the first or second date, dating for a few months before saying “I love you,” or playing things by ear until you’re both ready to commit.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:06 AM
5

Like banning no fault divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 12:13 AM
1

Of course they don’t exclusively project personality traits through purchases. They also do it through words and behaviors, obviously. The point is that personality expression is part of everything we do, and the reason we imbue so may of our decisions with personal expression is because we hope to attract people who align with those traits (and we find those traits attractive in others).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 04:39 PM
0

There’s also the issue of jealousy, insecurity, and control. If a man told a women to never use a sex toy again, read smut, or watch romance stories, there are reasons beyond a “failure of loyalty” for her to resent that request. Asking someone not to look at porn is the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 01:38 PM
2

I understand that it’s hard to discount the craziest voices, and I struggle with that too. It frustrates me when someone automatically dismisses an entrenched sexist woman’s take as “online behavior,” because I know these views carry over into the real world and I’ve had to deal with them in the real world. But I’ll try to keep in mind that most women wouldn’t agree with the statement “men think it’s okay to lie and manipulate to get sex” and that it’s not a feminist take, if you’ll try to keep …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 01:28 PM
16

This is a false flag. I don’t know any men who justify cheating. The cheaters I have known didn’t pretend it was allowed. Whoever is telling you that men think they’re allowed to cheat is manipulating you into thinking men as a group hold a position that almost no one holds.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 01:22 AM
4

In dating, red pill leans into the low hanging fruit of evolutionary psychology while ignoring more advanced models that broaden our understanding of human mating behavior. Namely, people use purchasing decisions and spend most of their lives trying to display their personality traits through shoes, tattoos, college degrees, cars, everything. The reason that we do this is to attract like minded people (as in people who literally have heritable personality traits that align well with ours). So th…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 01:20 AM
1

I honestly do feel like I need variety. But I don’t think I’m normal. I do ENM, and couple up with women who are sexually explorative. I’m not trying to trick anyone into thinking that I’m attracted to them and them alone, and I don’t expected them to be only attracted to me. I’d also note there are plenty of hotwives who seem to feel the same, so I don’t think it’s as gendered as people make it out to be. It’s more about how open you are, how wired you are for monogamy, and how deeply you’ve in…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 11:32 PM
3

I think it applies to both. So much of the animosity towards the opposite gender is literally just cope because someone didn’t like them, but then it gets intellectualized, group-thinked, and repeated until it becomes like an ideological tenet.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 10:03 PM
3

It still fucks up the thought experiment by introducing an amoral variable. If you throw a monkey wrench like “shy” in for the good guy you should throw a monkey wrench like “criminal record” in for the bad guy. “Shy” and “criminal record,” will both severely impact dating prospects.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 05:50 AM
–

Do you think maybe Karens can be understood this way? Maybe they associate their femininity with courteous behaviors extended towards them, so discourteous or neutral behaviors read as an attack on their femininity. They appeal to a more dominant figure (I.e. a manager) to dominate the subordinate by extending courtesy to Karen, vindicating her threatened femininity.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/26 11:00 PM
2

I agree. The woman I’ve been seeing is considerate, and that’s been such a green flag. It matters to me that she listens, and is nice to strangers, and cares about being nice to me too. My aim is always to make her happy, but it’s nice to have someone who thinks about me too.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 05:32 PM
2

For me personally, I think of kinks as like the “genre” of deviancies (e.g. breath play, cuckoldry, bondage) and then fetishes as specific traits or acts (e.g. I’ve heard “dark skin light hair or vice versa,” “being sewn together,” “licking literally every part of me”). People can use the terms however they want. I do get what you’re saying about people misusing them, but I think my view of genre/specificity is more useful for talking about people’s weird wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 04:43 PM
6

Just want to note that having a fetish isn’t a clinical disorder. I’ve heard the term “fetish” defined the way you’re defining it, like a sexual act or feature that is required to get someone off. I’m honestly not really a fan of that definition, since I think that you can be into feet but still have vanilla sex with someone. Does the fetish not count then? I think a looser definition of fetish is better, but agree that OP’s definition is too close to “preferences.” The semantics are kind of bes…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 04:26 PM
5

I wish more people recognized the connection between talking about male sexuality as if it’s inherently impure, projecting purity myths onto women, and then subjugating women for their own sexual protection from men. There’s that meme of a guy asking who would protect women without men, and her clapping back “protect us from whom?” And while I agree that it’s stupid to frame women as needing to center men Backus’s of the protection men can offer, I think a lot of people miss the point that this …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 04:00 PM
–

I think that you pivot to very conversation to sexual violence because you actively want to cast male sexuality as inherently predatory and bad because you are a sexist, so I’m not going to engage on that point any further.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:49 PM
–

I said sex is a normal and healthy part of being a human. You pretended that I said lying and manipulating are a normal and healthy part of being a human. See, you mixed up “sex” and “lying/manipulating” again, because there’s something wrong with your brain that equates sex and malfeasance.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:45 PM
–

This is like arguing with a twelve year old. If you’re going to keep saying I hold your position I don’t see the point in taking to you. Get help, it isn’t normal
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:43 PM
–

I think women who call all men liars and manipulators for wanting sex hate men because they do. If a man lies and manipulates to get sex, the immoral part is the dishonesty, not the sex itself. That’s where I believe you have a problem, you can’t imagine that a man has sex without lying and manipulating, because you’re a misandrist so you can’t empathize with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:42 PM
7

What lies were you specifically told the last time a man tricked you into sex? Like what specifically was the lie?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:41 PM
–

Bullshit. You want to live in a society that equates male sexuality to manipulation. Because you need women to be seen as de facto victims of men in every scenario. You want to live in a sexist society that demonizes sex. If you actually want a sexually safer world for women, you can start by learning more about human sexuality and not fear mongering about sex all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:40 PM
21

It’s been said by sexists for generations, because it’s a patriarchal attitude that infantilizes women by framing them as lacking autonomy in their own sexual decisions, thereby justifying taking their rights away and organizing society around protecting their sexual purity and reducing their value to that of their worth as sexual objects for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:35 PM
–

You are literally just taking your beliefs and projecting them onto me. Your whole post is written from an extremely sex negative assumption that a man wanting to have sex with a woman makes him a lying, manipulative prick. I disagree whole heartedly with that premise. I think it’s fine for a man to want to fuck a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:33 PM
–

I don’t think women hate men. I think you hate men because you demonize them for wanting sex and believe that by wanting sex they nullify any acceptable reason (in your mind) to want relationships. Again, I think you should talk to a therapist about why you take it for granted that wanting sex means NOT wanting love. There are things that you could deconstruct there that would help you improve your relationships with men
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:31 PM
–

YOU think being selfish and manipulative is part of men wanting sex. That is the premise of your post, which I am arguing against.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:24 PM
8

Which men? All men?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:24 PM
9

You clearly have no problem lying if you’re going to come in here and act like there are no honest men, or like women don’t also understand sexual dynamics and the potential for sexual encounters when they go on dates. Or are women all naive little children who couldn’t possibly want or understand that the men they go on dates with want sex whereas women wholesomely just want asexual romantic favors?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:23 PM
4

Which men? All men? I’m very upfront with the women I sleep with. And reducing people to sexist stereotypes is sexist. Gender essentialism is red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:21 PM
–

No. I want a world where people aren’t demonized for wanting or enjoying sex. I want a place old where people are free to express their sexual orientation, sexual identity, and sexual preferences without judgment.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:20 PM
–

I see right through you. You spend all your time bashing male sexuality because you WANT to live in a world where men can’t be openly sexual. That way you can complain about sexual men while also complaining about men who aren’t up front about their sexual desires (with posts like the delusional Lilith ones we get daily). And the irony is that promoting this sexist bullshit you rob women of their autonomy, as if they all just get tricked into sex. Because you operate under the assumption that wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:18 PM
10

You have to be brainwashed to think sex and romance— things that the vast majority of the human population engage in and find healthy, pleasurable, and relationship enhancing— are morally wrong. Sex and love are the best parts of life, and having sex with someone doesn’t automatically imply that you are harming them in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 03:00 PM
–

A radical feminist complaining that “men don’t want to be held accountable?” Sounds like you’re projecting again. You just want a world where male sexuality is demonized so that women can be viewed as de facto victims in every scenario and never held accountable.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 02:58 PM
12

Wanting sex doesn’t make someone an asshole. That’s your problem and it’s why you’ve been banging your manhating drum for a decade. If you could get over that most men (and women, btw) enjoy sex, you might stop being so angry. It’s work you need to do on yourself, and j genuinely think you should talk to a therapist to deconstruct why you have such an ingrained belief that there’s something bad about a person feeling sexual desire. It’s a normal, natural part of being a human and almost anyone s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 02:50 PM
–

Exactly. She’s just a prude
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 02:48 PM
–

I think you’re projecting your cakeist feminism onto men.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 02:47 PM
20

Of course she is. Pretending that men are bad for wanting or enjoying sex is stupid and sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 02:46 PM
57

Every day you post a different version of “men want sex and that is bad.” First of all, there’s nothing wrong with wanting just sex. Secondly, sex does not mutually exclude genuine romantic care. Thirdly, men are humans and want all the things humans want, including romantic connection.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 01:34 PM
–

To your question about Karens, Karens are a strange phenomenon. I think the word skyrocketed in popularity because the behavior was readily identifiable but we needed a word for it, and it instantly described a certain type of person.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 11:37 AM
–

I was asked this question yesterday, and I write pages extensively about it, and I got downvoted probably by the woman who asked it because it contradicts her narrative that women are perfect little angels. In short, I’ve known many, but I don’t think women who shit on men are a valid reason to hate women. I like the women in this thread who are humanist feminists because that’s basically what I am. I don’t like girlboss feminists.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 11:30 AM
–

I think they’re referring specifically to gender war bullshit. Radical feminists are red-pilled in terms of gender politics. They endorse all the same gender essentialist beliefs
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 06:26 AM
–

It’s person to person. Some are already mature and approach gender politics from a belief in equality. Others maybe start out all piss and vinegar but tone it down as they gain life experience. Then you have the ones who develop this myopic boys vs girl worldview. They just turn into Karens
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 06:22 AM
3

I appreciate you saying this, since it was my immediate concern also. “Decentering” the opposite gender is step one for red pill incels and pink pilled femcels, and you can see that every thread focused on boy/girl solidarity just becomes a hate sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 04:18 PM
1

But also in fairness you did include most of that context. You said you hung out and practiced together all the time, you clearly liked his personality, and you ended up getting together. I think to take all those context clues and reduce it to “what a creep” is what’s weird to me. That’s where it sort of requires a person to assume that women aren’t capable of having adult reactions, IMO
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 11:55 AM
1

It’s just weird that their reaction to #MeToo has been to project a childlike sexual sensibility onto women, like instead of having an adult reaction it’s assumed that you would… what? Pull the covers off of him and then freak out because you saw him naked and got scared?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 11:36 AM
1

Im not vanilla at all. I also don’t view infantilizing women as blue pill
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 11:26 AM
3

This is cute though
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 05:07 AM
–

Sure. Three women at my work have said “I hate all men” or “I hate white men,” to me. One is a C-level, another is a department head, and the third is my colleague. They say it with the implication that this doesn’t apply to me, and I understand that. But they’ll also say things like “that’s such a man thing to do,” “the bar is in hell,” and make other comments like that that sort of imply a strong bias. Outside of work, plenty of women have told me jokingly that they hate all men. But it’s not …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 10:55 PM
1

I consider the blue pill, essentially, progressive resistance to the conservative underpinnings of red pill. Red pill puts forth a theory (I.e. women only like tall, rich guys with big dicks) and blue pill claps back, calling out the misogyny of the premise, pointing out counter examples, and challenging the gender essentialist logic of most red pill claims. I don’t think blue pill is as definable because it is more reacting to red pill ideology. You could argue that feminism is blue pill, but t…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 03:36 AM
1

This is an excellent write up and pretty much what I was considering writing, but more flushed out. Good job.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 03:26 AM
8

Not OP, but no. Both are wrong. It’s fine to feel that want, but retroactively jealousy is an unreasonable expectation to put on anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 01:00 PM
4

It’s weird because sex positive spaces are typically heavily feminist, largely because, as u/kaleidoscopetide points out, sex positivity came out of feminism (or at least was largely bolstered by it). But I think considering feminists as a group sex positive is like saying “republicans freed the slaves.” It’s just so the opposite of what we see all around us. I left feminism because I’m sex positive, and at this point the two feel mutually exclusive (and also because feminism as a movement has b…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:05 AM
9

How is it detrimental to children for adults to have sex? There’s nothing inherently immoral about sleeping with someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:02 AM
1

While I wish that were true, the sex positivity subs have like a few thousand members, and the arguments I see in feminist subs are hardly sex positive. The pornismisogyny sub has 330k. They moved the Overton window to a ridiculous point. Mainstream feminism abandoned sex positivity a decade or two ago in favor of casting men as lecherous rapists. Edit to clarify my point a little.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 04:57 AM
-1

Feminists are the most sex negative people on the planet. They make conservatives look like libertines.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 04:33 AM
8

It isn’t a bad thing anyway. It doesn’t harm anyone, so why do you feel the need to police it and restrict other people’s liberty?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 04:32 AM
3

Most basement dwellers (I.e. incels and the general population of guys who don’t like or interact with women irl) are not sex positive. If you’re sex positive that’s great and I support you in that. I wish more people would recognize that shaming people for their sexual identity, sexual orientation, and sexual expression is bigotry adjacent.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 04:29 AM
–

To put it this way, I don’t think transaction automatically nullifies love. I think healthy relationships are symbiotic; both people get something from it, but more than that their love fulfills one another. When you love someone it feels like you become a part of each other. You share in their grief and their delight. There’ll always be some transactional aspect due to inhabiting separate bodies, but the deeper in love you are the less it matters who benefits from what.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 03:50 AM
4

I have a friend who absolutely loves being a mom. She needs at least a part time job, but I’m pretty sure if she had one wish it would be to just be a full time mom. Being a parent is difficult but plenty of people opt into it because it’s the thing that makes them happiest in the world, and j think it’s a little inaccurate to present full time motherhood as the hardest job in the world, given that it’s exactly how many women would prefer to live their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 01:41 AM
–

Yup. If she’s not into shorter men (or men with kids or ex wives, etc.) that’s fine. But it’s trashy to lead your profile with your want-nots. For me personally, it just reads as a not-so-humble brag from someone trying to project an air of having options. But if you actually have options there’s no need to insult people who don’t meat your criteria, you just don’t swipe on them. I.e. I don’t put “no fatties” in my profile, because I don’t want heavier set women to feel bad about me not finding …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 08:00 PM
13

I’ll do you one better: life is transactional. No one has ever done anything out of pure selflessness or altruism. There isn’t a single behavior that can’t be explained by a self interested motivation. Even a monk who endeavors climb up the Himalayas in pursuit of some kind of ego death does so out of a belief that it’ll somehow fulfill them. Even a Mother running into a burning building to save her child does so out of a belief that the flames won’t hurt near as bad as the loss would. But this …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 05:36 PM
7

Spot on OP. This is also why so many people on the apps are “bad at talking.” I guarantee you these people have conversations in their daily life every day. They just have a different conversational style than you do, which is frustrating if you’re trying to romance them
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 04:22 PM
11

I think this goes both ways though. There’s a reasonable expectation for men to put in some effort without resenting their potential love interests for it, and there’s a reasonable expectation from women for the men who pursue them to be actually interested in them beyond sex. Women underestimate the amount of women who use men for validation and men underestimate the amount of men who use women for validation. In both cases, people’s complaints about feeling used can be valid. They can also be …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 03:44 PM
3

I was literally in the comments just arguing with TERFs all night. I think you just need to recalibrate what you think is “slanted against men.” I’m a ma but I still care about being fair to women and seeing things as they are rather than only having sensitivity to things that affect men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 12:41 PM
5

I’m not a centrist. I’m a hard line leftist. I don’t tolerate sexism from men or women. That’s stupid and bigoted. The debate as I see it is between sexists and anti sexists. Sort of like the debate about racial politics in America is between racists and anti-racists, not whites vs blacks. There are plenty of progressive white people who don’t tolerate racism, just like there are plenty of men and women who don’t tolerate sexism (although I think most people are sexist to varying degrees regardl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 07:06 AM
1

I agree. Although I’m sex positive. I think a lot of the valid repulsion to sexual violence gets used as a cover to promote a puritan worldview of sex as inherently dangerous, dirty, degrading, and bad (i.e. it’s like how “think of the children!” gets used by people who don’t actually give a fuck about children to censor and roll back adult’s rights, except the discourse around sex is getting to the point where full grown adults are treated like children). Edit: As examples, there’s a post in r/…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:48 AM
7

I feel like you say that to me a lot. I’m an old school, liberal male feminist, not a boys-vs-girls feminist. I oppose sexism, and that includes calling out sexism that women direct at men. IMO it’s not possible to support sexism in one direction without presupposing a bunch of sexist beliefs in the other direction, so I hate radical feminists as much as their male equivalents, incels. My enemy is sexism, not men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:37 AM
3

I think may women underestimate the amount of misandry men encounter in real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:12 AM
4

When feminists stop believing in equality it just becomes a hate movement. Modern feminism has brought radical feminism mainstream (I.e. exclusionary feminsim that scoffs at equality and attempts to delegitimize it as “egalitarianism.” Exclusionary feminism that reframes the discourse around sexism as “misogyny” to conveniently delegitimize complaints about their own sexist behaviors and exclude male allyship). No, feminists were not always sexist. It’s a new thing and it matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 06:10 AM
3

Oh right, I forgot to add “and this is women’s fault because…” /j
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 01:03 AM
1

It all boils down to an insistence on enforcing patriarchal gender norms, IMO. Radical feminists constantly and reflexively reinforce patriarchal gender norms that harm men, but in doing so reinforce gender norms that harm women (I.e. when they say men shouldn’t take offense to sexism directed at them and chide them for being sensitive, it implies that sensitivity is a female trait). A man doing that is displaying “toxic masculinity” or being “misogynistic.” But radfems believe that because they…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 01:01 AM
1

Why would someone being non-western imply that they can’t or don’t understand feminism? I think someone who identifies as a “woman-adjacent queerdo” probably understands sex based discrimination way better than someone spouting off a bunch of white western feminist bs that boils down to “girls are good and men bad.” Radical feminism is frankly embarrassing. All it does is undercut actual feminism by presenting feminism as another form of sex based bigotry. And the fact that you have to attack pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 12:31 AM
12

So much of twentieth century sci-fi was about humanity being unprepared for the exponential advance of technology and its potential misuse, (largely because of the atrocities that the world wars brought on. I.e. Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Kurt Vonnegut). I grew up loving these books. I read almost every Huxley and Vonnegut novel. It’s pretty dystopian to see previously unimagined technologies being used to actively harm people in hitherto unexamined ways, but it fills me with a dread that if …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 11:41 PM
1

There’s a bunch of them in this thread unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 11:21 PM
1

Why do you think I don’t care about bigotry against women. Bigotry against trans women and trans men just pisses me off as much as bigotry against men. Funny you don’t care about that though
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 11:20 PM
2

I think it’s a valid criteria. Red pill espouses gender norms and their social enforcement. Transphobia comes from feeling threatened by deviation from gender norms, and demonizes people for resisting gender roles. Theres nothing progressive or blue pill about transphobia, so they shouldn’t pretend to be middle of the road sexists.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 08:34 PM
2

I’m not a misogynist. I believe in equality, something no doubt think is misogynist. But as they say, “to the privileged, equality seems like oppression.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 08:19 PM
1

Yeah these people are just hateful bigots who can’t fathom that maybe if you base your whole ideology on identity politics that automatically frame you as the victim, then you’re the problem. Edit to add: you aren’t fucking purple pill if you’re a transphobe, so they should fix that to say “red pill.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 08:00 PM
1

The left-wing misogynists… think their politics should make them immune to being a misogynist (although that's also amusing), but the real message they are telling women is that males are gonna male, regardless of politics, so really none of them are good people for women to trust and partner with The irony of you thinking that your sex makes you automatically immune to being sexist, but a male challenging you to be less sexist is automatically a “misogynist.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 07:59 PM
3

Thanks for proving my point. You have to be deluded to think a trans person has an easier time in life than a cis woman. They face greater dangers in dating, more discrimination in the workplace, greater threats than women politically, and the discourse is around their very right to exist. Every metric shows trans people face more severe challenges than women. You basically have to internalize such a victim complex that you view cis women’s lives as fundamentally more difficult even if the entir…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 07:56 PM
57

They aren’t innate. They’re learned and socially enforced. But I agree they’re mostly an expression of women’s sexism, and the women dismissing them here are normalizing the same patriarchal gender prescripts that harm women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 05:41 PM
6

Precisely. Their identity politics supersede any and all context, which is stupid because their arguments hinge on the idea that a person’s identity matters because of the inequality inherent to socially enforced power dynamics. I.e. they invalidate any unfairness that trans women face because they were not born into it, but they invalidate the unfairness trans men face because they elected into it. Not to mention it’s just fucking insane to think women are more oppressed as a group than trans p…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 03:31 PM
5

Edit: sorry, meant to reply to the other comment. But your comment doesn’t surprise me at all. I’ve had similar experiences with queer women and NBs.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 03:29 PM
-1

I feel like only trans/NBs get enough exposure to misandry to see how it isn’t much different from misogyny/homophobia. A terf refuting a trans person’s identity isn’t much different from a maga doing the same thing, for instance, and it’s kind of grosser because a supposed feminist should understand why that’s wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/26 02:22 PM
4

Excellent post. I also feel like there’s this weird social messaging that women’s power derives from their sexual and romantic potential because that is where it should derive from while men’s derives from their ability to provide and compete. To suggest otherwise is almost met with hostility and defensiveness. Sexists of both genders decry the challenges they face while sort of bragging off-handedly about their advantages as if the advantages have nothing to do with the power balance. It’s all …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 01:48 PM
2

What I’m saying is that I’m skeptical of the concept of “love bombing” in general. When I like someone I like to be able to compliment them without it being taken as a manipulation tactic. It actually feels much more manipulative to me that I have to intentionally be more withholding at the start of a relationship (similar to having to wait to text to not come off desperate). But since “love bombing” has entered the cultural lexicon it’s just a reality that being honest about your positive feeli…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 11:25 AM
2

I have an opposing theory to what gets peddled here. It’s survivorship bias. Healthy women accept compliments and praise, pair off, and remove themselves from the dating pool. The remainder get suspicious of compliments, internalize a weird “love is a lie” mentality, and view men who compliment them as suspect. Being aloof and feigning disinterest will take you far. But for me personally I want a woman who responds positively to positivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 06:53 AM
6

I choose slut (unequivocally and unironically).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 10:06 PM
1

I had a similar experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 01:12 AM
1

“I’m not sexist. I can’t be because I was born a woman, and due to systemic oppression that means that when I adopt identical belief structures to the sexists I hate, it’s a good thing.”
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 01:05 AM
2

my position is it isn’t comparable to a white person being racist Yes it literally is, because you’re adopting the same fundamentally flawed practice of using a hate-based heuristic to reinforce your own bias against a group. if you wanted an actual equivalent you could’ve mentioned black people who say they hate white people. Except that isn’t comparable at all. Black people face extreme and obvious disadvantages in the West that women do not. For example, they’re incarcerated at disproportiona…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 01:04 AM
1

Your position is just “you don’t understand. It cannot be sexism when I do it because I’m a girl, and women are born victims of bad evil men.” Thats stupid and sexist on its face, but it also inadvertently reinforces patriarchal attitudes that present women as incapable of taking criticism or being held accountable. The rightness or wrongness of an opinion does not reside in your uterus. The gender of the person having the thought doesn’t impact whether the thought is correct or not, and it does…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 12:40 AM
2

I fully understand what radical feminism is (which is why I’m picking it apart while you do the same sexist thing you always do, which is rely on the existence of gender to declare yourself automatically right as if sex the defining, essential thing that makes a person good or bad). Your whole ideology hinges on the belief that a person’s sex is their preeminent feature and the basis of whether they are good or bad. You are undeniably a sexist. But it also makes your position fundamentally hypoc…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 12:36 AM
2

Misandrists use the same hate based psychological mechanisms that Nazis, KKK members, and ICE agents use to automatically discount and dehumanize the people they hate, and systemically oppress them. Exclusionary radical feminism is the ideology that intellectually launders this hate based perspective, and morning all the same sexist narratives that red pill misogynists believe in. Pink pill is literally just red pill for girls. The primary focus of exclusionary radical feminism is reinforcing pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 12:05 AM
3

It’s entirely comparable as regards individual bigots. The same psychological mechanisms are at play.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 11:51 PM
6

They don’t consider their male friends men. One time I was covering my friend’s job for July 4th. I was riding in a truck all day retrieving bounce houses in the city, and I discovered my partner for this was super racist. He used the N word about once a minute, it felt like. We got to a house and retrieved a bounce house from a super nice family. “That guy was one of the good ones,” he said. We went to the next house. Same deal. Working class people showing their kids a good time. “One of the g…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 08:46 PM
1

There are two problems with their claim, IMO. The first is that the people who claim to be sex positive and the people who slut shame are two different groups. Or, secondly, if you claim they’re actually the same group, on what grounds are you making that claim? It’s like people saying “the real racists are progressives” because they can’t imagine that some people who care about race are actually not racist. What about people who actually aren’t racist? Some people (myself included) are sex posi…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 05:48 PM
1

I’m going to assume you at least agree that orientation originates with biological sex, not gender. I’m not sure I understand the question here, but my take would be that orientation is a mix of nature/nurture. While gender is a social construct, I don’t think it’s entirely irrelevant to how orientations develop. People seem biologically predisposed to their orientations, meaning some people are predisposed to having their sexual activates by exposure to masculine forms/sexual energy, while othe…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 02:37 PM
1

I agree. I consider myself 100% straight, and I’m not shy about my sexuality in other regards. I can recognize a man as attractive, but that doesn’t make me want to sleep with them at all and I don’t get hard thinking about a man’s ass. I’m watching and discussing Heated Rivalry with women right now clearly they do get something out of it in a way that I don’t even though j can still appreciate the show. But I think the backlash men face for homosexuality is more extreme, and leads many of them …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 10:37 AM
1

orientation is innate I think this is an interesting question and less cut and dry than “orientation” is innate. We aren’t born knowing what men and women are. I think if we were born without arms and legs in an island of people without arms and legs, and raised around them and socialized with them and never exposed to arms and legs, then you would find arms and legs off putting generally and sexually repulsive. I don’t think the “beauty” of the human body is innate that way. I do think there ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 10:17 AM
9

100% Misandrists frame it like women like women because women are objectively beautiful (which isn’t how beauty works in a psyche. People develop sexuality through exposure and conditioning). But this plays off of misogynists’ constant objectification of women and vocal disgust of masculine love. Additionally, male homoeroticism is viewed as emasculating to a much greater extent than female homoeroticism (there’s the “butch” stereotype, but I don’t think people view sapphic love as butchifying, …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 04:47 AM
4

You’re so real for this. At the same time, I think some people genuinely don’t feel the need for intimacy and deep human connection the way you and I feel it. That said, it’s way fewer than the amount of women who pretend that single life is winning. You can be sure that anyone flaunting how happy they are after cutting the other gender out of their life is doing it as a way of getting back at the other gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 03:09 AM
2

I also find the discourse around blue pill being the mainstream erroneous. Red pill takes are basically heteronormative takes. “Women like being spoiled and doted on.” “Men are supposed to initiate and prove their value through material gain.” “It’s okay to be a little sexist because reality is a little sexist” Are those not mainstream beliefs? What media are you consuming that counters this messaging? I’m not saying there are no stories that examine and construe these narratives, but even romco…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 06:23 PM
2

Yeah, just keep in mind that the loons don’t speak for all women. And also that women see the equivalent in incels, which you anI j probably summarily dismiss because we know how pathetic they are. It’s gotta be distressing and frustrating for women to see dudes claiming that legalizing rape would fix the world
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 02:21 AM
5

I’ve been in open relationships where I’ve slept with other women and we didn’t break up. I’ve also known ENM couples where this happens regularly. A lot of women find men who are already in a relationship more attractive, and if they don’t have hang ups about him being with other women it can be non-issue. There’s nothing inherent to women that makes them more or less tolerant of polyamory/ENM
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:57 PM
-1

I would also argue that, if what you are attracted to in a trans woman or femme gay men is the femininity that they present, that isn’t inherently gay.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:54 PM
1

Hate isn’t acceptable in either case. I know plenty of women who’ve been assaulted who don’t hate men. And being hurt by some women hasn’t turned me into a misogynist. But if I went online and took every opportunity to hurt and malign women who were suffering and rubbed my advantages in their faces, I could see how that might create some misandrists.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 11:17 AM
8

I think what they’re trying to talk about extends beyond people coming onto Reddit to ask for specific dating advice. What they’re describing is women who use their asymmetrical power in the dating sphere to emotionally wound men who are already emotionally wounded. This creates misogynists by making women look like sexually/romantically privileged cry bullies who position their unfair advantage in dating as a kind of natural order while men’s advantages in the rest of society. Which all reinfor…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 11:04 AM
0

That’s part of it, but there are also sexist women who just like to rub salt in the wound because it makes them feel powerful. I agree with OP these women create misogynists
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:37 AM
1

Tbh offline I think women generally are fairer to men. It’s harder to be a douche to someone in person. That said I’ve seen them also be sexist and disingenuous offline (I just think it’s less common).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:33 AM
1

Aw, you’re sweet to say that
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 04:03 AM
–

Yeah, I’m going to stop arguing with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:37 AM
–

I’m an actual feminist. That’s why it’s easy to pick your argument apart.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:17 AM
–

What if you go into it having thought about, having made sure they were clean, worn condoms, and with an IUD (like OP said) and you determined that the risks were acceptable? Why is OP immature for that?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:15 AM
–

What is “immature” about having sex on a first date? Sounds like something adults do tbh
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:08 AM
–

Just want to note OP is a radfem, not a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:06 AM
–

I don’t see where she called it a mistake anywhere. It sounds like an experience she chose to have that she’s unashamed of.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:05 AM
–

The problem with holding an indefensible position is that it’ll get torn apart anywhere that doesn’t actively censor opposition and encourage hate. Edit to add: women can call out hate too. I don’t know why you’re pretending women never call out sexism when the feminist movement itself is quite large, and many feminists do call out sexism amongst radfems.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:01 AM
–

A “mistake” to who? Why does anyone else get to decide that for her?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 02:01 AM
–

What’s your experience been?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:53 AM
–

You can call out whatever you want bae
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:49 AM
–

Yeah sorry for the novel. I guess the one sentence breakdown is they think casting women as unaccountable victims in everything has more pros than cons.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:48 AM
–

This sort of requires a deeper understanding of different kinds of feminism. Liberal feminism is what’s commonly thought of as high brow gender equality focused feminism. It’s about restoring justice to women by reducing or eliminating sexism. It’s inclusive. Radical feminism reorients this conversation away from equality. It’s exclusive, pushing out anyone who wasn’t born a woman (and women who transition to men) or who doesn’t behave in a way conducive to feminism. It rejects gender equality a…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:38 AM
–

That’s radical feminism for you. Basically “we believe all the same sexist narratives as red-pill but we’re on the girl’s side.”
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:15 AM
–

I think OP is a woman btw
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 12:56 AM
–

How can you know if you consented? It’s probably that societal forces coerced you into it because you weren’t mature enough. I think me and a bunch of other people should probably way in in whether your consent counted /s
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 12:49 AM
6

It’s Percy Bysshe Shelley, basically his argument and philosophical framework for polyamory with Mary Shelley. I have a similar view. The end is sort of a foregone conclusion so I try to appreciate my time with people
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 11:42 PM
8

True love, in this, differs from gold and clay: that to divide is not to take away.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 11:14 PM
9

One thing I’ll concede too is that I think some women are genuinely turned off by nice/stable/“safe.” But I think of this as sort of an inverted Madonna/whore complex at play. That is, most guys want a woman who would be a good partner and mother and who is also sexually available to them, but some have a complex that mutually excludes those two things. Most women want a man who sexually excites them while emotionally regulating them, but some have a complex that makes these mutually exclusive. …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 11:08 PM
2

It’s “their fault” if they can’t recognize that women experience sexuality differently than men do. I think most guys benefit from understanding that even though women are more selective, that doesn’t automatically filter them out of every woman’s dating pool, because women have higher variability in terms of what they’re attracted to. That’s good news for men, but so many choose this defeatist interpretation that they’ll never achieve peak 10% of desirability, so they go against the most basic …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 09:13 PM
16

I’ve had a couple arguments in this sub recently with red pillers, who argue that women dont like “safe” men, and that safety is a turnoff to them. What you’re describing, the level of comfort before you’d consider physical intimacy with someone, is exactly what red pill misunderstands about female sexuality, IMO. Because masculine sexuality is viewed as bold and brash, they think that the boldness and brashness is what attracts women to men. And that’s true to a certain extent. But it isn’t tru…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 08:06 PM
3

“Intellectual connection” is maybe the wrong term. I just mean a connection that involves non-physical compatibility. Ie. Mental/emotional/personal connection. I disagree somewhat that intellect can’t play a role in attractiveness. I don’t mean intellect in the sense of abstract philosophical thought or whatever. But as an example in Pride and Prejudice, Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy share an intellectual compatibility. They’re both super emotionally intelligent in a way that positions them outside of…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 07:50 PM
3

Good luck on your hunt. I’d say look at switches the most since, like you, I think sex should be about having fun, and switches are people who are in it for the fun of it most of the time IMO. They’re more likely to try Domming even if it isn’t their go to
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 06:54 PM
3

Yep. You sound like a good Domme. The onus is definitely on us to create a safe space for communication, so getting a lot of information up front helps. I should also note the first few times with my current sub was more verbal communication intensive so that we could establish that baseline trust.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 06:36 PM
2

u/paley1 is interpreting me correctly, but I want to stress that this isn’t a hill I’d die on. What I’m saying is basically that it isn’t as uncommon as people think for a random man to have a lower sex drive than a random woman, or for a random woman to desire a relationship less than a random man does. I think there’s more variability within the groups “men” and “women” than there is average difference between “what men like” and “what women like.”
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 06:34 PM
3

For reference I’m a Dom leaning switch, though I really do love when j find a woman who can assume a more dominant role. I think on some level people land on a spectrum in terms of how much communication they like and require. Three quick examples: Zero communication: I was dating a woman who was very deferential and shy but she had a high sex drive, loved penetration, and came easily from penetration alone (luckiest girl in the world I guess. And lucky me). She was horrendous at communicating, …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 06:19 PM
1

What I’m getting at is better expressed by my comment here. I’m curious your thoughts on it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:07 PM
8

M/30s/North East USA/atheist In general I consider myself exceptional in bed. Sex is my reason for being. It isn’t a “need” in the sense that I’ll die without it, but it’s a biological imperative in that my body automatically seeks it and as you put it, it’s a requirement for mental and emotional well being for me. I don’t want kids and view reducing sex to procreation as like reducing comedy to “benefits lung health.” It centers a tangentially related consequence of the physical act instead of …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 05:05 PM
5

OP is arguing that for women, sexuality tends to require non-physical attraction too, built on emotional and intellectual connection. I don’t think those things are as important for men, and as a consequence I think men’s attraction to women is more looks based than the other way around. I think women actually value looks significantly less than men, which isn’t to say that they don’t matter at all. But they matter much less.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:49 PM
1

Women can find “a partner” regardless of looks, but the quality of partner they find is going to be heavily looks dependent. Men go for the most attractive women they can get. I mean, looking at this the other way, it’s saying men don’t care about education level or degree. But does anyone honestly believe men don’t judge women based on their looks when considering partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:41 PM
4

I agree with your first comment entirely and that’s sort of where I sit. I think the examples and the Ansari case are sort of good examples of how feminist purity testing results in backlash against feminist hypocrisy and moral/logical incoherence. What, you don’t believe that this adult woman was criminally harmed by “accidentally” seeing a PENIS?! You don’t believe that this narcissistic celebrity was entirely POWERLESS in her personal relationship? You don’t believe this woman’s SEXUAL discom…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:23 PM
2

Sure. I appreciate your caveat at the end of your post, but I also think this point is relevant since deviation within men and deviation within women is greater than the average difference between men and women, and that point sometimes gets lost.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:05 PM
9

I think this is sort of why so many redpillers and incels buy into the idea that women are “only attracted to the top 10% of men.” They see that women are more sexually selective than men, but don’t register that they aren’t selective in the same prominently looks based way that men are. Women aren’t all attracted to the same 10% of men (which is closer to how male sexuality works, where there’d be much more consensus on who is “objectively” attractive), but that each individual woman is only at…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 03:02 PM
–

The “summer of love” was 1969 (same year as Woodstock). The sexual revolution was the 60s and 70s
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 02:20 PM
–

https://share.google/iuckHHCqcvzUORpyr Sorry, had to
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 10:32 PM
–

I’ve met plenty of radfems IRL. But, I’m sure you don’t exist offline. I always think the argument that toxic views only exist online, and that people don’t carry their sexism into the world stupid. I also notice it’s a uniquely radfem argument, enough that it’s essentially a dogwhistle for radical feminism. Like “you’ll never notice it in the real world, it’s just the bigoted belief system underpinning our entire personalities.” You don’t hear that from red pill, racists or other fascistic ideo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 02:04 PM
–

Are you joking? There isn’t a single feminist subreddit that isn’t actively hostile to men using the same arguments they use about TERFs. The reason so many TERFs and SWERFS come about is because those women see the same exclusionary arguments used over and over against men, and then it becomes their stance, and they put two and two together. I’ve argued with feminists in this sub who make the case that feminism is not and never was an equal rights movement, that gender equality is “egalitariani…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:07 PM
–

The truth is that neither are correct. Feminism (by which I mean mainstream feminism, radical feminism, and misandry-as-feminism) and red pill both insist that these proclivities towards certain gendered observations are are facts about men and women, treating femininity and masculinity as essential elements of their being. This encourages people to treat men and women as “men” and “women,” socially enforcing gender binaries and punishing people who deviate from traditional femininity and mascul…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:53 AM
3

Thanks. I wish more people would recognize that transactional view of sex and romance as toxic. People say this stuff like it’s a universal truth, but it’s the basis for a lot of incel/femcel rhetoric.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:04 AM
2

Would I consider him romantically successful? It really depends how happy they both are in their relationship. I don’t consider six figures with a college degree “average.” The median salary in the US was $62-63k, while 33% - 40% hold degrees, so we’re talking about roughly double that. He’s not “rich” but he’s definitively successful, career wise. Sexually he’s obviously a failure, and it’s hard for me to imagine a couple who are content with a dissatisfying sex life. But even this sort of boil…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 05:50 AM
6

I think this is complex. On the one hand, I agree with you. I’m kind of an open book. It feels unnatural to me to not speak about life experiences, or to feel like I should be embarrassed for negative experiences I’ve had. I can tell a story about being abused, or getting my heart broken, or just a really shitty date in a pretty fun way that doesn’t betray too much bitterness, I think. And I really value a partner who can hear it without assuming that I deserved the abuse or that trusting them w…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 05:14 AM
5

I guess it kinda depends. I prioritize companionship and sexual compatibility in a partnership. To me, that combination is romance. Companionship without emotional vulnerability doesn’t feel that authentic. Like I can take the piss with come construction bros while working together, but I don’t feel like they’re my friends. With my real friends we can fuck around and joke, but also have heart to hearts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 06:47 PM
9

Of course we seek companionship. There was a post the other day about some people seeing romantic and sexual pursuits as mutually exclusive, while others do NOT see them this way. I am firmly in the camp of not seeing them this way, meaning that for me, having sex with someone is part of getting to know them and developing companionship with them. my guess is that they already get it from their friendships so sex is really the only thing that’s left. I’d argue the complete opposite. The reason s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 04:59 PM
5

I did read it. I took insertable length not being a predictor of a toy’s popularity to mean that there isn’t a preference for longer dildos, especially since they state it twice and would have included it in their findings. Googling it suggests market research finds 4-6 inch dildos or 5-7 inch dildos sell the best (though actually finding this research I found a little tricky. Maybe market research is more proprietary), with some sources saying 6 inch dildos are most popular. I don’t know why wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 01:53 AM
0

It’s also kinda like, “are we supposed to believe that all these chicks and dudes who vilify wo/men as a group are suddenly fair to their romantic interests and not dismissive and abusive?” Would someone who posts “men severely underestimate who much they suck” actually treat her man well? Of course not lol. You ain’t the prize you think you are sis
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 01:02 AM
10

Note: research finds that even though women prefer less morphologically accurate penetrative sex toys in terms of scrotums, glans/penile ridge, and aesthetics, the most popular toys reflect average penis size in length and slightly larger than average circumference.. If you don’t believe this one study, you’ll find there’s actually a fair amount of research corroborating this. It begs the question, if women actually preferred larger than average cock, how come when selecting from any size and sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 12:45 AM
–

This smells like bullshit. The “before” and “after” photos look edited both ways, one to make him look uglier and the other to make him more attractive. Comparing to other pictures of him, the one on the right looks closer. Also, the main difference between the two pics is the “lens” through which the picture was taken. Wide angle lenses make faces appear stretched while narrower lenses make them appear skinnier, so the same person can look like both of those images depending on the lens (I.e. 1…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 12:50 PM
6

I book dates with like 30-40% of the women I chat with. If he’s booking dates with <0.1% of the women he’s talking with, he’s doing something wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 03:00 PM
9

This, plus love languages. Some people have “gifts” and “acts of service” as their primary love languages. They like “princess treatment” because it’s a show of affection much the way words of affirmation and physical touch can be. Generally, women prefer to embody feminine roles and men prefer masculine, but this isn’t always the case. And while I’m generally masculine, I would love to be flown out to an island, gifted the world’s most luxuriant treats, and showered with kisses/worshipped. If a…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 10:12 PM
2

1): No. Unless I’m literally (consensually) degrading her. Even then, I don’t think what I’m doing is morally wrong. 2): logically no. But irrationally yes. I’ve turned down being pegged before, not because I think there’s anything wrong with being penetrated, but because even though I recognize that I’ve been socialized to see it as degrading to be feminized, I think I wouldn’t enjoy it because it would feel gay to me, and I don’t want to feel gay. 3): most of my partners enjoy sex with me. Whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 09:35 PM
3

That’d be nice, but christian nationalism is more about hurting people who are different than you. Female orgasms don’t hurt anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 05:11 PM
9

I had a friend, Ronnie, who was always dating beautiful women. It honestly puzzled me a little bit. He’s 5’6 or 5’7, and his face isn’t particularly attractive IMO. But he was fun to be around. He always knew where the party was. Always knew where to find party favors. He always had something fun going on. And he always had at least one gorgeous woman hanging off his shoulder. I don’t mean conventionally attractive women. I mean I mean 5’7, double-D, 135 lb model looking women. Women who stand o…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 01:47 PM
3

I think the free choice paradox probably does lead women (and men) to be less satisfied with online dating. Women don’t claim to love online dating. The dating market is indifferent to whether its constraints (or lack-there-of) leave people more or less satisfied. But also most people don’t plan on being on them forever. So if having a wide set of options is less enjoyable when making the selection, that isn’t super relevant to future happiness. I doubt in the t-shirt experiment that the free ch…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 10:24 PM
–

This is a great point. Red pill talks about women like if any woman enters a bad relationship, that’s proof that all women secretly want bad relationships. The way more obvious thing is that some women have unhealthy propensities, and also that some women are drawn to bad men because they are also bad people.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 04:26 AM
1

I assume apps work in your twenties and it’s equally important, but I’m in my mid thirties so they weren’t as big when I was coming up. Also everyone was going out all the time. In your thirties there are just way fewer single people, so you basically need apps. I think you’re missing the point about accepting rejection gracefully. Women will read insecurity on you if you need them to accept you, so learning to accept rejection gracefully builds self esteem and confidence. It’s the most importan…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 04:20 AM
7

In your twenties, get out to bars and shows and parties. Talk to everyone, not just the women you’re interested in. Make everyone feel welcome and try to be someone that people want to be around. Take chances and learn the difference between a woman who’s into you and those who want to be left alone. Develop a tolerance for rejection and don’t take it personally. In your thirties, curate your profile. Your profile pics should all be great, and they should all showcase a difference aspect of your…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:21 AM
11

What, so anyone who disagrees with you is the problem? Fuck that. This post is sexist as shit
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:10 AM
0

By that logic most men could become mercenaries and assassins, but that’s not really a privilege in any meaningful sense of the word.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:12 PM
1

I believe you. This is my only real data point and the rest is guess work. I can speculate based on a couple cam girls I’ve met. The one lived in a $4k apartment that’s he split with her ex, and the other lived in a $2k loft. Both were in expensive but somewhat seedy parts of town. The second looked much closer to the dream of a high end escort living a lavish life, and her loft was as essentially a sex parlor with manikins in bondage harnesses, sex toys and literature on sex lying around. She m…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 09:01 PM
0

Just want to note 300 quid is $405, so not all that far off. Also these women were pretty but they weren’t exceptional. They don’t look like high end escorts, just regular hot girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:39 PM
-1

Actually, about a month ago a friend and I matched with a couple women on tinder (with that double date feature). They said their love language was Venmo. I thought they were joking and flirted, but they responded unironically that it’s $500 each. It seems like that’s probably normal
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 08:27 PM
11

Firstly, I think straight up usage is very uncommon. I think most of the time people who were rejected are bitter about having spent money on a date, invested emotionally on a person who didn’t reciprocate, or performing sexual favors for someone who didn’t want to commit. They retroactively frame their unrequited interest as “getting used,” even though they freely spent, gave, performed. That said, I’ve had a couple experiences that felt pretty nakedly manipulative. This includes buying tickets…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 07:03 PM
3

This seems pretty uninformed. Most men who aren’t into kink are dominant. If anything I feel like you’re more likely to find a subby or switchy guy than in vanilla dating. But if you’re that judgey you probably wouldn’t be welcome
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 03:46 PM
5

What am I on about? You’re the one projecting your victim complex onto women. they believe that are oppressed avd they are in a precarious position all the time, so it is right for them to focus on themselves. Isn’t that exactly what you believe,except about men? And anyway it sounds like your frustration with this comes from your recognition that it is wrong, so why are you perpetuating it in your side?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 02:25 PM
0

You should check out your local kink scene if you haven’t already. IMO it’s a world of difference dating people who are sex positive. I felt like I found my tribe. It also exposes a lot of what gets talked about as universal truths in PPD as kind of bullshit, since there’s an alternative dating scene where many of those “truths” don’t hold up. I.e. In vanilla dating guys basically do have to act more reserved and ambiguous if they want to maintain a woman’s interest. In kinky dating you just nee…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 02:16 PM
6

Alright this is all obviously coming from somewhere, but the appropriate place to figure that out is a therapist’s office. In the meantime stop being a hateful misogynist and maybe people (which includes women) will be more willing to listen and help you.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 12:43 PM
2

I know I’m just clarifying my position in it
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 12:32 PM
13

these men do exist but they’re a minority. Not really. Almost every n-count thread is dominated by men (and some women) who think it goes without saying that women should be shamed for sleeping around too much. And it’s almost universally accepted that men want women to act like sluts for them. I don’t think it’s mathematically possible that these aren’t the same guys. That is a big part of why women are wary of sleeping with men. Even the men they sleep with sometimes lose respect for them. No …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 06:01 AM
14

When I meet a promiscuous woman that’s a huge green flag for me. It means she has sex for fun and pleasure. And it also just makes her more relatable to me. And it makes me feel like she chooses me because she likes me, since if she didn’t she’d be off with some other guy. I think guys who hate sexually liberated women really shoot themselves in the foot, and I’ll never understand wanting a woman who’s less sexually available. Usually it just means a lower sex drive or that she’ll weaponize sex …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 03:24 AM
29

I think there are a lot of guys who crave a pornified existence where women throw themselves at them, but a lot of these same guys harbor an immature view of sex that frames women who throw themselves at men as “sluts” unworthy of respect. It’s hard to feel bad for them because of that hypocrisy. But it’s also just deeply ironic because if they could scrap that view and replace it with one that views sex as pleasurable and healthy (even for women) they’d probably get laid a lot more.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 01:34 AM
–

I think for every woman drawn to married men there’s five married men drawn to extramarital affairs.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:50 PM
2

I think that guy also happens to be a 1/2,000,000 person, not reflective of men in general. But I think that when considering committing to relationships the average man is probably about as selective as the average woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:49 PM
5

I can’t. It takes me to TikTok in the AppStore, and then when I open it, it doesn’t go to the actual video. I hate TikTok UI
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 01:22 PM
–

Are misogynists good men? I don’t think so. But I agree as someone else said that it’s a continuum. And I don’t think the purpose of life is strictly to be minimally sexist, though j do think a person is less good to the extent that they’re a bigot. men who can’t get sex are 99% deserving of what women say about them. I disagree with this pretty strongly, partly because social psychologists recently tested that exact theory and found basically the opposite: Conclusions: Our findings did not supp…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 12:32 PM
–

Moreover, misogyny and misandry are interlinked. Some people may be literal fe/male supremacists where the direction of the negative stereotypes is more pronounced, but you can’t really reinforce sexist stereotypes towards one gender without justifying the prescriptive gender norms that define the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/26 11:44 AM
–

I’m here because I’m interested in the psychology of sex, and have strong (anti-sexist) opinions on gender politics.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 07:56 PM
3

She didn’t consider them dates though. And also by this logic she’s dating many men simultaneously
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:13 PM
1

They weren’t dating (or at least she was aghast when a friend asked if they were getting together and I said “they’ve been on a couple dates”)
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:03 PM
4

I disagree that it’s entirely a delusion. Pretty privilege is a real thing. For instance, my last roommate was a 7/10 (nice body but a beat face). She had a mason working on her basement. By going to lunch and dinner with him a few times while he was going through a break up, he offered to take thousands off the price of the house work (she did decline that to avoid feeling obligated to anything). It was an interesting experience living with her. On the one hand she’s basically aware of the pref…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 01:31 PM
3

I loved it. I was a double major and neither of them really helped me land a job after undergrad, but I became a writer/movie producer for a little while. I think it was helpful for understanding character motivations.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 10:00 AM
2

Nice. I got a psych degree too, though my focus was in social psych research, not clinical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 04:09 AM
1

I agree 100% with all of this. I don’t really know how you address therapy-speak though. As a general rule people should probably not use it in arguments that aren’t in front of a therapist. Maybe it should be on therapists to be a little more rigorous in defining terms for their clients. But also most people are learning these terms through Psychology Today and other low bar pop-psych publications
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:48 AM
1

That’s bachelorhood. For every night like that I’ve got a story about a Colombian chula, a feminist pain slut, a lesbian* couple, or just another lonely heart. And if that’s my consolation prize in life I’m okay with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:33 AM
9

I don’t know if men are getting more emotionally intelligent. I do think more men are seeing through fake feminism though (and I agree with you that liberal feminism/equality is a good thing). Here’s how I see it. Feminism went mainstream, bringing women’s issues into the light, giving women the vocabulary to discuss systemic sexism. Radical feminism went mainstream, reorienting sexist structures to hurt men. Men get enough exposure to feminism through women that they too have the vocabulary to …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 12:57 AM
0

It’s giving “if you think about it, the Jews are the real nazis.”
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 07:53 PM
-1

“Slurs like ‘terf’.” I’m dying. If you don’t want to be called out on your hateful bullshit stop spreading it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 07:47 PM
4

*Wanna caveat that I don’t dislike “jumping through hoops,” I just like recounting stories. And also want to caveat that I’m highlighting the annoying parts, but still mostly enjoyed this person’s company. She was just vexing. I matched with a smut content creator who was explicit about what she did. Her face looked elvish and she had an unforgettable ass. Outside of smut she made money streaming video games. There is no hoop I wouldn’t have jumped through. She was barely responsive in chat, whi…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 02:35 PM
6

This idea that people shouldn’t be allowed to deconstruct generalizations in a debate sub is idiotic. People who think “trends exist so I should be allowed to stereotype,” are idiots.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 12:52 PM
1

I don’t think fruits have it easier than vegetables, or that women have it easier than men. That still doesn’t address my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 12:50 PM
3

I care. I hate transphobes. You’re just taking someone who has a harder life than you and debating the validity of their existence in a world that’s already pretty dangerous for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 12:46 PM
1

Why the scare quotes?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 12:44 PM
4

“Exception that proves the rule,” is a thought terminating cliche that takes someone else’s counter evidence and pretends that it somehow reinforces your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 12:42 PM
–

I guess my naive take is that by hosting those users here instead of r/ThreeXChromosomes or r/IngrownHairCel or wherever, they’ll engage with gender politics somewhere that doesn’t unilaterally validate their hate. I honestly think this sub probably does more to deradicalize people than to radicalize them Edit: I didn’t realize r/threexchromosomes was a real subreddit that was banned lol
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 03:16 AM
–

I think you’d be surprised how many young people are fully withdrawn from pursuing romance Edit: also I agree with the rules barring blackpill posts, mostly for the “woe is me” attitudes that they foment. Without rules the sub would probably full convert into r/psychorsike. Side note I wish more women posted here so the topics could be a little less male dominated
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 03:05 AM
–

I think my point stands regardless. I hate incel and femcel rhetoric, and sexist bigotry generally, but I think people should be able to contribute to the discourse since it affects them even if they aren’t sexually active.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 02:51 AM
–

I agree with the overall premise, but it’s worth noting this sub gets 125,000 visitors per week. A fair amount of those are going to be incels/femcels. However, I’d disagree with OP that someone should have to be sexually active to post or comment, as this is a debate sub about gender politics, not just dating. A femcel is still affected by redpill misogyny even if they don’t want to fuck her and vice versa. An incel is still affected by radfems goading him to kill himself. While I don’t think t…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 02:41 AM
1

I dont come on here to argue with women, or look for dating advice. I do well with dating. I come onto here to provide young guys dating advice that hopefully steers them away from red pill, and to debate radfems and incels who steer men toward red pill. It’s kind of a civil service.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/26 01:33 AM
-1

I don’t view wanting to have sex with someone as taking away from the romance. I can think of an ex-partner or two who 100% expect the men they are interested in to be fully interested in them, and who wouldn’t view requiring reciprocal sexual desire as “manipulating and using” those me for sex. What is it about sex specifically that disqualifies it from being a reasonable compatibility thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 11:28 PM
3

I treat casual hookups basically the same as people I’m serious about, so it’s a little tricky. Like either way I’m going to be respectful, fun, honest, and happy to plan and pay for a date. One key difference is that if I’d consider it settling, I probably won’t introduce you to friends/family. I probably won’t respond as quickly or put as much effort into my responses, because I’m not trying to project a seriousness that isn’t there.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 11:13 PM
2

Exactly. And I’d draw your attention to one more thing: this plays out on a societal level as a presumption that men are worse than women. It’s the flip side of the “women are wonderful” effect. Whereas women are given the benefit of the doubt, men are considered shitty until proven otherwise. This is why any relationship advice post invariably receives all the “break up with him,” “girl, run” and “you can do better” responses. It isn’t particularly gendered, because it’s a symptom of sexist bel…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 10:32 PM
3

Yeah, I’m not sure why there’s so much skepticism that these people exist. I feel like I see it fairly often, though it’s usually not entirely overt. There are a lot of threads, for instance, where a woman in the comments is weighing in on what they want or what gives them the ick in dating, and then seven comments in they mention that they’re celibate or don’t date and it’s like then why are you pretending your opinion on dating is valid or applies to anyone else?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/26 09:38 PM
1

I also want to be chosen for both. Being liked for your personality is flattering, but I want my partner to physically desire me too.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 10:33 PM
39

I think if more people understood the relationship between benign sexism and hostile sexism, more people would oppose it. Put simply, the more you accept “men are like this, women are like that” as a valid worldview (because sometimes it benefits women/men to think this way) the more you’re willing to excuse harmful negative beliefs that follow the same logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 08:52 PM
1

That’s a good counterpoint. I think for certain cultures, negative stereotypes are pervasive enough that accents are seen as unattractive. I would say as a rule accents from other English speaking countries are held in high regard (like a Canadian accent sounds funny to me in America, but generally j think women would find Canadian men automatically more interesting than fellow Americans, even if a Midwest accent is more pronounced than a Canadian one).
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 07:00 PM
10

I agree. Philosophically I align with egalitarian men and liberal feminists. In practice feminist spaces and MRA’s both tolerate “venting” about the opposite gender until it becomes a pretty clear culture of animosity toward that gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 06:34 PM
6

Edit to add: it is so fucking annoying having to argue whether sexism is sexist. Yes, your gender war bullshit is sexist. If you’re going to spout it, at least own it instead of trying to take away peopl’s ability to identify it. The misandrist example I gave is an obvious example of hate. “Good” and “bad” are social constructs, and if you ascribe them to a whole gender or believe one gender is inherently superior/inferior that’s sexism. The misogynist example I gave is also obviously sexist. It…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 06:22 PM
6

“Obvious sexism isn’t hate because it’s true.” I don’t care if you’re sexist but please stop pretending that hating an entire gender isn’t sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 05:48 PM
65

I remember feeling that way in high school, before I’d ever had a girlfriend. I felt like women liked douchebag jocks and filtered out worthy dorks such as myself. But I was fifteen, so my conception of relationships was based almost entirely on 80s high school movies and 90s/00s sex comedies showing social outcasts win sexy women from asshole alphas who didn’t appreciate them. Then one day I got a hot girlfriend, and I felt the shift. I couldn’t believe that I was the underdog who somehow won t…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/26 03:39 PM
2

Honestly, I love condomless sex but I don’t push for it. The past few times I’ve had it, my partner will say she wants condoms and we have sex with them a few times, and then comes a time where w’regrinding without condoms and she slips it in, and I check “are you sure? I thought you said condoms only” and she’s like “yeah whatever.” I sort of wonder how common this experience is. Bite: these are women who are on birth control, so the concern is just STIs, which I test for.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 10:22 PM
3

I think the correct action is to provide a fair take regardless of whether it’s a man or woman you’re debating. It matters more to misandrists when women call them on their bullshit and it matters more to misogynists when men call them other bullshit. When people see that men and women can and do empathize it makes sexist arguments look pigheaded and wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:45 PM
15

Even if we could measure accountability, politicians are the last people I want representing my gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 01:06 PM
11

There are a bunch of examples in these comments of OP doing exactly what you describe, replying to women who empathize with “oh yeah?! But you’ll never feel it the way I feel it, huh?!” I agree that sucks and I get why some women say, “fuck it. And fuck men too.” But to your question of what do men want (or what’s a reasonable expectation anyway)? I think just try to keep being fair minded. Just like you get on here and see men demanding more than empathy, guys read posts like this and only see …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 01:01 PM
3

Yeah I think it’s a genuinely good point. Edit to add: I think the same can be said of guys criticizing women for being too picky. “If the opinion was voiced by a woman, would the opinion hold water?” would be a good way to judge if the guy is being fair or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 06:11 AM
4

You googled “hypocrisy vs. double standard” because you obviously don’t know the difference. If two people have an equal obligation, it’s just a standard, not a double standard. If someone criticizes a higher standard that they aren’t held to, they are a hypocrite, from the Greek, “hypo-” below “crite” criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 05:57 AM
0

That’s stupid. It isn’t a “double standard” if the person criticizing is held to the same standard. A double standard is holding someone to a standard that you don’t hold others (including yourself) to.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 05:27 AM
4

Pointing out that a hypocrite is enforcing a double standard is hardly a “fallacy.” Edit: I agree with your initial point that replacing the woman complaining with a hypothetical man is a good gauge for whether a man is lazy in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 05:06 AM
0

Funny I just opened this app and it looks like you just responded. Regarding the black-and-whiteness of sex positivity/negativity, I think there are a couple things going on. First, when you’re in a group and something sexually “charged” comes up, a consensus of positivity or negativity quickly forms. In r/entertainment there’ve been posts about an old actor who solicited a prostitute. Most of these threads have people defending him, pointing out that if they’re both adults and she’s consenting …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 04:47 AM
11

Every guy should know this by virtue of having put his foot in his mouth at least once. You can pretty instantly kill attraction by saying or doing the wrong thing. You can also build attraction by matching on things like humor, values, and interests. We call it “compatibility” but that’s too sterile a word for the feeling of meeting someone who just “gets you” and the way that attraction builds when everything just feels right.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 05:49 AM
7

A big difference is how much more socializing and bar hopping millennials did. Also, sex negativity is a lot more prominent these days. It sort of feels like it’s in vogue for women to view relationships as trite and beneath them, which I think does impact dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 04:42 AM
1

I would marry a cam girl, porn star, exotic dancer, or sex educator. I wouldn’t marry an active escort because, while I’m okay with us being open, I’d like encounters to be more prenegotiated. I would have no problem marrying a former escort. I’m not concerned that a woman’s sexual history will trump the sex we have. I think I’m pretty good. I’ve slept with strippers and cam girls for free, of their own volition. Also, the fact that she’s with me is enough proof that she wants to be with me, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 02:04 AM
1

Do you achieve an erection when watching porn, even though those pornstars are obviously getting railed by other guys and you are actively watching it?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/26 01:42 AM
1

Blue pill is sex positive in that it endorses the free expression of gender identity, sexual orientation, and body positivity. None of those are red pill concepts. Women’s sexual liberation is also a progressive liberal idea. The people downvoting me for saying slut shaming is inherently sexist are red pill, not blue pill. Tradcons and radfems are both sex negative, but as previously mentioned, radfems are pink pill because they mirror redpill beliefs. Also, generally speaking red pill is very h…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 07:48 PM
1

Tradcons are red pill. Radfems are pink pill. They endorse all the same sex negative and gender essentialist beliefs as red pill, so blue pill isn’t a fitting term.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 07:29 PM
–

The point I’m trying to make is that “preferences” aren’t the great equalizer that people make them out to be. They can be an expression of prejudice, and it’s easy for people with those biases to just say “what? It’s my preference.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 06:04 PM
1

I agree. And you also have red pill grifters who sort of formalize their belief structures through podcasts and self help books. Blue pill doesn’t really have that, which is part of the reason that people don’t think of a particular ideology for “Blue Pill.”
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 05:05 PM
2

‘Tis better to have loved and lost. The point of life is not to prevent harm at the cost of love. It’s better to try for love and get your heart broken
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 03:27 PM
2

I’m generally skeptical of arguments that use “brain chemicals” or “neural pathways.” I’m not a psychologist but I’ve performed research and been published in a peer reviewed journal, so I’m familiar with how it goes. A lot of times the issue isn’t the research but how it gets extrapolated in pop psychology. And then of course researchers can have their own biases and write papers to support them. At any rate, I don’t think any actual scientist or psychologist would make the argument that break …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 03:11 PM
2

The question isn’t about whether women are sexist for imbuing promiscuous men with more value, it’s about whether it’s sexist for men to reduce women’s value based on their promiscuity. Yes. A double standard about sexual behavior based on a person’s sex is sexist. If we can’t agree on that as definitively sexist, then there’s no point in talking about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:54 PM
2

I disagree. These same arguments are used against no-fault divorce. Sex isn’t inherently unhealthy, that’s just puritan bullshit and the science behind it is similar to the “science” that was behind gay conversion therapy: it’s ideologically motivated research to prop up conservatism.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:51 PM
1

It is a sexism issue though. The argument is too involved for this comment section, so I’ll try to right a detailed post explaining why. The dumbed down version is that patriarchy is predicated on the idea that sex is inherently harmful to women, and sex negativity justifies systemic sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:44 PM
3

It’s not a lie. Most sexist beliefs are offshoots of the idea that sex intrinsically benefits men and harms women. That’s the underlying premise for slut shaming promiscuous women, and it’s the underlying premise for upholding a patriarchal society structured around infantilizing women at the expense of their rights and equal treatment.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:41 PM
1

there are plenty of sex positive misogynistic/misandrists. Sounds like “It’s actually progressives who stare racist!!!!!” Yeah fuckin right. Not if we’re comparing the other side of the aisle. Edit to add: y’know who’s sex negative? Feminazis and actual nazis. you know who isn’t sex negative? Normal men and women who fuck each other. Which of those “sides” do you think is more sexist?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:07 PM
1

Alright well the morally relevant concept is how you value people. Devaluing people based on a sexist double standard is sexist, whether you believe that people’s value is intrinsic or not. Edit: I highly disagree that people don’t have intrinsic value, but that’s a whole other can of worms and beside the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:55 PM
1

I addressed that already. Sex negativity isn’t itself sexist, but it’s bigotry adjacent. That’s why it’s always the most misogynistic men and misandrist women spewing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:52 PM
1

That doesn’t increase his intrinsic value as a human being, and a woman exploring her sexuality doesn’t decrease her’s. So yes, this sex-based double standard about sexual behavior is sexist. It’s basically what the term “sexism” means as coined to describe.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:47 PM
3

This is a deflection. The sexist part is believing that men and women’s value is inversely affected by sex. It’s a fact about themselves, not a physical quality that their body is responding to physically. A better analogue would be women preferring men who make much more money than them, which I would consider classist and sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:28 PM
–

I think categorically excluding people based on race does show racism. For instance, when I was in middle school I had a poor friend who was racist. He claimed to have family in the kkk. They’d committed hate crimes, and after his uncle was murdered by a black man, he dedicated himself to the alt right pipeline. He flew a confederate flag from his truck in high school. He swore up and down that Tyra Banks (who’d just been voted the prettiest supermodel in the world) was “hideous. He would shout …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:11 PM
1

Clarifying my position. There’s “hate” as an emotion and then there’s “hate” in the sense of internalized biases. It’s possible to not be enraged by a woman’s promiscuity but still hold them to a double standard: when she has sex it lowers her value and when men have sex it raises their value. That is “hateful” in the internalized “bias” sense. It’s sexist. The exception is thinking that everyone (men included) who has sex is bad. But I also consider puritan anti-sex mindsets hateful in their ow…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 12:59 PM
1

would you call it sexist if a man didn’t hate them but still didn’t want to be with a promiscuous woman? Let’s clarify between hate as an emotion and “hate” in the sense of internalized biases. I think it’s possible to not be enraged by a woman’s promiscuity, but still hypocritically think that when she has sex it lowers her value and when men have sex it raises their value. That internalized belief is hateful (in the internalized “bias” sense) and sexist. The exception would be thinking that ev…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 12:50 PM
0

There’s not a non-sexist reason to hate women for sleeping with men. They don’t want to admit that they’re sexist, so they convince themselves that there’s a logical reason for the double standard. It’s about protecting their ego.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 12:37 PM
2

I’m blue pill. I date around, don’t care about marriage, and if the woman wants to pay for the date I don’t take offense. Red pill is obsessed with marriage and birth rates, codifying dating rules based on gender norms, and playing up the power differentials in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 11:43 AM
-1

That’s not what blue pill is. As in real politics, blue pill is the counter to the red pill narrative. Red pill with regard to gender politics is traditionalism and heteronormativity (which is a lot more mainstream). Blue pill is just calling out red pill on sexism and cultish adherence to gender norms
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 03:58 AM
0

I’m criticizing you because you’re being insane and unfair, and you know it. I don’t care if that’s moral grandstanding. I give a fuck about seeing things as they are, and part of that is acknowledging that everyone deserves to be treated fairly. Part of that is not being racist or sexist or homophobic.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 03:17 AM
3

Yeah. And for what it’s worth I feel the same thing happens with MRA’s. Just try to stay cool and rest on the belief that neither men nor women deserve to be treated unfairly based on their gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 03:04 AM
0

This is literally delusional. I refuse to believe that you’ve interacted with so few women that you can’t think of one who would be insulted at how unfair and unreasonable that characterization is. Get off social media until you’ve had some time to think about what you’re looking at and who is telling you these things.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:54 AM
2

This is just my take on the pills, but here’s my perspective. Red pill = reactionary traditionalism. She girl want he man because baby crazy. Pink pill = red pill for girls. What if we reinforce the patriarchy in a way that benefits women? Blue pill = liberal egalitarianism. Differences in gender expression aren’t inherently good/bad and people shouldn’t be forced to conform to them. Pro LGBTQ+, pro sex worker rights. Black pill = incel/femcel. It’s all a genetic lottery and you’re either born r…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:32 AM
-2

I think most people endorse some degree of sexist beliefs. I would only consider egalitarians and liberal feminists actual blue pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:24 AM
6

The term in this subreddit is “pink pill” (aka red pill for women). When girl boss feminism loops back around to endorsing all the same evopsych gender essentialist beliefs as red pill
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 02:08 AM
1

Women don’t like “nice guys” because they don’t like sycophants. She registers that the “nice guy” is treating her like a superior being, but knows that the other shoe will drop if she fails to meet his (sexual) expectations. Aversion to chivalry is a defense mechanism. Edit to add: studies show that both men and women want someone who’s slightly avoidant. Probably because people who are slightly avoidant are slightly out of their league (hypergamy). So there’s also the side of it that a guy dro…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/26 01:53 AM
5

Sure, but when we’re talking about whether being a nice/good/stable person, I think that’s a net positive toward how attractive a person looks to the opposite sex. I think a lot of guys get hung up on just being nice and respectful but they don’t know how to sexually entice women. Even if you’re nice and respectful you need to be able to create sexual/romantic interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 06:36 PM
-1

That’s not necessarily true. There are women who love men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 05:18 PM
5

No, but humor makes women more attractive to me generally. If I meet a woman in my league who’s funny I feel instantly smitten. I would even give a slightly uglier woman a chance if she was funny and we got along well enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 04:51 PM
1

I disagree that it’s not controllable. I have standards that include values.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 04:46 PM
8

Disbelieving that she is correct about what she says she wants is more of an assumption.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 03:49 PM
4

I think that’s a huge part of it. I think a lot of men have an aversion to male sexuality that feels borderline performative.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 02:40 PM
1

Seems like you have a weird aversion to porn
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 02:30 PM
2

I think that logic extends to most people’s fantasies. If you’re having sensual partnered vanilla sex you might look up more hard sex or random encounter porn. If you’re fucking lots of strangers you might look up to”sensual lovers romantic.” It’s the non-familiarity that makes it exciting.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 02:22 PM
26

I think it’s stupid to disbelieve women when they say they want “kind, gentle, respectful” men. At least that woman (and women like her) are into that. It’s like when I say I want a funny girl. Some women will say men don’t like women with a strong voice, a lot of personality, or who are too outspoken. Okay, I’m sure some guys don’t. But that’s what I want and a woman like that would be wasted on a guy who can’t appreciate it. Same goes for the kind guy. Note: what is meant by kind/nice/ is up f…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 02:05 PM
1

I go on dates every week and sleep with a new woman about once a month. It’s really a question of what is meant by “struggle.” I (mid 30s) know that I do well compared to other guys, but dating is still very much a slog. I understand that a lot of the guys whining sound like entitled little pissants, but I just want to share a bit of my experience. I was absolutely destroyed when the love of my life left me. I was still very much in love with her, but for the last couple years should couldn’t st…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/26 01:01 AM
5

How is that different than female centered men? Do they harm all men by uplifting women?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 04:11 PM
1

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 03:58 PM
–

“My prejudices don’t matter,” - every bigot ever. I don’t care if you’re sexist, just stop pretending it doesn’t count as sexism. If your logic is that it s okay for you to be prejudicial and discriminate based on sex, you are a sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 03:53 PM
1

This content was anonymized and mass deleted with Redact
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 03:10 PM
3

Agreed. “Simp” and “pick me” are mostly used by sexists to mean “gender traitor.” The vast majority of people get into relationships and treat their partners with affection and respect that losers would call “simping” or “pick me” behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 03:04 PM
3

I know he’s lying. He just wants his dick wet or he has a fetish and I’m nothing more than an object. I think you need to attack this belief within yourself. That isn’t how love works, IMO. Desire isn’t entirely separate and distinct from romance and love. I’d agree that sex and love can be different, but even as a slutty man I still catch feelings if I regularly sleep with someone. It’s like saying “she’s only dating me because she wants free dinner.” Can that happen? Sure. But anyone coming ba…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:45 AM
1

I think people are overstating how detrimental this will be. It’s a bit, “rock and roll will cause teenagers to like sex and drugs.” People can watch porn, gory movies, listen to death metal, etc. and all this entertainment doesn’t really fuck people up. Or at least I prefer to live in a world where people can entertain themselves however they like and still be expected to act decent.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:26 AM
–

I reject anyone using it as a defense of prejudice or treating people different. I’ve been robbed at gun point by a black dude. I don’t cross the street when I see black people, and when people say racist shit I call them on it. Cause being victimized isn’t an excuse to be an asshole to that group forever. Everyone in their life has people who were bad to them and they can internalize it as hate toward a group or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 10:09 AM
–

Yeah. It’s still sexist as fuck to say “some people are crazy, therefore all women/men are crazy and I should treat them like BPD rapists until proven otherwise.” The sexist part is accepting the premise that it’s okay to discriminate instead of judging people on an individual basis.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 04:57 AM
7

/s?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 01:59 AM
2

It just gets muddy because some people use bluepill to mean progressive/feminist, but there are a lot of radical feminist gender essentialists. But that’s horseshoe theory (e.g. TERFs are TERFs because they think they think the essential differences between men and women aren’t something you can transition out of). A normal left-leaning person doesn’t believe men and women are different in an essential level or that they should be treated as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 01:48 AM
11

I always think “look at celebrities” arguments are so stupid. Of course Bradley Cooper can date anyone he wants. But so can Margot Robbie and Margaret Qualey. Maybe 1 in 100,000 get that experience. Maybe less. We aren’t in the same ballpark, state, country, or time zone as them so it’s sort of beside the point of what the 99.9999% of us experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/26 12:56 AM
4

“It wasn’t no thang” is just a fun, informal way of saying “it wasn’t a concern.”
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 09:22 PM
1

About a year ago, defending a woman’s right to assume all men are rapists was a big misandrist talking point. #notallmen was a sarcastic meme suggesting any man who took offense was “part of the problem” because they were deflecting, and they’d use any instance of men taking offense as an opportunity to spread cherry picked statistics to prove men are sexual predators. Note: I appreciate that you don’t think this way. Just providing context for why you’re seeing the surprising amount of people d…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 08:19 PM
23

There’s a difference between being judicious and being prejudiced (I know judicious isn’t the perfect word, but you get what I mean). “She said something my BPD ex said, which gives me pause” = judicious. “Women are like my BPD ex” = prejudiced.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:31 PM
3

I had a similar thing with my ex anyway. It felt like she took my passion as a threat to our relationship. It’s made me a little hypersensitive to controlling types.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 06:17 PM
5

Generally yes. It’s okay to conform to gender roles, but it’s sexist to impose gender norms on other people. For instance, you say people don’t want to be around women who aren’t nurturing. What about punk chicks? I love em. I think they have a place in society even if they aren’t giving nurturing mother vibes. I think the same thing goes for basically everyone. It was wrong of people to make fun of male nurses when they first became a thing and it’d be wrong to make fun of female engineers or c…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 05:46 PM
4

This is just a chicken or the egg argument. There are cultures that are more sexist and ones that are less sexist. The idea that people should embrace sexist gender roles because society is sexist so complying will benefit them is just a prisoners fallacy. It’s totally possible to not be sexist. The people who do embrace those sexist gender roles just come off like the selfish, sexist manosphere and girlboss grifters OP describes in their post.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 05:27 PM
13

I think it’s also super evident that the selfishness is sexist when we’re talking about hypothetical men and women. “A good wife should always cook for her man before she takes a bite herself.” “A man should always be willing to drive his princess everywhere.” Yes, it’s selfish. But it’s also exploiting social constructs. It genders behaviors that are “nice” and altruistic into expectations that get taken for granted.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 05:23 PM
9

People can be selfish, but forcing particular expectations on someone because of their sex is sexist. A lot of times the selfish behavior that you’re describing are expectations that we as a society believe and uphold. I.e. “women are supposed to be nurturing emotional caretakers,” “men are supposed to pay because they’re responsible.”
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 03:14 PM
–

Yes. I agree with your post (I don’t view respondent reliability as a blue or red pill issue. Response bias is a thing, and I agree with your explanation for why it’s ambivalent expressed between men and women. I think the effect you’re seeing is evidence of commonplace sexism acting as a social pressures causing to have more/fewer partners). I think u/tbutlah’s guesstimates sound about right for me and my friends, although I have friends who had fewer partners because they coupled up young. I t…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:53 PM
–

I have had a similar experience, but I think you don’t realize how many conservative guys there are who basically lock down the first or second woman they can. It becomes more evident when you see the other at conservative guys talk about sex. Not all conservatives, but definitely a lot of dudes with very traditional worldviews in this sub who would think a woman is a “whore” for being with ten guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:30 PM
3

I think there’s a lot of confusion about what “equality” means. There’s equality in the enlightenment sense that “all people are created equal under god” (or the universe, or whatever). The point of this is that Ii one is inherently superior or inferior to anyone else, regardless of their physical differences. It does NOT mean that people are identical, it means that they shouldn’t have to be to be treated with the same basic respect and rights. Then there’s “equality” in the sense of outcomes b…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:58 PM
11

I largely agree. I’m a high drive man and still need regular sex, be it casual or serious. So casual and regular sex hasn’t permanently satiated that thirst in me. But I do agree with OP that access to it helped me see women as full people. But I also agree that it’s not a prerequisite to view women this way (just something that helped me take women off a pedestal when I was younger). Maybe the caveat is that being seen as a full person helps you see them as equals, and being seen as a sexual en…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 05:46 PM
–

I think in this case she’s just perennially stuck in a “self improvement” phase similar to red pill guys. Like I’m sure next month it will be “I’m going to read a book every week” and then the following it will be “I’m cutting toxic people out from now on,” etc. etc. She was also super into therapy, which can be a red flag. Minor-therapy generally but there’s a type who make it their whole personality and use it to validate every selfish thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 03:53 PM
–

I drove an hour to buy a woman dinner because she was legitimately food insecure. I didn’t want sex or anything (not that I wouldn’t have had it), I just felt bad for her. I was also bored, and I have the means. It felt like a nice thing to do, and there’s the off chance we really vibe and she’s just going through a hard time. When I arrived she was wearing pajamas. She’d put on a lot of weight since her pictures, which happens for about 20% of the dates I go on. Also she didn’t have a phone, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 03:23 PM
12

There’s a strong anti-romantic, anti-sex trend right now that’s driving gender wars propaganda, IMO. People don’t realize it isn’t strictly “men/women bad” content. It starts with “never suffer an insult without cutting someone out of your life,” r/im14andthisisdeep style memes
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 01:01 PM
0

Unfortunately, this is the mainstream attitude in all feminism subs. I’ve been told many times in this sub and others by feminists. I disagree with it because I’m a liberal feminist, but feminism subs are echo chambers which favor exclusionary feminism. The effect is that, while most feminists might disagree with the conclusion that all hetero and marital sex is rape, most discuss male sexual interest as intrinsically violating. I.e. all sexualization is objectification. This also explains when …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 04:35 PM
1

I think it’s relevant to the question, “where is that premise (that women are attracted to predators and find shy guys unattractive) even coming from?” IMO it’s seeping in from the radfem premise that all male sexual attention is predatory. So people see that guys who display more sexual attention receive more sexual attention and think “wait, what?! I thought that made them a predator?!” It’s not something you or I believe in, but that’s why people who view sex as a battle between men and women…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 04:25 PM
6

If the same thing that happens to me happened to her, and you agree that what happened to me wasn’t rape, then how do you know that it was different for her?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 01:50 PM
-1

There is no such thing as victimless rape. Any attempt to project victimhood on someone who didn’t feel victimized is disingenuous, bad faith bullshit. I’ve been woken up by blowjobs and other sexy things. I would not say my consent was violated, because I welcomed them. It’s actually an awesome thing to wake up to.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 01:12 PM
1

The radical feminist position that all heterosexual and marital sex is rape is a real argument. “Rape Redefined” argues that consent isn’t an internal emotional state but an objective circumstance of power dynamics, and it argues that what we think of as “consent” is often manufactured through coercive social pressure and therefore not valid. If you look up the article it’s well written, but the problem is it’s intellectually laundering a sick and sexist idea that all male heterosex is a consent…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 01:05 PM
3

That’s ridiculous. I disagree with any definition of rape that includes instances where both adults enjoy the experience and would not claim that they were raped.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 12:47 PM
1

I want to clarify that I don’t think it’s the lack of communication is inherent to women. The other half of the messaging telling men that they should just know is telling women that they shouldn’t ask. I think as far as the “PiV is ‘real’ sex and everything else is just foreplay” mainstream conception of sex, the measures that could properly counter it get hamstringed. Sex education that discusses pleasure, female centered porn, and sex positive depictions of sex get fought tooth and nail by co…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 01:34 AM
1

That’s a fair question. Yes, I think the way society centers PiV as the main sex act while neglecting more female focused sex acts is purely a communication issue. Society isn’t the one having sex in these contexts. Men and women are, and they can resolve this issue through communication, plain and simple. I don’t think those heteronormative assumptions have zero impact on women or men’s sex lives. I just think, “men are selfish narcissistic lovers” is a stupid and sexist takeaway. My explanatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:19 PM
2

Your orgasm is your responsibility. It’s not surprising that you can’t take accountability for your own sexual pleasure when your hateful ideology prevents you from examining why these differences exist in men and women but presupposes some sexist paradigm where one gender has all the negative traits. Pretty convenient that it reinforces the idea that men are responsible for everything all the time and women can’t be expected to shoulder any responsibility, reinforcing the patriarchal conditioni…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 10:02 PM
3

I think it’s because most Americans base their understanding of sex on the handful (4-8 people) of partners they have sex with in the entire lives, and a side effect of sexual repression is not talking about sex so people basically learn how to have sex via watching porn (which is like learning how to cook by watching a few videos of the same recipes all the time), and because of the reasons I mentioned in my initial response: people inherit a heteronormative script that tells them men are the a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:31 AM
1

That’s only true for radical feminists. Regular women aren’t going around intellectualizing why it’s they need to make bad faith arguments in support of gender norms in order to beat men at gender roles.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 11:19 AM
1

Patriarchy involves giving women these benefits so that they can be treated as less respectable and less competent. It removes accountability from women and has men shoulder it, but the side effect is that women aren’t viewed as equal to men and have fewer rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 06:13 AM
2

I wonder how often gay men achieve orgasm.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 05:59 AM
12

I wrote my response the way I did because I’m addressing heteronormative dating dynamics. I consider them separate and distinct from kinky/queer dating dynamics. Explain to me how these statements “clearly revolve around PiV = sex.” as a general rule I want her to cum before PiV to enhance the experience for her. sex should always start with foreplay focused on her. foreplay should go on long enough that she’s begging before you move to penetration? You act like if a penis is involved at all tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 05:37 AM
3

You mean my type /s
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:14 AM
3

Heteronormative dating is honestly the shittiest part of being a straight cis guy (which kinda speaks to how not shitty the rest is. But genuinely, dating here sucks. I much prefer queer girlies on Feeld).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:13 AM
2

I don’t think their view is grounded in reality. I do think they’ve internalized a sex negative narrative that tells them women don’t like sex, and then they see radfems saying that women hate all men, and they draw the conclusion that women don’t want to sleep with them because no women actually enjoy sex. Anyway I just got a match while writing this. I’m gonna go see what that’s about.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:09 AM
2

I’ve only been approached by women a handful of times. Incidentally a lot of the times I’ve been approached by women they were queer. I think it’s more common for women to approach women than men, but that women who are used to approaching women are more comfortable with approaching generally.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:05 AM
2

Not OP but there’s a popular misandrist/incel narrative that women don’t actually like men. r/womenarenotintomen is an incel sub about it, but I’ve also seen it expressed overtly or as subtext by a lot of misandrists.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 03:03 AM
14

These questions are asked as leading questions, so I’m going to provide a counterargument before answering directly. The orgasm gap is entirely explained by 1): women’s higher variability in how they achieve orgasm, 2): men are expected to just “know,” 3): women’s inability to request what they want and need in bed: Variability: Men are just wired to cum more easily. (I don’t, but that’s because I trained myself not to never cum prematurely). It’s not just that some women like penetration and ot…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/26 02:56 AM
0

Scenario 2
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 02:04 AM
–

That’s because they’re responding to the same systemic issue, a patriarchal condition that makes women parasitic to a paternalizing order that dehumanizes women. Those men aren’t incorrect that some women receive special treatment and those women aren’t incorrect that some men abuse the abusive system that they were conditioned into. Where both sexists err is that they ascribe those behaviors to something intrinsic within men and women. And also as in suggesting here, they treat people who don’t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 01:42 AM
4

100%. The post sneaks in “meant to” as if it’s an objective thing. Objectively, none of us are “meant to” or “supposed to” do anything. These are human concepts that don’t fit an evolutionary discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 07:54 PM
1

That’s good to hear. I also try to keep in mind that when I was coming up boomers shit on millennials for everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:21 AM
1

Yeah I kinda feel that. It’s annoying because we have to share the world and I’m pretty sure we’re cooked within ten years
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:04 AM
3

I mean there are a ton of guys in this thread (and often red pill guys in other ones) who talk about body count like it’s a foregone conclusion that it lowers women’s value in the dating market. But I agree women do this a lot too
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:03 AM
12

One thing I haven’t seen mentioned is novelty. A lot of women value novelty. An Australian in America? Women are curious, love the accent, and think he’s interesting. From his perspective he’s just some guy from Australia. So I think they get added points for that. I think guys do this too, to a lesser extent. But like a chick with a French accent is going to elicit a lot of curiosity from me.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 03:48 AM
1

You’re preaching to the choir dog. I just wish more women recognized their role in preserving this mindset. I blame girlboss feminists (aka pinkpill), for laundering these redpill/traditional values as if feminist ideals happen to align with patriarchal power structures.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 03:41 AM
3

That’s basically what I do. We don’t need to fuck on the first date but I need a kiss or to make out or something to indicate that you don’t view sex in the transactional way u/iron-wold-41 describes. From my pov it’s just laughably dishonest when the same women who believe men shouldn’t have expectations expect men to fulfill certain patriarchal archetypes to “earn” sex. It’s like Of course you don’t owe me sex. I don’t owe you dinner or commitment. I thought we liked each other, but I’ll go fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 03:35 AM
3

Yup. “Women go through life with tons of guys doting on them. They get special treatment everywhere they go and never have to do anything for themselves. Talk about life on easy mode.” And the same thing happens with misandrist women. “Men control everything. They get away with literal murder and assault all the time and everyone just accepts it because they respect men for no reason. People excuse everything they do.” Both sexist men and women picture the average wo/man as more attractive than …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 03:05 AM
2

I don’t really understand this tendency to cater to red pill behavior though. Like the guys who care about this stuff have internalized red pill beliefs, so when I go out with a girl who performs femininity that way I assume that she’s internalized those same beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 02:31 AM
5

Endorsement of sexist beliefs correlates strongly strongly to picturing the opposite gender “average” as attractive. I.e. sexist men think the average woman loves a successful influencer’s lifestyle while sexist women think the average guy is handsome enough to appeal to the majority of women (factor in status and finances. He drives a $40,000 - $60,000 car and owns property).
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 12:48 AM
0

Reframing “boys vs girls” to “sexists vs non sexists.”
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:44 PM
2

I’m saying I resent the assumption that all men are redpill (and I’m not about to have a conversation about why actually it’s okay for you to make sexist assumptions about me).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:23 PM
4

I’m also confused about how this relates to what they said. I think they raise a good point. Developmental obstacles may be the hook that gets them into manosphere nonsense, but that doesn’t mean that the manosphere doesn’t exacerbate misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:14 PM
2

Your sex life isn’t my concern. I just want to voice that blue pill men exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 10:01 PM
-1

I agree that’s what’s happening, but just want to add that not every guy sees women as dirtied by sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 09:58 PM
2

Explain why me not dating women or cops isn’t a phobia. Explain why a woman not dating bisexual men is. Can you do that? I did. In the paragraph you quoted immediately below that. It’s a bias because the exclusion is NOT based on physical attraction or incompatibility but on an irrational aversion to an invisible difference occurring within them. Once again, all dating involves bias. This is the meat of your argument. And this is where you are wrong.You talk as if sexual preferences are themselv…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:13 PM
5

You’re a guy who thinks porn and threesomes are “fringe” and that people should only ever take advice from “traditional” men like you. Why should anyone care what you think is normal? Your definition of normal sucks
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 05:35 PM
1

Let me address the meat of your argument with the meat of mine. If you have two identical men, (one is bi and the other is not) then the only difference between is that one also sees men as attractive. It’s something going on within them and nowhere else. If that is the deal breaker then it does imply she a bias against bisexuality, because whatever is a turn off about it to her must necessarily stem from a bias against bisexuality/homosexuality. I would argue that that is very different from no…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 05:30 PM
5

I didn’t think you’d call yourself “men.” Is it “women attacking men” anytime a woman calls you in your shit? You’re being biphobic by saying that all blue pill guys are bi, and that we shouldn’t listen to their takes because they are bisexual, and you throw in that women don’t like bisexual men. It’s obvious that you also don’t like bisexual men (and I assume LGBTQ people in general).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 04:46 PM
4

What sentence suggests that to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 04:32 PM
2

FWIW if you have nuanced takes I don’t want you banned.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:30 PM
3

I think the person you’re arguing with there is right. People are entitled to their preferences, but that’s a little different from saying preferences never indicate a phobia. I think a man who will only date virgins has some obviously misogynistic hang ups. Similarly, I think if the reason a woman won’t date a man is because he’s bisexual, I think that constitutes biphobia. And at any rate I think OP is trying to use that to invalidate bi people’s perspective because they don’t like LGBTQ peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 03:01 PM
1

This whole post is so nakedly homophobic too. It’s clearly intended to weaponize women’s biphobia against bi men and promote bi-erasure by invalidating bi men’s perspectives. OP is consistent enough in their responses that it’s clear they know what bi-erasure is, they know what forced heteronormativity is, and they’ll just pretend not to understand those concepts to enforce their shitty religious world order. That’s why they’re doing it. You see it (edit to add: guess not). I see it. And based o…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 02:38 PM
3

Tbh I’ve been temp banned for talking shit too. But I respect that they don’t let it devolve into mud slinging cause every post would probably go that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 02:30 PM
14

Bi people’s perspectives are best, IMO, because they deal with dating from both sides. Bi women, for instance, will tell you that talking to girls is 10x harder than talking to guys. Bi guys will tell you that dating dudes can be scary and you have to be careful. You can use that knowledge to inform how you approach women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:47 AM
4

How is it degrading? Do you watch porn?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:37 AM
5

How is it fringe if 87% of people fantasize about it? You’re just throwing around “normal” like that makes monogamy good. Not everyone wants to be like you. Stop trying to suggest they should.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:27 AM
8

Three ways are like the most common fantasy in the world. Almost 90% of person have them. So the difference is a woman can be with a red pill guy who has the need to constantly reinforce his vanilla ass no-fun sex is this one thing and anything else is gross mentality, or she can fuck a guy who knows how to live a little. Edit to add: politics aside, part of the reason women prefer non redpill men is because redpillers are sexually repressed.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:00 AM
1

Idk if I’m a 1% poster, but I’m unfortunately 100% straight. I’m into cucking to the extent that I’ve bulled for other couples. Monogamy is a red pill concept. Im non-monogamous but have gone long stretches in monogamous relationships before and don’t strictly oppose it. And you also say all this like it’s a a bad thing. There’s nothing wrong with being bi or in an open relationship or hotwifing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:40 AM
–

Exactly. When blue pillers say “just be yourself” what do people think they mean? They mean be authentic. Be real and look for someone who will appreciate it. I don’t think that’s the same as saying looks don’t matter or that you don’t have to put effort into being appealing. But it’s closer to what OP is describing: doing some self examination to figure out who you. Confidence builds organically from that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 01:35 PM
–

I don’t think aligning your inner and outer selves is anywhere close to the core of red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 12:34 PM
3

From another person’s perspective, “love bombing” is just someone being nice to them and gassing them up. Which is why it’s effective for picking up women with low self esteem like u/lafrescatrumpeta mentioned. Also this whole thing of pointing to celebrities as proof of women’s innate preferences is stupid. BPD is a “clinical outlier to predict women’s general mating preferences” but fucking Johnny Depp isn’t? Give me a break. If it came out that Angelina Jolie may have been abusive to Brad Pit…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 12:22 PM
–

I don’t totally disagree, but your point is a little self contradictory isn’t it? You’re saying too many stats are given and that these aren’t reliable indicators of what’s likely to come, but you’re also providing stats that are pretty much in line with the stats I’ve seen regarding Gen Z and the discourse around dating (I.e. less people are doing it). You’re also saying we shouldn’t hand wave away the implications of these stats, but you seem to be suggesting that the marriage numbers will lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 05:38 AM
-1

Freely consenting adults can do whatever they want and that shouldn’t be policed. But exploitation itself is obviously unethical, almost by definition. Laws against statutory rape, for instance, are defending against exploiting a kind of power imbalance. If we want to dig into moral philosophy, Kant argues that the worst thing a person can do is to reduce a person to their sheer utility. The most extreme example would be slavery, which is a maximally exploited power imbalance. But Kent’s definit…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 12:46 AM
2

I think “passport bros” have a lot of guilt by association similar to age gap relationship enjoyers. Some of it is earned, some of it not. There’s nothing wrong with dating outside your age range or culture. What is wrong is exploiting a power imbalance. The messaging that western women have been spoiled by equality and progressive values is very conservative and gross, and speaks to the power imbalance that those guys mean to exploit. And I’ll be honest, that’s what I think of when I hear “pass…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/26 12:02 AM
-1

I guess I’m one of these people you’re talking about because I wholly disagree. I almost never see people insisting that there’s no pressure to conform to gender roles, but I often see people presupposing that men and women just “are” this way or that. If you say “actually, men and women aren’t a monolith and sexuality can be fluid,” there are a lot more people who pretty much roll their eyes and say “yeah whatever” before immediately going back to talking about attraction like it’s objective.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 08:35 PM
8

I’m using “dogwhistle” loosely, but for example I was getting along pretty well with a woman recently. She was very much a liberal type like myself, but in scrolling her socials I saw an old pic of her wearing a “world’s best misandrist” shirt. It wasn’t just that, but being on the fence about her I just thought nah. Not worth it. Another time I was hooking up with a pretty gorgeous, very smart woman. She’d been an Olympic qualifier, ran a mile everyday with weights, and had multiple degrees. Bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 04:52 PM
7

Agreed. Knowing dogwhistles has also helped me flag a date or two as femcels.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 03:57 PM
16

I agree with this. I recently heard that a good relationship involves both people being “quick to apologize, quick to forgive,” and I think that’s true. When I’ve been in healthy relationships that’s how it felt, and when I’ve been in unhealthy ones it felt like that’s what was missing. That is what is meant by “unconditional,” I think. That your love for a person is based on your appreciation for them as a person over any one behavior or disagreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 06:09 PM
21

I’m being sarcastic, suggesting that Jude believes that misrepresenting his intentions was somehow her fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 03:06 PM
11

What does this anecdote even suggest? Would Jude not have been friends with her or nice to her if he knew from the start that she enjoys having fun? If his friendship and niceties are contingent on her being a shy little prude, then why would she let him know about her freak side?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 02:08 PM
21

Why would she do that to him?!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 02:02 PM
3

Ah I did my bad
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 07:11 PM
1

Look I’m not trying to bash you for struggling with sex. If it’s a point of insecurity that’s valid. But I do think examining that might help you. Having a healthy relationship to your own sexuality goes a long way in being perceived as fuckable to other people. In particular, women want to feel safe, but a guy who feels indignant rage and personal jealousy because she has sex is scary.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:04 PM
-2

Sex is fun and interesting. Hemorrhoids rarely are.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 05:38 PM
14

This is such a bullshitty answer. It’s like saying “being bigoted against racists is wrong,” or “bullying people for hurting nerds is wrong.” You know why it’s wrong, you just don’t care.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 05:56 AM
1

That misses the point that “easiness doesn’t equal immorality.” They wouldn’t call those single digit chads immoral sluts for choosing to sleep with a bunch of women, even though they’re lucky. And anyway that is obviously not why people slut shame women. They don’t do it for any logical reason, really. They do it because since birth they were taught that sex is bad and shameful and that women are the ones who have to enforce that social more, because men won’t. So they internalize a sexist worl…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 04:28 AM
19

Precisely. And it’s worth mentioning that it’s also morally fucked up when real issues, like pedophilia and mental health, get used as cover to abuse people for their sexualities. Like when transphobes incessantly imply that trans people are pedophiles, or when sexists harp about blue haired “sluts” all having mental health issues. It’s fucked up and gross how puritans latch onto these issues only to disingenuously suggest that anyone who isn’t ashamed of their sexuality must be some predatory d…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 03:15 AM
35

To build off of this, slut shaming is wrong for the same reason that homophobia and transphobia are wrong. Religious excuses don’t excuse homophobia or transphobia, but neither do any excuses, because the fundamental problem with stigmatizing people for their sexual orientation, sexual identity, or sexual desires is that you are attacking groups of people for their most private, vulnerable, and personal domain of their lives. You are projecting to society that it is okay to police who these peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 02:00 AM
9

You aren’t a dictionary. You’re just taking men’s ability to discuss a real thing that happens away. When that happens they turn to people who do give them a vocabulary for discussing sexism they face. I’d prefer the people discussing this with them not also be sexists.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 03:42 PM
4

And yet
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 02:35 PM
23

35 1: Single (with FWB and regularly dating) 2: I’m aware of redpill. I actively oppose it. My interest in this sub stems mostly from an interest in psychology and fascination with gender politics. I also hate misandrists for making feminism sound like hypocritical bullshit and driving men to the right. I feel like this is the best theater to clown on them while showing young men that opposing misandry doesn’t require you to become a misogynist. You can oppose both.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 01:01 PM
5

Why isn’t it realistic that people stop generalizing and criticizing groups on the basis of gender? You probably can’t make everyone stop being sexist, but if other bigotries are frowned upon why shouldn’t sexism be?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 12:47 PM
3

I think the definition of blue pill is much murkier than red pill, especially when it comes to dating advice. Red pill dating advice is basically evolutionary psychology explanations filtered through social media (a problem that evo-psych already experiences, since those researchers are already tasked with explaining millennia from the context of right now). But it’s fair to say that it can be boiled down to men presenting as protector/providers types and women presenting as doting monogamists. …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 05:20 AM
12

Doesn’t most blue pill advice boil down to “be your genuine self?”
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 04:13 AM
2

That response is confusing. What I’m getting at is that if you dated men, you’d likely discover that the issue is dating, interpersonal relationships, and probably some things you’re doing in these relationships. Not gender. Regardless, there’s no excuse to be a bigot.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 05:53 AM
1

I don’t think you can fairly make these kinds of judgments about women until you’ve dated men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 05:35 AM
2

I accept both. Do you?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 07:04 PM
2

It’s actually kind of striking how similar sex negative feminism is to religiously conservative sex negativity, which is why they support all the same policies (e.g. banning porn, criminalizing sex work, being anti-kink, socially enforcing sexual purity). In both cases the womb is sort of sanctified as the seat of women’s power and importance. Sex is framed as inherently violating to her, and there’s a belief that her sexual decisions don’t just offend her honor, but the honor of her community (…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:59 PM
1

I think men and women should be free to watch or read whatever they want. Kink shaming people in either case is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:41 PM
2

It makes me think women are envisioning their ideal committed partner, whereas men are reporting which women are most sexually appealing to them. But idk, as a woman do older men get more attractive to you as you’ve aged? Or do younger men starting looking less good?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:35 PM
1

Women who weaponize that situation to hurt men are immature and bad. I don’t disagree with that. But all you can do with that information is decide to not care what they think and continue to operate in a way that doesn’t hurt people. I think the reason we don’t see that behavior in movies but see it in high fantasy books is because those books are framed within a fantasy world. They aren’t in romcoms anymore because they’d hit too close to home, and we can’t unsee the problematic behavior as a …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:28 PM
2

OP basically says that learning how to romance women involves learning how to manipulate them. My take is that all social interaction involves “manipulation,” in that sense. (I.e. it’s manipulative to tell a joke to someone you want to be friends with. It’s manipulative to take on more responsibility at work so you can ask for a raise). If a woman expects a guy to plan a date, be charming, and maintain an air of mystery (rather than professing his interest in her), then a guy following suit stri…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 05:29 PM
1

I mean, do you disagree with her post here?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 05:13 PM
–

That’s basically how I feel. Its sort of like hustle culture: the motivation to improve your life isn’t bad. It’s the wholesale adoption of a toxic attitude as like an ideology that is a red flag, especially when the people who get wrapped up in it seem to lose the ability to view things any other way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 04:58 PM
1

I disagree with the assumption that women sleeping around automatically means a woman is unstable, or that it inevitably results in her regretting casual sex. But I fully agree that these guys are hypocrites projecting that onto women. I actually seriously doubt that they know many women who lament all the casual sex they’ve had. I’ve met women who say they had periods of promiscuity and don’t do it anymore, but it’s usually in a “been there, done that,” kind of way. I don’t think I’ve ever met …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 04:41 PM
2

I feel like Lilith’s perspective has slowly shifted to be more nuanced in a way that’s actually pretty heartening.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 04:35 PM
2

I think sexism is fueled by the sexless, and we live in this weird time where sexist losers have an outsized voice online (and in government). But people will get tired of being told that it’s shameful to like sex and romance, and that liking men/women makes them a gender traitor. It’s why radical feminists lost the sex battles in the seventies.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 04:19 PM
7

Some women fully understand the dynamics you wrote about in your post and exploit them because they hate men. They’re just bad people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 04:00 PM
11

OP, I think that’s all basically accurate, but there’s a way to reframe these things so they aren’t a complaint so much as an understanding. 1: The boldness women seek in romantic partners can easily be framed as creepy if they aren’t into the guy. The takeaway for guys: One woman doesn’t get to unilaterally decide for all women what is acceptable. If you respected ethical boundaries, then you shouldn’t feel bad if one person took offense to you asking if she wants to dance. 2: A lot of women co…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 03:28 PM
–

Dom Daddy Little Girl (DDLG) is a kink. It’s basically what you describe. And it’s perfectly fine for a woman to have this kink and to enjoy acting submissive to a protector/provider man. But there’s a huge difference between practicing DDLG as a kink and adopting it as a lifestyle without any kink awareness. It sounds like you’re clocking why this is a problem: 1: She’s internalized a bunch of patriarchal precepts that she unironically believes men and women should follow. 2: She hates men for …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 02:09 PM
–

I like subby women too, but would never date one who brats as a lifestyle without being kink aware.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:25 PM
–

Very good point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:20 PM
2

I understand. A lot of how we talk about feminism is contextual. I think it’s fair to say that much of online feminism has been co-opted by radical feminists. Exclusionary radical feminists perspectives override and force out inclusive/liberal/equality-based perspectives. That’s true whether we’re talking trans people, sex workers, or male allies. But this sub sort of showcases how unpopular their takes are with the general public, because they can’t win by actively excluding dissenting or censo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 08:51 PM
2

That’s not true for me. I want liberal feminism to win out over boys-vs-girls feminism. That’s a normal thing to want if you care about gender equality, and the idea that it somehow makes a person a misogynist to think feminists shouldn’t practice or endorse sexism is flawed.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 05:44 PM
3

we just wish more reasonable feminists would put a leash on the radical ones. Hard agree. I wish more anti-sexist women would tell exclusionary radical feminists that liberal feminism is a valid expression of feminism, and radical feminism just makes feminism overall look hypocritical and unappealing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 05:42 PM
3

OP is on the money that the rates are almost identical, but the relative ease of identifying physical abuse compared to more nebulous psychological abuse, coupled with social pressures that discourage men from identifying as victims of women, create an illusion that female abusers exploit. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that a woman hitting a man is not the same as the opposite. It strikes me as disingenuous when MRAs pretend that size differences are irrelevant. But I have no doubt that…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 03:23 PM
3

Women know that women are capable of abuse too, and women know that abuse can be psychological and emotional.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 03:02 PM
–

I’m 100% a leftist, I’m just a liberal feminist. I don’t think people should tolerate gender essentialist, right wing talking points parroted by “feminists” like you, because there’s a morally consistent framework for my feminism. Unlike radical feminists, I think everyone is born equal and there is no essential difference based on gender, and that gender based discrimination is wrong. Edit to add: I’m actually not “sowing division.” I’m doing the opposite: preaching equality. If your feminism t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 01:41 PM
–

I’m a leftist man and 100% agree. Its not just that radical feminism excludes men, it’s that it promotes illiberal ideas (e.g. “porn should be illegal,” “men and women are too different to be considered equal“ “sexism is a tool we can use to hurt the patriarchy”), so it actively drives away left-leaning and moderate men who otherwise might make good allies. I don’t blame a young man for turning to the dark side when they’re encountering people like u/Difficult-Value-2670 online and seeing how mu…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 01:07 PM
3

I dated a cute trad girl in college. She was second gen Taiwanese raised conservatively in Texas. We had a pretty great relationship for four years, before she transferred to Oxford. As nice as it was I think I’ve always sought someone who I relate to more as a person besides. I’m not letting one person turn me off queer or alternative women. Everybody’s different.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:51 PM
4

Soft, sweet, and submissive is fine as a kink but I prefer an equal outside of the bedroom.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 08:04 PM
1

What about people who are competent at dealing with complex relational structures? Should it matter to them if some dumbasses who can barely handle one relationship disapprove of their polycule or whatever?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 04:36 PM
1

What if you fucked other people in your community?! Maybe that could work too!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 04:23 PM
2

Yeah. And I don’t take freakonomics as gospel. But I think there’s a pretty clear reason states with more progressive policies are better educated, wealthier, and have lower crime stats. Red policies are typically more short-term-at-the-expense-of-long-term solutions, while blue policies are the opposite. If you overpolice drugs, you’ll get some criminals off the street. If you disproportionately incarcerate black men, you’re also taking fathers, brothers, uncles, and family support off the stre…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 02:59 PM
6

Oh it was a couple years ago and I’m pretty much over it. I just have zero empathy for people who would use a break up to vilify people for transitioning or coming out. Those people need to get over themselves. Even the term “trans widow” is hilariously pathetic and self victimizing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 02:29 PM
6

I think they mean that, to your point, states with abortion access have significantly reduced crime rates, at least partially because more abortions equals less kids growing up in extreme poverty and unstable housing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 01:59 PM
2

I’m an empath. Sometimes I can tell how a person is feeling by imagining that’s how they feel and then instantly deciding I’m right.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 01:54 PM
1

Why not pair bond with multiple people?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 01:52 PM
4

I’ll speak to this as a straight cis man. While I’m very open, sexually, my partner was always more fluid than me. She was bi, which I did think was a bonus because it might get me involved in FFM threesomes eventually. Alas. What did happen is that she eventually asked about transitioning. I scoffed and told her I wouldn’t be attracted to her if she were a man, which she did take offense to. Then, during the pandemic, she fell down a radfem rabbit hole and became a lesbian separatist, leaving m…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 01:26 PM
2

I hear what you’re saying, but her argument is so loaded with sex negativity that I don’t buy it. I find with this type of discussion, there’s often a lot of motte and Bailey arguments. The easily defensible argument (for instance, that you personally felt socially pressured to dress for male gratification in the name of empowerment felt disempowering), is valid. But OP is talking about changing the language around to suggest the opposite: that in order to prevent situations where one is told th…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/25 05:38 AM
3

No, I’m clarifying that your position harms women. Your position questions the societal impact of women’s sexual behavior. By holding this position, you normalize questioning the social cost/benefit of women’s sexual behavior, which normalizes the evaluation of women based on their sexual behavior, which normalizes the policing of women’s bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 08:28 PM
3

As stated, the suggestion that someone else’s opinions of a woman’s sexual exploits IS the problem. Why is your opinion (that validation is commodified; that sex is not, or should not be perceived as, empowering) relevant? It’s the implication that it is moral to evaluate women through the lens of their sexual history that is the problem. That is itself a form of control that’s socially enforced for women in a way that it isn’t enforced against men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 07:42 PM
25

Boys vs girls bullshit. Men and women like sex, commitment, and each other. The vast majority of women aren’t going to turn femcel to support your gender war.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:52 PM
4

Most people identify with liberal feminists values. Most people who’d say they support feminism but don’t consider themselves “feminists” identify with the values of liberal feminism, not radical feminism. This gets distorted online where the people identifying as feminists are doing so in radical feminist spaces, where liberal feminism is largely excluded. That’s not to say radical feminism hasn’t gone mainstream. It’s more to point out that even if online spaces are dominated by radical femini…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 05:46 AM
3

Exclusionary radical feminists are. But they’re basically incels with vaginas. Liberal feminism doesn’t oppose women’s sexual liberation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:17 AM
8

Whether women have too much sexual freedom.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:09 AM
7

It is about personal choice though. Your argument is basically that society has done too much to sexually liberate women, to the point that it cheapens sex by commodifying it. How does this reduce agency in any way shape or form? How, specifically, does it reduce long term well being? This argument relies on a lot of presumptions about sex: that it should be reserved for a man and a woman in a committed romantic relationship. That sex outside of that dynamic is harmful. And that sex is harmful t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 10:58 PM
1

I think that’s sort of splitting hairs if we’re talking about it from an evo-psych perspective. You could argue that women like men who can procure drugs, celebrity access, and exclusive parties because these are signs that the man is genetically predisposed to be agreeable, high EQ, higher intelligence, and extroverted. Or you could say it the other way around, that women like men with those personality traits because it can afford them those material benefits. It’s sort of chicken or the egg.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 10:41 PM
–

I could be open to this as a social experiment, if we chat some more and confirm that you’re a safe person. There’s also the ethical concern that you couldn’t actually follow through on any dates you lineup and it’d be catfishing, and I’d be a little worried about maybe getting by flagged by the app for hav in separate profiles. Still, if this is something you’re interested in we could chat more to formalize it as an experiment.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/25 06:10 AM
1

I have people arguing with me that simp-ism is bad because it causes men to be too nice women, and you arguing with me that pick-me-ism is bad because it causes women to over sympathize with men. Neither are true. Most well adjusted people would be called simp by incels and pick mes by femcels.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 10:44 PM
1

There are plenty of situations where people kill each other for stupid reasons. The way these terms are used colloquially isn’t to call out one in a million toxic behavior, but to deride people for allying with the opposite sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 09:13 PM
1

There are users and doormats in the world. But that’s not really how simp or pick me get used. Most of the time when someone is called a “simp” it’s a man defending women’s rights. Most of the time when a woman gets called a pick me, it’s a woman who likes things men like or who unapologetically likes men. In both cases, the subtext is that the simp/pick me is harming their gender by relating to the opposite gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 07:50 PM
-3

“Simp” is a sexist term used to malign men who care about women. Likewise, “pick me” is a sexist term used to denigrate women who care about men. Edit: calling a man a simp is misogynistic, not misandrist, because the implication is that caring about women is bad. Calling a woman a pick me is misandrist for the inverse reason. Both terms imply that someone is a gender traitor for caring about or sympathizing with the opposite gender, which is textbook discrimination.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 06:27 PM
5

The idea that people should enjoy being marginalized because it prevents monoculture is ridiculous on its face. No, I don’t think it’s a good thing when the mainstream bullies a subculture. I don’t think “they get to enjoy being called freaks by normies.” This is a weird argument that I’ve seen a few times, expressed in a few different ways, and it’s highly alarming. Examples (paraphrased): More intense patriarchal attitudes are actually good for women because they heighten the expectation place…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:57 PM
1

I speak up when I see swerf rhetoric. But it’s bad for the discourse when they can just say that men complain about women reading fictitious stories. Both arguments promote sex negativity. It’s better to genuinely hold the position you’re representing (I.e. people should be allowed to explore and express their sexuality however they see fit as long as it’s consensual) and argue it from there, since there isn’t a defensible reason that someone else’s discomfort with people’s sex should override t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:45 PM
2

Who is saying that this is transcendent? Can you point me to one person saying that Morning Glory Milking Farm made them transcend?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:29 PM
1

I agree that men and women aren’t different, at least not on an intrinsic level. Their sexualities, ambitions, struggles, and life experiences aren’t fundamentally more noble or shameful than one another’s. They don’t love or hate or fear differently, even if it gets expressed differently. But I don’t think watching porn is bad, and I don’t think reading smut is bad. I do think it’s bad to shame people for watching porn or reading smut. There’s no reason to shame people for masturbating or engag…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:20 PM
7

People are allowed to be weird. I think that’s fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:13 PM
2

Yeah. Kink shaming is wrong even if you don’t personally share the kink.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:12 PM
4

it destroys gender narratives Good. Fuck gender narratives. We need less sexist enforcing of gender norms, not more. Gender narratives result in double standards for both men and women and reinforce sexism at a social level, which is why patriarchy exists in the first place: because men and women aren’t viewed and treated the same. They’re discriminated against because of their gender. women behaving (and failing) in the same way men do is a step up (especially if your showing it off). How is re…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:02 PM
1

Define “unhealthy.” it’s not what decides if the attachment/obsession is healthy or not. What decides if an attachment id healthy or not? And what even is an attachment to a fictitious character? Why would it matter if it’s avoidant, anxious, anxious-avoidant, or secure? when the driving motivation is obviously negative like “This character is yearning something insane for this woman. No one has ever done that for me.” Again, why is that negative, why does it matter if it’s a fictitious characte…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 01:54 PM
1

Insecurity is the only reason to hate women for their sexual histories. Shaming women for that is hateful and sexist, so it does bother me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 01:04 AM
2

As is like anything else. If you want to be good at it, it takes practice. And I’m guessing based off of your regurgitated puritan bullshit that you’re no authority on good sex. And you can slut shame all you want, but to me it wouldn’t matter if a woman slept with half the party. I’m not worried that any of those guys are better in bed than me, because I’ve slept with the other half of the party. So why would I be afraid she’d leave me when I’m the best she’s ever had?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:45 AM
3

If you have more sex with more people you will get better at sex. Also, the important part of what I’m saying is that a promiscuous woman is just more fun. She has more joie de vivre. Shes the life of the party and she everyone’s happier when she’s around. If you can handle a woman like that (as in not get jealous and insecure) then you’re the luckiest guy in the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 12:33 AM
1

They do it consciously because they feel that this particular setup would or would not be best for them even if they’re still attracted to the 22 year old waitress. I find a 22 year old waitress attractive, but I’m not attracted to her in the same way that I’m attracted to a 32 year old photographer/librarian. And I don’t think that distinction is irrelevant since it seems like the same distinction women make in dating. To be clear, I think you’re wrong to think men and women process these types…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:34 PM
–

This is semantics. When we say “hate speech” we mean hatred as in prejudice and bigotry. When u/N_Count_Council says “they convince themselves they don’t [hate men],” he’s clearly referring to hate in the sense of prejudice, not the emotion.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 11:24 PM
0

And when that happens, people can choose to abort, adopt, or raise it themselves. But they shouldn’t be able to choose to make someone else raise it against their choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 07:45 PM
4

Bio essentialist sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:38 PM
2

I mean, that probably does happen. I’m sure if you checked their search history it’d have a lot of “sluts” “milf,” “mature,” “pawg” etc. probably in a strong correlation to how fixated they are on those issues
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 03:40 PM
-3

I think it’s extremely likely that you’re correct. People project all the time. I’d extend this to say that most of the anti-sex crowd are the ones who struggle the most with their sex drives, and the frustration they feel at suppressing their own sexuality comes out as angst against people who aren’t abstaining.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 12:58 PM
7

Id add that media plays a role (and always has) in shaping people’s perceptions of what “average” is as well. In Seinfeld, Jerry dates 73 women. In a lot of sitcoms there’s a different love interest practically every week. And a lot of the male love interests romcoms are quickly established as cavalier “chads” who have their pick of the litter with women. Because these are stories, and because “Chad” is also mostly fictitious. The reason world famous actors like James Franco were getting MeToo’d…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:02 AM
–

I think they’re different crimes that are wrong for the same ethical reason. But i think part of the difference is that stealthing is a sex crime whereas lying about being in birth control to get pregnant is more like a financial crime.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:48 AM
4

The equivalent of a guy who takes offense to rejection is a woman who takes offense to rejection. Women who complain about fuck bois are like men who complain about women “leading them on.” Manipulative men and women exist, but you need to keep in mind that every time you hear these complaints, they’re coming from someone who is bitter because they felt entitled to someone else’s body or entitled to someone else’s commitment, and it’s a lot more likely that the jilted party is justifying their b…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 10:27 PM
0

“If you pay for my Farris I’ll fuck hot girls.” (Not an actual quote. Just the subtext).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 12:32 PM
6

This is a human thing. It’s also partly a pill-issue. If someone is making red-pill arguments, you might infer a bunch of their other beliefs. For instance the financial/abortion thing. They see themselves as calling out hypocrisy in your party platform. Which can be misguided, but it isn’t always. They it’s bad faith actors, they might not want to admit their anti-choice because it’s inconvenient to their financial-choice position, for instance. And as regards personal relationships, arguments …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 10:35 PM
–

when it comes to glorifying the act online. You use this term “glorifying” a lot. What do you mean by it? You’re talking about sex as if it’s a form of worship. a majority of women who do CNC seem to be wanting to chase the feeling of some past trauma. You have it backwards. They don’t want the feeling of a consent violation. They want the context of a consent violation with a different feeling. This can allow them to reclaim a sexual event in their lives in a safe and controlled environment wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 01:31 PM
2

None of these words are actually hard. Tell me what “big word” got you and I can clarify, or you can look it up. Edit: I hate this stupid ass way of arguing. Your inability to understand something isn’t my problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:39 PM
2

I could dumb it down, but all of those words in the order I said them make sense. If you need help with any of them let me know.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:24 PM
0

Bahahahahhahaaa
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:17 PM
0

Men already know that women largely don’t orgasm from PIV. You are being too gracious. A lot of these guys have only slept with a few people, if that. A lot of these guys are embarrassed to talk about sex, especially with women. And what little they know mostly comes from porn. And I’m pro porn, but it isn’t a good basis for understanding what women like sexually. The best thing for that is listening to your partner in a non-defensive way and trying things they like, free from judgment. Which it…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 11:16 PM
2

I agree that the guys you’re responding to are giving toxicity levels that break Geiger counters, but OP sounds like a stand up guy and I think it’s rude you’re attacking one of his insecurities.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:58 PM
1

Ah yes. The mentally healthy response of choosing to perceive your partner’s sexual needs as a direct repudiation of your immutable physical characteristics.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 10:32 PM
4

To clarify, the “desire = lack” part is woo woo. There isn’t an intrinsic moral goodness or wrongness about base jumping, or having sex, or splurging on that extra shot mocha latte. Equating delay of gratification with purity ascribes an undue moral relevance to it, which gets used to shame people for being human.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 03:25 PM
3

No. That’s woo woo
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 03:15 PM
12

Thinking that everyone who can cheat will is such cope from people who are optimistic that even one person will like them enough to stay with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 02:13 PM
2

Anyone telling you that pleasure is bad and should be resisted is selling something, or moral grandstanding to make themselves feel better.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 01:53 PM
1

That’s a fair point. But I lived in the burbs for about a year, and when I moved to the city my matches went up ten fold. I figure it’s because people in the suburbs might set their radius to 30 miles, but women in the city will more likely have it set to three. So even if you’re within half an hour of a city you aren’t in the zone of all the people there.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 03:08 AM
2

I think “monogamish” relationships have and will continue to be more normalized. I don’t think this is an expression of imbalanced power dynamics though. Most people at some point in their lives would welcome the opportunity to have a threesome with their emotionally committed partner. The idea that you couple up in your 20s and are exclusively attracted to one person to one person for the next fifty years is bunk. Maybe couples don’t go full polyamorous, but in an increasingly liberated world w…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/25 06:22 PM
1

Yep. I think red pill has actually done an effective job articulating the core tenets of the patriarchy. It could be written out like this: Men and women are spiritually different, and this difference is that men like sex because it increases their essential value and women dislike sex because it decreases their essential value, which is rooted in their ability to bear and raise their husband’s children. Sex is transactional between a provider/protector class of men and a nurturer/caretaker clas…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 08:29 PM
3

Same. I like fun promiscuous women and consider myself fun and promiscuous. Doesn’t mean I’m going cheat, just means that I’d get more out of a relationship with someone who enjoys sex for fun and pleasure (and I get the feeling a lot of these anti-sex red and pink pilled people would not be fun, and probably deal with a lot of sexual strife in their relationships).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 08:01 PM
1

Perhaps a better way of saying it is “religion is rooted in gender roles”
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 04:12 PM
1

And to think all this time you’ve missed the paragon of religiously back gendered equality, Catholicism
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 04:07 PM
1

I don’t think there’s an agenda behind it, but that doesn’t mean that oppressive power structures haven’t cropped up more or less organically, with some people recognizing and exploiting them and most people inadvertently playing into these power structures by normalizing them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 04:05 PM
2

I think there are a lot of women who fall outside of “crazy” and “obedient.” Would you agree?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 01:04 AM
1

Men jokingly fetishize women’s mental health and women will joke about how they’re pathologically drawn to bad guys (like truckers and prisoners). More blatantly misogynistic men go after waifish women explicitly because they’re compliant, which obviously can play to abusive power dynamics. But I think in all cases this can be about abusive power/control when people unironically prefer emotionally unstable women or socially disadvantaged men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/25 01:00 AM
2

I theorize that women who like “bad boys” and men who like “the crazy/quiet/docile ones” are both attracted to people who’d struggle to escape their abuse. The abusers like knowing they have the upper hand socially and emotionally.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 11:04 PM
1

Exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 04:09 AM
1

As an aside: there was more drama behind the scenes of this movie than probably any other of the past decade.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 11:44 PM
-1

“It did what all ads are supposed to do: create an anxiety relievable by purchase.”
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 11:36 PM
1

I just named a few ideological tenets of the red pill. Can you go ahead and name some blue pill tenets?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:34 PM
3

Red pill is an “ideology” in that it puts forth ideological tenets. “Men like sex and women don’t, but women just leverage sex for provision and protections afforded to them by men. Women pursue high value men because it is their nature to be hypergamous. Despite not actually liking sex, women go through a phase where they slut themselves out to high value men before settling for betas out of a desperate need for emotional security, and to ensure the survival of their children.” Blue pill isn’t …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:22 PM
7

Blue Pill is resistance to red/black/pink pill ideology. As u/Lift_and_Lurk pointed out, a lot of red pillars consider TRP a “toolkit” for understanding relationship dynamics. Fair enough, but is that how red pillers in these threads really treat these “tools?” No, not at all. They often treat them like gospel, form a particular lens and worldview around them, and insist “this is the way the world works. This is how men and women are.” So I would say TRP (and black and pink pill as offshoots) is…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:03 PM
6

Ngl I totally get not linking to a comment or thread. It’s Reddit, not a research paper. Unless he was on r/sex_positivity or a similar sub about sex I 100% believe it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:36 PM
5

This argument (OP’s) always seem so stupid to me, for a bunch of reasons. 1: it’s a false dichotomy. Having the same career opportunities as men isn’t at odds with their freedom to chose something else. 2; If you wanna argue that people aren’t freer toiling under capitalism, that’s a different conversation. 3: women want to be free to have the same opportunities as men. The relative liberty/golden manacles of a job exists regardless of an employees gender. There’s no logical, ethical reason a pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 09:15 AM
–

Agreed. It boils down to gender roles being forced on everyone, and a societal insistence that these roles are healthy and normal, and that anyone who doesn’t perform their gender role well must be the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 07:56 PM
-1

Empathy? lol
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:19 PM
11

I agree, but I also think many women underestimate how many women mean their rejection as an insult. There are women who just want an awkward interaction to end as quickly and harmlessly as possible, and then there are women who take offense to being hit on in a “you think I could ever find you attractive?” kind of way. I.e. if any of the misandrist women in this sub have ever gotten the opportunity to reject a guy, I’m sure they used that opportunity to make it hurt as a statement against men. …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 01:49 PM
–

Yeah. 10/10 troll post.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 10:57 PM
2

I’ve had this. Basically you connect, the sex is great, you get your hopes up and halo-effect the person. Then over time you realize the incompatibilities are probably deal breakers. For one of these for me, she told me she had bipolar. She was incredibly sweet though and phenomenal in bed. But over the course of six months I never met anyone else in her life, she was really bad at communicating, and really secretive. She was still a peach to hang out with but that was all we had. I broke up wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 10:48 PM
–

But generally people are like their friends, and when psychologists looked at whether there’s truth to “opposites attract,” they kind of found the opposite. Birds of a feather flock together. There’s a lot of evolutionary psychology research suggesting people are more attracted to those who possess similar (largely heritable) personality traits like intelligence and conscientiousness. Still, I don’t think you’re totally wrong that gender polarity makes people intriguing. I just don’t see it as a…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 10:50 PM
–

A lot of red pill relies on “polarity”; men being manly and women being feminine. And I think it’s interesting that people so different can get together and find romance. But I’m skeptical that people in these highly polarized relationships find much, if any, companionship in their partners. Also, the second you start talking about real relationships all of the gender woo falls apart, because people don’t all neatly conform to their gender roles
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 10:20 PM
4

I think there’s a false dichotomy between being good at sex and being good relationship material/“a good guy.” Young people should fuck around and get into relationships when they find someone who matches their weird.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 04:21 PM
1

Oh look, a gender essentialist arguing that sexism is feminism. Great.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 04:39 PM
4

It sort of depends how you define “feminism.” There’s liberal/intersectional/egalitarian feminism which frames patriarchy as an extension of “gender essentialist” or “gender determinist” beliefs. Basically feminism that opposes sexism as a whole. Then there’s exclusionary radical feminism, which embraces gender essentialist beliefs and frames patriarchal as a problem with men specifically. Radical feminists aren’t fighting for equality. I’ve argued with radical feminists in this sub about whethe…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 04:16 PM
6

Point me to the article that says [men] cannot understand why being a shoulder to cry on once in a while does not result in a total capitulation to his every need at all times. That’s not “science.” That’s sexism. You’re just taking a bunch of gender essentialist stereotypes, stating hyperbole around them, and reinforcing sexist talking points.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 01:07 PM
4

This is a good example of “gender woo.” You’re just repeating a sexist narrative that because women are women their friendships are more dear to them in a way male friendships can’t be and because men are (gross, shitty) men they only care about sex. People are people. They all have emotions. They all have sexuality. And you can’t know what’s in someone’s heart just because of what’s between their legs.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 11:33 AM
7

Easy. The divide comes from sexism, and from people accepting and enforcing sexist stereotypes. Stop taking “wo/men tend to be like this” to mean “it’s acceptable to discriminate against people on the basis of their gender/sex/orientation/body.” I understand that differences exist and that we need to account for them. But that never excuses overlooking a person’s personhood or making snap judgments based on their gender. That’s something the majority of men and women can get behind. But instead,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 03:50 AM
2

I think that speaks to their main point (in the title anyway). All things being equal, there’s not really a reason to believe that women like being single more than men do.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 04:14 PM
1

Not really, IMO. Purity myths are a big part of patriarchy. It’s basically buying into the idea that women are fragile little flowers, which justifies policing women’s bodies and bodily autonomy. The flip of that is the messaging that men are sexual brutes (who are one sexy ankle reveal away from ravishing women), which justifies the need for social shaming of women’s sexual expression. But on the whole I would say patriarchal messaging is very kind to men. It respects men in a way that it does …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 03:51 PM
-1

I think that “nice guy,” in this context, describes a cluster of internalized patriarchal beliefs. 1): men’s sexual desire is offensive while women’s sexuality is pure. 2): true love purifies male sexual desire, making it inoffensive. 3): chivalry proves true love. This creates a psychological complex. They believe men karmically earn women (and sex) through chivalry. It justifies their hatred of “chad,” their feeling of entitlement to sex, and their splitting of women into romanticized Madonnas…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 01:21 PM
7

Hear hear
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 07:43 AM
6

Feminism has never been about presenting women as docile little lambs. It has always been about women’s struggles to be taken seriously and treated with the same respect afforded to men. Femininity’s association with cuteness, and the way that centers men and undermines women’s ability to be taken seriously, is a major theme of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman: With Strictures on Political and Moral Subjects (1792). The oft-lamented sexual revolution applied this same concept to sexuality. T…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 07:39 AM
2

Yikes
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 11:53 PM
5

Of course people create a negative self image when confronted with negative responses. A consistent sense of self is healthy and important, but you’d have to be delusional to completely divorce it from others’ perception of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:43 PM
4

I think the people dismissing them are also sexist and immoral though, so I don’t see how that in any way justifies bullying OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 09:03 PM
7

I don’t think that’s a good excuse to invalidate people’s experiences with racism, or even just their experiences with rejection generally. I wouldn’t belittle or judge an unattractive woman if she said she’d had bad experiences with men. I’d believe her, but want her to know that not all guys are like that (which is the truth), rather than acting like one of the men she described.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 04:17 PM
7

Looks mattering isn’t misandrist. The misandrist part is dismissing and ridiculing OP for caring. I.e. if a woman complained about men not agreeing to date her, and someone replied “she’s probably >30% BMI,” and someone else said “30% BMI can still land men. My bet would be >70%” I would consider those men misogynists.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 03:15 PM
7

Just a reminder to any young guys reading this who may feel attacked. A lot of the women making comments like this are middle aged, married misandrists trolling you because they’re unhappy in their relationships. Ignore them. Not all women are like this. When people say “online isn’t reflective of the real world” this is what they’re talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 02:17 PM
4

I agree with that. But right now “touch grass” “it’s a small, vocal minority” and “men shouldn’t take internet comments so personally” are part of a gender essentialist narrative that men shouldn’t participate in gender politics (because men should be strong, stoic, and held to a higher standard than weak, emotional, irresponsible women who can’t be expected to not be bigoted online).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:56 PM
3

In an ideal world we could burn down social media. In the real world we can’t, so we should do what we can. Confront gender essentialism. Shout down incels and radfems. And help people see that not everyone is a sexist POS.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:51 PM
7

You can’t reduce the rate of information flow and you can’t constrict others’ right to information. Democracy requires participation. The only solution to address online radicalization is to shout it down when you see it. Be within the first ten comments. Support reasonable takes that don’t turn everything into a childish boys vs. girls argument. Stand on the merits of your argument. Call misogynists and misandrists out. Be smart and kind.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:44 PM
14

Opinions do change and they matter. We see that more clearly in America because it influences elections and policy. Cultural shifts are felt, and unaddressed gate elements quickly into radicalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:34 PM
2

I don’t understand why you’d get so upset about people not being enraged by touch. For instance, in France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece, and most of Latin America, lots of women kiss each other in the cheek to greet each other. Does that bother you? And if not, how is that different from other sexualized light affection like patting a butt? It’s almost like these modes of being playful are socially constructed, and you’re forcing your puritan outrage into them. You are mad that they aren’t ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:49 PM
1

If someone doesn’t feel threatened or violated by a harmless touch, why the need to impose harm on either of them? Why do you need to take offense for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:50 PM
0

Y’all are so afraid of touch it’s embarrassing. Also, in what country are liberal beta males running things?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 01:49 PM
8

Agree with all these points.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 01:22 PM
3

That would actually be hilarious to see the breakdown and it’s all 18-20M vs 45-65F
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 01:20 PM
3

I like the term gender woo and agree a lot of people develop weird, personalized pseudo science around gender. “Gender essentialism” is the term for thinking that men and women should be viewed, understood, and treated as essentially different than one another because of their gender. (I.e. “trans women aren’t women because they were assigned male at birth.” Even if they “pass” on every level, gender essentialists tend to be transphobes because they’re incapable of separating the person from the…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 12:48 PM
4

I’m glad to see people defending the apps. It’s a different dating landscape to be sure but the positives outweigh the negatives. It’s dehumanizing but you have literally thousands of options. Once you’re on a date it’s basically the same as it always was, with the exception that you may get ghosted or cut off inexplicably. But I think that’s actually kind of better. It’s like accelerated romance.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 05:20 AM
3

I agree that feminism is as necessary as ever, but also agree with OP’s conclusion that gender equality cannot be achieved through exclusionary feminism. It requires female and male advocacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 11:20 PM
1

Feminism is an egalitarian movement. Why would egalitarianism mutually exclude someone from being a feminist any more than it would exclude them from being a socialist or a BLM ally?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 11:18 PM
1

I don’t think the world is very sex positive at all. It’s not illegal to be gay, swing, or do most consensual things, but that hardly means it’s socially accepted. Shaming people for their sexual identities, orientations, or just for having a lot of sex hurts people socially far more than it benefits anyone. And more importantly as it contributes to the gender war, teaching men and women that sex is scary, important, and bad is unhealthy and causes them to develop unhealthy worldviews about men …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 05:47 AM
1

I’m not sure I understand what you mean. I think you’re saying that people have a natural or socialized proclivity towards submission or domination even in non-D/s dynamics, which I’d agree with. But I don’t see how that would make them fake. People can also choose to explore them intentionally or switch roles, so the existence of the roles is very much real.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 11:11 PM
3

I see the larger problem as online echo chambers. Feminist spaces aren’t meant to cater to men or their problems, and that’s fine and valid. The issue is that by excluding male allies’ perspectives, and with plenty of aggrieved and embittered female perspectives, exclusionary radical feminism has gone mainstream. Even inclusive female voices in feminism have a hard time being heard over thinly veiled misandrists who can discredit a liberal feminist take as “centering men.” And the issue with tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 07:39 PM
1

I think I’m gonna write a post about this later, but the main thing is that there’s a divide in feminism between intersection feminists (think humanist, egalitarian feminists who believe that dismantling patriarchy requires ending gender based discrimination) and the exclusionary radical feminists (think tErfs, swerfs, gender essentialists who believe that gender is the most important thing about a person, and who believe reverse sexism is required to tip the scales in women’s favor).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 07:17 PM
1

Totally agree. I think sex positivity in general would do a lot to dismantle gender war hostility. Pink/red/black pill ideologies reduce people to their gender roles and judge them for it. Kink explores gender roles through subversion and inversion without judgment. And what you learn by being kinky is that people are unique and their sexual attractions, interests, and the way they identify with sexuality is specific to them. The gender war makes a lot more sense when you realize the average Ame…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:41 PM
8

This is a bad take. Realistically, most consent violations are examples of men not “picking up on it.” The prevalence of consent violations is a testament to how problematic it is for people to internalize the subtext of the post, which is that “men should just know” and that sexual deference is unattractive because real men aren’t afraid of crossing boundaries when they’re unsure.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:29 PM
3

I think there are at least as many men who appreciate assertive women as there are assertive women. Guys who can’t appreciate a woman who knows what she wants and asks for it are missing out, but it also bums me out that women are socially pressured to be indirect about their desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:20 PM
0

I don’t think so. I wanted her to feel comfortable but I still knew how to melt into subspace. But being in subspace also made it harder to pay attention to how other dom/mes were doing as subs, so it’s difficult to say how the other groups were doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:46 PM
1

I used to think that when I was younger, but as I’ve gotten older I’ve recognized that there are a lot of Dom/sub couples who can enjoy that and it’s their right. I’d say I agree that gender binaries shouldn’t be enforced on people via gender binaries though.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:33 PM
5

The reality is that if people are going to be playing with power dynamics they should take the time to learn about them and how to set up clear boundaries and talks about consent. Short of that I think it’s dangerous and bad for women to enforce those gendered power dynamics as an expectation on men, just like men shouldn’t really be slapping/choking/getting kinky with it without prior consent. The main thing I’m arguing against is the idea that these dynamics shouldn’t require explicit communic…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:47 PM
1

I disagree. I can be switchy and have subbed plenty of times. It is, broadly speaking, an exchange of the sub’s trust for the skill/focus/effort that the Dom provides. Subbing can be an art unto itself. But what the post is talking about, IMO, is the underlying power dynamics present in the vanilla scene as an extension of gender binaries. I’m just saying that it’s hypocritical for women who’ve taken on the sub role to expect men men to be more dominant when most of those subby women could not D…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:44 PM
5

I of course know that skill. The point I’m making is that it can be hypocritical to be hypercritical of a skill you don’t have to possess and will never possess because of your prescribed gender role. Switches can go off and that’s valid, but women who strictly conform to their gender roles enforcing a patriarchal double standard is shitty at best and dangerous at worst, because it promotes rape culture by convincing men “they should just know” and that “they need to be more aggressive.” The act…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:22 PM
12

I’m just explaining the lack of empathy. I think it’s fine for a sub to expect that of a Dom, but misguided for a woman to expect a man to telepathically register her signals in a non-kink context and judge him for not acting brash enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:15 PM
4

Incidentally I was having this exact conversation with a sub last night. Subbing is easy, in the same way that taking a compliment is easy. You don’t have to think or do anything, just go along with what your scene partner wants. That said, some people can’t take compliments and some cant passively accept sexual energy. I was fine at it, but I was focused more on making my “Domme” feel comfortable and that it wasn’t stupid or silly for her to be dominant. Because of that I didn’t notice what oth…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:09 PM
15

Yeah, but also most women would be terrible at it. I’m thinking of a D/s workshop I went to where, at one point, the instructor Domme had all the D/s’s switch roles so the subs had to act dominant. It is laughable how bad most subs are at this. So to me, women complaining about guys not knowing how to read their minds sounds like brats complaining about fake Doms. They see these roles as an extension of some intuitive natural order, but in actuality knowing how to confidently initiate, seduce, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 03:28 PM
3

Yeah that is tricky and can feel dehumanizing at times, but I also understand why it’s a turn off to women if their first impression of a man is that he’s immediately developed a strong bond and may require her for his emotional well being.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:52 AM
6

Yeah, I don’t know why OP thinks they can just say “they claim it’s different women, but actually it’s not!” “Stage 1” (that men should be the pursuers in relationships) is not a feminist idea. If anything it’s a patriarchal idea that some feminists might tolerate since it’s relatively innocuous. “Stage 2” (demonization of male sexuality) is something that exclusionary feminists do. “Stage 3” (judging men for not pursuing) is not something inclusive or exclusionary feminists do. Misandrists aren…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:39 AM
1

Yup. I’m an adult, going out with other adults, to see if we’re compatible. It isn’t deceptive to sleep with someone on a first or second date and later decide that we probably shouldn’t be life partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:42 PM
1

Yeah. The women doing that are sexists. Their voices are small and don’t matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:35 PM
2

I agree. But many people will take offense to the idea of being fetishized, and there’s not really a way to have that conversation before you’ve engaged them as a potential object of your fetishization. Unless you meet through a fetish dating app or kink event. But more to your original point, I don’t think finding someone attractive because of their demographic rises to the level of “fetishization” on its own, much the way being attracted to skinny or tall people isn’t necessarily fetishizing t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:58 PM
5

I’ve seen fetishization talked about as “a specific kink that a person requires to get off.” But truthfully I think there’s a lot more grey area. Treating someone as just a sexual object because of their race would be fetishizing them in a morally wrong way, IMO. Finding a different culture or ethnicity alluring because they’re exotic to you isn’t inherently immoral.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:22 PM
3

That logic is easily extended to a fully solipsistic worldview. No one ever does anything that they do not do for themselves. Altruism does not and cannot exist. A monk who scales a mountain and lives alone in solitude tending to plants and animals does it because they think they’ll achieve enlightenment or whatever. A social worker who takes on the heavy dramas of people’s lives believes helping people will make them feel fulfilled. To be clear: this is stupid. People shouldn’t actively objecti…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:02 PM
–

Oh look, a straw man argument implying grown women aren’t mentally equipped to make choices about their bodies, used as fear mongering strategy to demonize sex. It’s embarrassing that you don’t see yourself as the conservative you are
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:38 PM
1

I can’t tell if you’re being serious or not, but the idea that sex is inherently harmful to even adult women and the gender politics of “male sexuality is essentially dangerous, scary, and bad for women who should be pure and safeguarded from men” is implicit in your purity culture bullshit. So again, explain to me how exactly your opinions aren’t red pilled. Like what specific red pill belief do you disagree with? Cause from where I stand you believe all the same patriarchal red pill traditiona…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:28 PM
1

Can I ask, why do you have yourself flavored as “purple pill” if you vocally espouse conservative/regressive red pill ideology? Can you clarify what red pill beliefs you actually disagree with?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:10 PM
0

lol ok
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:07 PM
2

There’s no reason to be having sex is a serious relationship isn’t on the table What if people could have sex just because they wanted to, and there was nothing you could to stop them?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 05:06 PM
4

100% Imagine taking a normal, well adjusted person, and trying to explain to them all the shorthand that gets used as if it’s a real, factual phenomenon. You have to explain “alpha fucks beta bucks,” “chadsexual,” “hypergamy,” “AWALT,” etc. they’d look at you like you’re a fucking conspiracy theorist, because it’s conspiracy level adherence to a weird ideology. It’s not that these things never happen. But they get tossed around as if they are universal law that everyone should accept and perceiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:39 PM
1

Ok
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:32 PM
–

Misandry comes from the same patriarchal preconditioning that misogyny does.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 05:26 AM
3

Coming from a pink piller…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 04:58 AM
2

That doesn’t have to do with my point. You can have sex or not have sex without internalizing the belief that sex is inherently bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:12 AM
7

Why can’t anyone seem to imagine a world where sex isn’t inherently bad, dirty, and dangerous? Sex is sex. You don’t have to go through life believing that it’s inherently harmful. There are people out there who will be happy to have sex with you, and it’s possible for you both to enjoy the experience and live a more enriched life because of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:06 AM
8

It’s weird to me when someone implies that a woman wanting to be romanced or a man wanting be desired sexually is some kind of “gotcha.” Both just want to be wanted, neither are committing some kind of moral failing in wanting that, and love doesn’t mutually exclude physical touch, acts of service, or gift giving, anymore than it excludes quality time and words of affirmation. So why do people act like material benefits cancel out emotional benefits?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 04:11 AM
3

I think you’re half right. A rich guy can buy a woman a drink with strings attached and take offense if she doesn’t put out. A poor guy can buy a woman a drink without expectations even though the money is dearer to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 04:06 AM
32

No, the closest is between my dog and me.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 04:03 AM
–

The vast majority of men and women don’t cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 12:33 PM
–

I really think more guys push for traditional gender norms than women. (Most) women are not telling men that they want more traditional men. Men are hearing that from other men. Now, I’m not saying you need to be metrosexual. But being comfortable in yourself and your own sexuality goes a long way, even if that means you’re comfortable saying something that could be perceived as weak or effeminate. It reads as confidence if you own it, whereas performative masculinity reads as insecurity or toxi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 03:28 AM
–

I do fine hooking up with a new woman every month going on 3-4 dates. I have a sub six-figure job. I don’t resist being masculine but I’m only ever as masculine as I feel like being. I’m not afraid to embarrass myself or come off too fem. Most women’s profiles in my city say “MAGA swipe left,” and those women recognize traditional vibes as coded to “traditional values” that they hate.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 02:58 AM
–

The implication that women are the ones solely enforcing gender roles is ridiculous. Yes, a lot of women have internalized harmful and sexist gender roles (often to their own detriment), but it always seems to be the men who also espouse those gender roles claiming it’s women’s fault. It’s total projection.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 01:16 AM
1

There’s a trend of sex negativity more broadly in society (i.e. people being scandalized by content in movies and tv, complaining about it in video games, pro-censorship conservatives, incels using dark romances as a “gotcha” against feminists, radical feminists claiming heterosexuality is compulsorily forced on women and attacking choice feminism). I think they’re seeing that reflecting in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:27 PM
2

Agreed
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:12 PM
3

Sexist men and women internalize and perpetuate purity myths. Sex positive men don’t lose respect for the women they sleep with, because they don’t believe a woman’s value derives from her purity. Sex negative men (who tend to be sexist) develop Madonna-whore complexes, so they do lose respect for women who are willing to sleep with them. Women with internalized misogyny think along the same lines.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 09:11 PM
3

Here’s one on Femcels and the rise of heteronihilism
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 08:24 PM
8

Studies typically find no or low correlation to sexual dysfunction, or improved sexual performance for men who masturbate regularly. “The results indicated that masturbation frequency was positively associated with overall sexual function for women. This was moderated by relationship status, meaning that more frequent masturbation was associated with better orgasmic function and sexual satisfaction in single women, whereas the opposite was true for women who were in a relationship. For men, more…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 08:14 PM
1

Anyone arguing that patriarchy benefited women is an idiot. To me, it’s like pro-fascists denying and discounting the rampant abuses that always attend fascism.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 07:18 PM
9

My thoughts: what a reductive and inaccurate portrayal of human desire. That is not a blue-pilled take. Framing sex as a begrudging transaction between material provisions and sex is red-pilled.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 12:55 PM
2

A past that gender warriors are eager to return to.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 12:52 PM
6

It 100% gets projected onto women as their value as a person. And anyway why wouldn’t you value someone who likes to have fun more? Unless you also don’t like to drink beer and go out to fun things and get tattoos and live with a little sense of adventure.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 12:16 PM
7

Yeah. I’m an adult. I go to work, pay bills, and am a functioning member of society. Outside of that I like to go to concerts and clubs and have fun. I’d prefer a partner who isn’t scandalized by the thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 05:44 AM
12

Yeah, fun people tend to have fun. The problem with red pill is that it frames these things as if they detract from her value as a person. I seek a tatted up, pierced, hot cool girl who likes to get out to concerts and shows, who’s down to smoke and drink recreationally and dabble in Molly and mushrooms when the occasion calls for it. A woman who never kissed a frog, who never got a tattoo, who doesn’t like going out on the town, who doesn’t ever drink to excess and who’s only personality trait …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:48 AM
1

True. But I will say I hooked up with an old flame a month or two ago, and she said that she hadn’t had an orgasm since we’d last met up about a year prior. She said she hadn’t really dated much, and the woman I dated before that hookup had also gone three years without really dating. This isn’t to contradict your point, because I agree most women in the dating scene have some form of on demand hookup. It’s just to say that there are also a lot of women who can put it to bed for a while.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:44 AM
1

Not really. The chicks who are into anal, threesomes, bondage, and that kinda shit are having way more orgasms than the prudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:36 AM
1

How many women are there in America of birthing age? A hundred million? So 1% or so get abortions? That sounds correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:35 AM
1

Also sex positive. This guy thinks incels = whores because he thinks a man gains value when he has sex and a woman loses value.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:33 AM
0

As a dude who hooks up with about one woman per month, this sounds accurate to me. Most of the women I’ve slept with have had a phase at some point or other (or are currently in it). I think it’s fine and normal, and I look down on men who judge them for it. They’re just jealous/insecure.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:30 AM
2

Facts. It’s frustrating to parse threads like these because I’ve known plenty of sexual women. But in threads like this red and pink pilled people just accept that women are anti-sex and then make the conversation more sexist from there.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:22 AM
1

For your sexist take. Plenty of women enjoy sex because they enjoy sex. Implying that the only reason a woman would want sex is because her dumb girl brain got tricked by men is sexist as shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:17 AM
1

I think more women misuse these terms because more women go to therapy, and if more men went to therapy more men would misuse them. There’s an excellent podcast called Bad Therapist where a psychoanalyst and a cultural analyst for the NYT discuss pop psychology and the misuse of therapy terms and famous cases of bad therapists. Highly recommend. There’s also a podcast called Bad Therapy where two highly misandrist women drunkenly trash men and misuse psychology terms, which I accidentally clicke…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 03:07 AM
2

I find time to call out incel rhetoric.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 09:46 PM
1

Stop infantilizing women. Stop stigmatizing male sexuality.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 07:50 PM
2

There shouldn’t be an age gap cap. The whole point of having an age of consent is that the person under the limit can’t legally consent, and after the limit they can. To clarify, the issue with statutory isn’t the age difference. It’s that one person can’t consent. If both people are capable of consent, then creating an age gap cap strips both adults off their ability to consent. It’s a matter of personal liberty. Source: 35M fucked a 29F doctor last week. Why the fuck should the government be a…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 07:48 PM
3

“Fatherless behavior” is a judgey, sexist comment. You’re literally saying they need a patriarch because you can’t handle them “misbehaving” like anyone should give a fuck what you think.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 07:41 PM
1

It’s not. Tell femcels and incels to both eat a dick (but not in a penis shaming way).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 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