TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ekmetzger Archive

View 0 posts and 220 comments by ekmetzger on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
11

Cool humblebrag my dude. You've slept with 150 chicks (I'm sure they've all been 9's and 10's, too) and make 200k. Why are you asking the lowly faggots on this subreddit for answers? Aren't you the all-knowing deity you're looking for already? Why can't you intuit the answers yourself, given that you're so successful and cool?
/r/askTRP04/02/20 04:52 PM
5

Most of human existence globally is degradation and sheer horror. Most of contemporary western human existence is misery-lite. Maybe not total immiseration, but definitely could be better. That said, I have absolutely no fucking time to focus on babyish miseries and other people making judgements. I have a single life. My focus is on me, my accomplishments and my pleasures. Here's some Seneca that I take to heart (I don't take all stoicism to heart, but he's right sometimes) “For what prevents u…
/r/askTRP04/02/20 04:40 PM
1

I see no issue whatsoever with your methodology and anecdotally similar methods have worked for me. So keep doing your thing.
/r/askTRP03/02/20 07:25 PM
1

This is going to be different-ish for everybody. Sweet nothings are Machiavellian if you don't mean them. Say whatever you want, just be careful you don't start believing it yourself. I treat all my plates as romantic potentials, three at the moment. I go on dates with them, get them little bullshit $20 gifts every now and then (super seldom, but a little something once or twice a year doesn't hurt), all that kinda' shit, I just also make it crystal clear that I will never stop fucking other wom…
/r/askTRP03/02/20 06:37 PM
3

It's subjective and objective. Objectively, the vast majority of humans prefer certain features within faces. Subjectively, different people prefer some features over other features, but we are all essentially drawn to the same shit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3130383/ https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/BF03208842
/r/askTRP15/01/20 09:36 PM
1

When did I say you shouldn't? I was responding to a single, specific claim. And what you just wrote has nothing at fuckin' all to do with it. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/19 08:47 PM
2

Okay, and that's not even remotely similar to the claim that "familiarity breeds contempt." Do you people even give a single fuck about what is true or not? Like, there is nuance here and if you choose to ignore the nuance, you're just going to end up saying a whole bunch of dumb, wrong shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/19 08:10 PM
6

Unsurprisingly, as usual, you are making a claim without looking up the relevant research, even though your claim can be empirically verified. And, as usual, it's a lot more complex of an answer than you're suggesting, probably because it's easier to spew platitudes and soundbites than it is to actually think about stuff before saying it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25910379 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08853134.2016.1272051 https://www.jstor.org/stable/4122904?seq=1 This …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/19 08:05 PM
3

Hm. Dr. Drew heavily leans toward monogamy, Dan Savage heavily leans towards polyamory, and Esther Perel is kind of an apologist for both. Interesting line up you have here.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/19 05:04 PM
5

It's because it's possible to have conflicting data sets and very few people here actually understand how to analyze data. So we probably do have some studies that say coupled up dudes are happier, but there's also studies that say casual sex makes men happier, casual sex makes men not as happy, and quite a few studies with mixed results. There's also lots of good stats on how monogamy murders male libido (and if this is the case, they're probably not very happy, as lack of sex is positively cor…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/19 03:23 PM
7

Male. 29. Literally constantly. The 'men think about sex every seven seconds' thing rings true for me. I don't know if this is abnormal or not but it definitely takes up a fuck ton of mental bandwidth.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/19 02:29 PM
2

Honestly, there's a ton of studies on the efficacy of meditation and you could find them super easily with a three word google search. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29616846 https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/04/harvard-researchers-study-how-mindfulness-may-change-the-brain-in-depressed-patients/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_on_meditation
/r/askTRP23/12/19 05:46 PM
1

What's your point? And why do you think that? How could you possibly know?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/19 05:09 PM
5

lol? You know what would have pissed her off even more? Not replying at all.
/r/askTRP19/12/19 06:43 PM
2

It's an article that mentions several different conflicting studies, which is why I posted it. As far as I can tell, they are honest about the results of the studies. I guess you can be dismissive of evidence, as long as I'm allowed to be dismissive (Hitchen's razor) of big claims with zero evidence. So I am still gonna remain agnostic, and admit I dont actually know and either do you, and you're likely still going to remain totally certain of zero evidence claims. Doesn't bother me none cause a…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/19 12:13 AM
2

As far as I can tell, the research for the claim you just made is pretty scant. The results are inconclusive at the moment. https://www.ozy.com/acumen/men-like-monogamy-less-than-women-right-think-again/94473/
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/19 12:07 AM
2

The aforementioned population explosion within these communities disagrees with you that there's not a want for it. Moreover, a system that says "find what works for you" is at least benefitted by being modular and potentially ethical, which old polygamist traditions definitely did not. You seem to be comparing a hugely open system to a drearily closed one and then making what I consider to be a gigantic leap in logic by saying they will end up in the same place. At this point, something tells m…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/19 10:25 PM
3

I believe Rome and Greece fell for a variety of different reasons, not just polygamy. Male oriented polygamy and men not marrying certainly could have been one of those factors. And that still has little to do with polyamory and sexual openness in modernity. I do not believe they are comparable systems of thought. I think a close analogy would be comparing Athenian democracy to the democracy described by Thomas Paine. They are both democracy, but considerably different in form, temperament and p…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/19 10:16 PM
3

> We aren't creating a new social construct here. Poly's been done. I don't think this is 100% true, mainly because open relationships and polyamory have evolved to be so (almost frustratingly) multiform and nuanced that they can hardly be compared to the polygamy of antiquity, which almost always revolved around men hoarding a bunch of women and women's sexuality and choice being oppressed. I do not think this type of highly structured, individualized sexual openness has ever existed in large p…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/19 09:50 PM
4

It's just what I predict based on current trends. More and more people, especially college aged people and younger, are exercising their sexual freedoms far more liberally than essentially ever before. Casual sex for both sexes is almost certainly way up, marriage (as we've noted) is way down. On that same point, polyamory and open relationship communities have had population explosions within the last decade and are now firmly baked into the zeitgeist. Also new things happen all the time! Somet…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/19 09:02 PM
-2

Difficult to tell, but I think sex (talking strictly about the U.S. here) will be hyper liberalized in the future, or at least far less traditionally "Christian", which I have no real issues with. Open relationships and polyamory are eventually going to beat out traditional monogamous frameworks as the primary "type" of relationship. Pair bonds and such will still happen, not possible to get rid of them entirely, but they're going to be spiced up with swinging, multiple partners and little extra…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/19 08:39 PM
1

Stats are proof sometimes, it depends on the stat and how the specific studies were conducted. Factor analysis for psychometrics and personality theories aren't objective but are often lauded as objective, which makes no sense cause ALL interpretations of psychometric factor analysis are defined by heuristics (convenient solutions that are not necessarily empirical). Anything that is heuristically analyzed is by definition open to varied data interpretation, which means there is no way to use fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/19 07:10 PM
1

Lol, it's almost like personality tests of this type are reductionist pseudoscience and not taken (particularly) seriously in any cognitive science department across the country. It's almost like the human brain, thus human personalities, are too multiform and varied to try to understand using limited scope, methodologically fucky statistical methods like factor analysis. https://web.archive.org/web/20121107113908/http://web.sls.hw.ac.uk/teaching/level2/A42SO2/reading/Eysenck%20Four%20ways%20fiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/19 06:45 PM
20

I fuck other girls. Works wonders.
/r/askTRP13/12/19 04:59 PM
3

29.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/19 03:58 PM
33

Almost certainly different from most men here, who seem to think their perfect mate is a 50's housewife caricature for some weird fucking reason. High value - Educated, intelligent, well read, a few (hopefully artistic or ambitious) hobbies, can actually hold down a conversation, reasoned views of her own on a number of philosophical and political topics, good sense of humor, hot (see: slightly above average shape, regularly takes care of herself) and sexually experimental/bisexual/not prude. I …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/19 03:47 PM
58

I think if you're super inexperienced or just getting your RP sealegs, sleeping with whoever is fair game. That being said, it's silly to not maximize. Efficiency in this case is about quality, not quantity. One 9 is worth more than nine 1's. Fucking uggos isn't a good exercise for self respect -- if anything it'll make you feel worse. But fucking hot girls will make you feel and be better essentially every time.
/r/askTRP12/12/19 07:48 PM
9

... is this a joke? She's very clearly not interested. Stop trying to get with this girl. This cringed me the fuck out. You tried to kiss her THREE times and she said NO three times. What don't you understand? Jesus dude. This is rough.
/r/askTRP11/12/19 03:48 PM
1

Well, honestly, this might be the first time I've posed this question where the responder actually has a good excuse for me. Yeah man, keep working hard, then, you're going to be just fine. Still, all my other advice is correct. Just fuck her and do.not.listen.to.her.words. LTR's aren't worth it at your age, so don't let her (no matter what) talk you into one. Easy, peezy. Keep workin' hard, kid. You'll be okay.
/r/askTRP09/12/19 09:47 PM
4

Keep fucking, never get into an LTR with her. What is difficult about this? Her demands don't matter. They're the demands of some -- your words -- complete slut. Why would you fold to the demands of a complete slut unless you are truly Edward Cuckhands? Also don't worry about her talking shit. That's just what gossipy sluts do, they gossip, there's no stopping it even if she views you positively. Oh and what's with the celibate lifestyle shit? Why not just find another girl? You know there's lik…
/r/askTRP09/12/19 09:42 PM
11

Have the threesome, shut your autistic mouth for the moment.
/r/askTRP09/12/19 09:20 PM
31

Lol -- you don't believe them. A woman's words are as ephemeral and fleeting as the life of a firefly, or something poetic and nice like that, at least. What I'm saying is they're not here to be believed, they're here to have fun with and fuck. As oft said in this sub: Believe her actions, not her words. And, you know, I suppose the best capital T True advice for you here is to make yourself so busy with other pursuits you don't even notice the little anxiety-plagued neuronal discharges in your …
/r/askTRP09/12/19 05:56 PM
24

Because many of them are there solely for validation, and all of the ones who are above a 5 have a whirlwind of constant options/dick. Probabilistically speaking, you are not the top of the hierarchy, so she gives you a small shot (giving you her number) while also giving out her information to a bunch of other dudes higher in the hierarchy than you that she's def going to fuck. Welcome to Earf, baybeeeeeee.
/r/askTRP06/12/19 08:37 PM
2

I think you're mostly right, and luckily we do have some papers on this. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14558590 Current theoretical and empirical findings suggest that mate preferences are mainly cued on visual, vocal and chemical cues that reveal health including developmental health. Beautiful and irresistible features have evolved numerous times in plants and animals due to sexual selection, and such preferences and beauty standards provide evidence for the claim that human beauty and o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/19 02:18 PM
1

'Fitness' in these studies generally means cardiovascular health, not necessarily having the physique of a pro athlete. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2785721/ https://www.mdedge.com/neurology/article/73260/alzheimers-cognition/cognitive-benefits-are-seen-young-adults-who-exercise “Being fit means that you also have good heart and lung capacity and that your brain gets plenty of oxygen,” said Michael Nilsson, Professor at the Sahlgrenska Academy and Chief Physician at the Sahlgrens…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/19 08:52 PM
3

Is my recent post about women being people and necessary for well being too controversial for you?
/r/askTRP20/11/19 09:26 PM
2

Oh, you want the one where I'm critical? It's one down, lazy girl: "TrP is really good for some stuff and some of the philosophy contains some pretty bitter truths about human nature, but at least half (read: 50%) of the shit said here is total unverifiable bullshit based on the testimony of dudes I wouldn't ever take seriously IRL (i.e. dumpster humans with no real substance). I'd recommend a healthy dose of skepticism if you want to wander the depths of TRP subs"
/r/askTRP20/11/19 09:18 PM
10

Assert what you need out of an exclusive relationship. Don't compromise. Get what you need. If her expectations for exclusivity don't match up exactly to your specifications, gtfo or plate her 'til oblivion, but don't get into an LTR with her.
/r/askTRP19/11/19 09:36 PM
1

"Hm, weird, I seem to have lost all my fucks somewhere..."
/r/askTRP19/11/19 09:18 PM
6

Will piggyback on this. I'm 6'2", slim and have a relatively unattractive face. Pulling 7 - 8's has never been a problem and I'm fairly sure it's exclusively due to my height (I am not interesting, rich or funny).
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/19 05:08 PM
1

Yeah, I disagree entirely. Something tells me we're going to disagree no matter what, so no argument needs to ensue here, but yeah... I just really think that's bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/19 05:42 PM
2

Yes, I do. :) ty
/r/askTRP15/11/19 03:24 PM
5

> From my perspective there's nothing bad with that, it's just that while I was reading the TRP stuff I got this impression that "talking too much makes you less alpha". TRP is really good for some stuff and some of the philosophy contains some pretty bitter truths about human nature, but at least half (read: 50%) of the shit said here is total unverifiable bullshit based on the testimony of dudes I wouldn't ever take seriously IRL (i.e. dumpster humans with no real substance). I'd recommend a h…
/r/askTRP15/11/19 03:23 PM
4

You sorely lack imagination, or simply don't realize how many women there are in the world. Philosophy game can work if you're not a total retard.
/r/askTRP15/11/19 03:08 PM
13

The sapiosexual thing is bogus. No one is attracted to intelligence only, which is why the claim is so dubious. If there's a dude who looks like Chris Hemsworth with an IQ of 100 and a 5/10 dude with an IQ of 120, Hemsworth is getting chosen regardless if the chick claims to be a 'sapiosexual'. Hardwired ape neurology is going to override the 'I love smart guys I swear!' attitude in a fuckin' second. Why would going after smart chicks make you less "alpha", though? Smart chicks can be hot and fu…
/r/askTRP15/11/19 03:07 PM
2

Hm, probably a misunderstanding, I could have phrased that better. What I meant is that there's no winning against the nature of most humans, namely there's no way to tangibly erase the promiscuity of primates. This goes for men and women. They are going to be the way they are no matter what. Women will bounce from dick to dick without remorse or regard for "relationship status", and since it's this way, men ought to bounce from gash to gash in much the same manner. I call this a bad game becaus…
/r/askTRP15/11/19 01:28 AM
1

We will likely just not agree on this and that's okay. I really don't think there's anything to mitigate, and most women are not going to be insane if you're selecting appropriately and using Bayesian reasoning. If your quality filter is good, that's really all the risk management you need. Don't go for nuts and you won't get nuts.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 09:04 PM
7

Have you ever walked across the street? Have you ever driven a car or been a passenger in a car? Have you ever flown on an airplane? If you want to be paralyzed by 1% chances, go ahead, be my guest, sounds like a little pussy move to me. Life is all risk-reward -- moreover, it's Bayesian inference. You have to create probability values for yourself for ANY situation -- it's the maximum likelihood estimate, where you choose the belief corresponding to the highest likelihood of the observation. Th…
/r/askTRP14/11/19 08:09 PM
6

> get rejected and then build a name for myself as the thirsty creepy guy. The thirsty guy?! In college?! Are you saying college aged men want to fuck? Are you saying college aged women are somehow unaware that dudes want to fuck? Listen, you'll only establish this kind of reputation if you take the rejections badly. If you don't, then nobody will give a single fuck. You gotta' do you, man, you can't let the opinions of others get in the way.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 07:40 PM
1

Fairly experienced with addy. Why not lower your dose? If you're already taking the lowest dose and the side effects are like this, there's a bunch of less intense alternatives (like Concerta) you could try.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 06:35 PM
4

You absolutely have to find a way to not care about this. If you want to fuck hot girls, orbiters and other dudes are a fact of life. They will never stop coming. They're built into the fabric here. Look, there's just no reason to care. They're going to get fucked by a bunch of dudes, no matter who they are, no matter the relationship they have with you. In an LTR? Yeah, she's still gonna' get some side dick, whether you know it or not. Have a couple plates? Yeah, they're fucking other dudes if …
/r/askTRP14/11/19 06:18 PM
1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_analog_(chemistry)) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative_(chemistry)) It produces roughly the same effect, although the duration and intensity have generally been noted to be shorter. Still, I would always do the real stuff over an analogue. We just have more studies on the effects of pure LSD, so I see no reason to use a derivative.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 04:42 PM
3

Unfortunate. I'd recommend not using an analogue to start, though.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 04:09 PM
3

You don't need luck, you'll likely be more lucid and articulate than the majority of your class.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 03:56 PM
4

Yeah, I've done shit like this. Here's my advice: don't. Why? Because there's like a billion other women who don't have boyfriends who have all the same qualities you just mentioned. Hot girl who seems like a freak? Go to a college campus sometime, dude. They're mostly hot and mostly freaks. Why are you pinpointing a chick with a boyfriend? Can't get other chicks?
/r/askTRP14/11/19 03:55 PM
2

He doesn't have any, it was objectively not a matriarchy, although there was a matrilineal bent there -- according to Xenophon, the Spartan constitution mandated that inheritance and proprietorship pass from mother to daughter. Still not the same thing as a matriarchy. I will note that contemporary anthropologists don't really view nation states and societies in terms of 'patriarchy' or 'matriarchy', as explained in this AskAnthropologists post, which is very well explained and further expounds …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/19 03:28 PM
3

Sparta wasn't a matriarchy, I don't know what that dude is talking about (although there were Spartan queens, like Archidamia), but the women of Sparta had significantly more freedom than, say, Athenian women. They were able to own slaves and property and could also divorce. They also had elementary educational programs exclusively for women and even Aristotle was under the impression that "men were ruled by the strong and independent women, unlike in the rest of Greece."
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/19 03:19 PM
2

Hm, yeah, I guess that's a morally wonky part of TRP, although I'd argue the TRP subreddits have sort of turned into a factional shadow war with a ton of different subgroups having their own interpretation of the "scripture". There's hard scripturalists, moderates, blackpillers, MGTOW's, ultra gym bros, pseudo intellectuals, just plain normal dudes who do well with women, etc, etc. Point is, there's definitely several subgroups on the TRP subreddits who wouldn't approve of being a wanton asshole…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/19 02:41 PM
11

You can follow some aspects of TRP and still be a 'decent' guy. Look at me! I love kittens!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/19 02:32 PM
23

Low dose psychedelics are the closest thing we have at the moment to panaceas. Now, they're not actually panaceas, and some people don't react well even to small doses, but usually they're hugely useful tools for introspection and perspective shifting. If you want to look at the world differently, altering what the world feels and looks like is a good place to start.
/r/askTRP14/11/19 01:42 PM
1

That's a lovely phrase, and thank you.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 09:15 PM
0

Um, that's Psych Today talking about this study. Maybe focus on what the article itself is talking about instead of looking for tangential issues for no reason. Using multiple methods (longitudinal, correlational, and experimental), 8 studies (N > 2,200) establish that broad foreign experiences can lead to immoral behavior by increasing moral relativism—the belief that morality is relative rather than absolute. The relationship between broad foreign experiences and immoral behavior was robust ac…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 08:53 PM
2

Read. Once you're sick of reading, read some more. Once you think you have read enough, you haven't read nearly enough, so read some more.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 08:31 PM
1

We need hobbies, activities, a social circle and a decent job to keep our lives furfilling and I think almost everybody will agree with me here. According to you know, peer reviewed science, you also need sex for normal cognitive function, so if you're a heterosexual or a bisexual, women are necessary for that. Like, sorry it is just objectively this way. Welcome to human evolution. Saying you need women to live a decent live is pedestalizing them and that doesn't even get you a woman in the fir…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 08:02 PM
4

Because I agree with some of the things TRP has to say. I don't have to be 100% ideologically aligned with TRP to post in this sub, nor do I have to be a tribal cuck who fawns over the sidebar.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 07:45 PM
2

Well we don't need them anymore. This is the whole concept of this subreddit. That we don't need women they are just an asset to our incredible and awesome lives. I'm not MGTOW and I also think it's dumb as fuck to take pretty much any ideology as 100% gospel. The "sidebar" is wrong about all sorts of shit. Correct about all sorts of shit, too. Not gonna' blindly follow it just to feel like a part of the tribe. Don't give a shit about the tribe. Care about being an individual and will continue c…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 07:43 PM
1

For the continuity of the species, we need women. In order for our brains and bodies to function properly, we need women (or, at least, physical intimacy/sex from some source). So, no, I think we kinda' need them to live in a normatively "good" brainspace.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 07:36 PM
1

Good to know you are a happy Patriot of the Echo Chamber and don't actually have any individualistic thoughts or principles. Like, you literally just referred to TRP as "us". Hilarious.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 07:01 PM
15

they fuck it up for me Once you realize how useless women are, it stays with you. They fuck it up for you? Sounds like you are leaning on women to make your life good and that sounds like little bitch logistics to me. If you want to make yourself the victim, go ahead, it will literally NEVER help you achieve anything. Self victimization is bitch af. How about not letting them fuck stuff up for you? How about being good enough so that stuff just doesn't fuck up all that often? Ever thought of the…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:59 PM
3

Your username is already halfway there, dude. You'll be fine.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:47 PM
1

Ok, I formally retract all my claims. They are all 100% false. No need to be a little bitch about it, dude. I didn't say they were 100% false. I said you need evidence to make them true. I said earlier the intellectually honest position is to remain agnostic, so that's what I think we should both do, not cry at ourselves for being 100% false :(
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:44 PM
5

Read Camus (The Stranger, Myth of Sisyphus), Borges (Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius), Beckett (Waiting for Godot, Molloy) and Stoppard (Arcadia, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead). I don't read books on pick up or self help or any lame shit like that. Read actual literature and figure out how it relates to your life.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:34 PM
3

Works for some, not for others. What really works is gaining an understanding of life fundamentally being silly as fuck.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:17 PM
10

What's your advice for me? Give fewer fucks. End.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 06:12 PM
1

Oooo, and also just want to point you a little thing called BURDEN OF PROOF. Reaaaaally shocked someone with MULTIPLE DEGREES IN SCIENCE doesn't understand this concept, but you made multiple claims ... it isn't up to me to disprove these claims, it is up to you to provide evidence for your claims. That's how this works. I'll stick with Hitch on this one: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."
/r/askTRP13/11/19 05:40 PM
1

And while I do heavily prioritize hard science over subjective experiences, not everything has been tested in a formal study. When many people experience similar things, which also fall in line with what studies and theories have proven, they are very much worth listening to. No. Anecdotes aren't evidence. Surprised someone with a science degree would believe this. I'm not a logical positivist, though -- not ONLY empirical evidence matters. That's why I'm fine with statistical evidence, or axiom…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 05:36 PM
1

Hey man, so like basically everything you wrote is not scientifically verifiable. I always try to post at least a single study verifying my claims before making them, or else I will choose to remain agnostic on the issue. If there is no good evidence, there is no good reason for me to believe it. Nothing you wrote in this post has any evidence, therefore I will choose not to believe it. There are zero good statistics or research papers to verify anything you're saying (no real stats on social me…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 05:17 PM
6

and others are cock-hungry monsters who just want one guy's cock. And various shades in between. Your job is to vet potential LTRs properly so you promote a woman who is on the better side of that scale. Biologically speaking, I do not think this is true. Barring asexuality or other genetic anomalies, the majority of humans find more than one human being sexually attractive throughout their lives. In general, we all find multitudes of other people attractive. So the women who only "want one guy'…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 04:56 PM
6

Everything you wrote is true and good advice, except for this: > In fact, even if very physically attractive guys hit on her, she wouldn't even notice. This is silly. No matter how high your SMV is, men and women both seek sexual novelty Not only will she notice, but depending on the relative SMV of the other dudes compared to yours, she will likely reciprocate with flirting or just flat out hook up with him. Having a high SMV doesn't prevent women from wanting new dick. Everything else you wrot…
/r/askTRP13/11/19 04:27 PM
25

Plan your trip to South America and go no matter what -- don't worry so much about what she's doing. If she's going on an international trip with one of her female friends, it, uhh, well, results vary but it's prob not gonna' be good for ya.
/r/askTRP13/11/19 02:38 PM
4

Novelty is a huge thing for both men and women. This has nothing to do with "alpha-ness" and "beta-ness", and I'd argue both those terms only serve to confuse the sexless men here and limit their behaviors. If you want to get laid regularly, want to have some sort of abundance mentality, worrying over your 'alpha-ness' isn't going to help you at fuckin' all. Becoming an interesting, self respecting individual is going to help you. And even if you are interesting and self respecting, you can't re…
/r/askTRP12/11/19 04:36 PM
2

As in, on the very first date or more of a later stage pillow talk subject? It's my go-to conversation starter for practically all of my dates. If it's not the first conversation, it's one of them.
/r/askTRP08/11/19 09:25 PM
8

Maybe it's different for me because I actively seek highly educated girls, but like I said, they know all this stuff intuitively already. Not only that, but they're all hot, so they've been through the rigmarole of stupid men trying to 'game' them. They're women, not retards. They know what we're doing and anyone who thinks they're oblivious has not been paying attention. I dunno', it's kinda difficult to answer this question because I know I do things differently than most of the guys on here. …
/r/askTRP08/11/19 08:50 PM
22

I haven't told my plates or my 'GF' about TRP directly, but I have discussed all the finer points of the ideology with them. Surprisingly, they agree with the vast majority of shit I discuss with them and these are all hyper educated hyper liberal girls in their late 20's/early 30's. Most of the stuff on TRP isn't even particularly controversial when it's articulated correctly. A lot of it is common sense mixed with understanding primatology. There's some other whack shit that I don't fall in li…
/r/askTRP08/11/19 08:25 PM
1

An event I've never participated in? How does the event change anything? He's talking about self deprecating women -- read the title of the post, dude. I think the best response for self deprecating women is to never give an inch and I said as much in my comment. A couple other users seem to agree with me. Hm... why aren't you crying at them for not reading the sidebar? They gave the same advice, so what gives? Either way, I don't buy this argument. Women self deprecate all the time and the part…
/r/askTRP06/11/19 09:03 PM
1

Nah man, that's all right. Some ideas here are good, some are bad, extremism is stupid as fuck and I'll continue trying to be as intellectually honest as possible without succumbing to groupthink, like you have.
/r/askTRP06/11/19 08:27 PM
1

Wow, it's almost like the sidebar on a particular subreddit isn't gospel and shouldn't be treated as if it's immovable truth. It's almost like individuals are allowed to have thoughts of their own that might slightly disagree with hard edged, not necessarily correct, subjective rules. Something tells me dudes like you, who follow ideologies so strictly that any thoughts to the contrary make your opponents 'autistic', are actually just kinda' fuckless losers who like to shriek at people for havin…
/r/askTRP06/11/19 08:18 PM
1

Very well thought out reply, my man. You must be a real killer.
/r/askTRP06/11/19 08:06 PM
1

Lol, how in the world does anything I just wrote imply I have autism? Projecting pretty hard, my dude.
/r/askTRP06/11/19 08:01 PM
1

I have no idea what the fuck a lindy hop dance class is or why the hell you're there, but I would suggest just agreeing with them and reinforcing their worthlessness. "Yes, you do suck" with a blank stare works wonders. Sometimes when you make them feel pointless enough they'll sleep with you. Pure nihilism game can really work on chicks with fucked self esteems.
/r/askTRP06/11/19 06:52 PM
7

'Find out'? Hint: if she is a contemporary woman with an average sex drive, the probability of her being a 'slut' is astronomically high. You don't have to find out shit. She likes dick just as much as you like pussy and if you're an average human male, that means she likes dick a whole fuckin' lot
/r/askTRP06/11/19 06:31 PM
14

Why not get some self esteem, some self respect, and then start fucking girls you're actually attracted to?
/r/askTRP05/11/19 08:35 PM
4

> So I guess my question is, if you do LTR/marry are you just accepting that she was a whore, but is now your whore? Yes. Also generalizations are bad. Not ALL women are pointless sluts, just a lot of them are. > If all girls are sluts deep down, is there even an LTR worth having ever? Sure, as long as you have side chicks and keep your options open. LTR's can be wonderful, but they're shit when the math isn't in your favor. She can ALWAYS get fucked at the drop of a hat. You have to make sure y…
/r/askTRP04/11/19 09:38 PM
1

Super easy. I keep going. Even if it's bad, I keep going. Editing exists. Will edit later. For now? Keep going.
/r/askTRP04/11/19 05:26 PM
3

Some girls are just super touchy/flirty, I don't think anything you write is a sign of anything other than a super touchy chick. These are not positive signs, it's her being naive and oblivious.
/r/askTRP04/11/19 05:25 PM
6

Alpha is a variable term and I don't think it means much. This sub constantly prattles on about dudes lifting but most of the dudes I've met who are ONLY obsessed with lifting are about as interesting to speak with as a granite countertop. They're uninteresting shitbags. Maybe they can pull, but they don't actually have anything to bring to the table. I'd rather pull and also be interesting, which means making my life about more than lifting. I think the real alpha males are dudes who aren't dis…
/r/askTRP04/11/19 05:16 PM
1

Tell him you're going to fuck her and then go fuck her. He does not own her, she is more than capable of making her own decisions.
/r/askTRP04/11/19 04:20 PM
5

Great username. But that's why I suggested microdosing. It's not the same kind of experience as, say, even a single tab of LSD. Microdosing is really just optimism, sharpness and euphoria, not a lot of the laugh-y, think-y, and visual side effects. I agree psychedelics aren't for everyone, though. Standard doses, anyway.
/r/askTRP02/11/19 12:28 AM
3

Yeah, here's some advice: let it go, she doesn't matter, you're allowed to make friends using whatever means you choose. If she's so pissy about it, she can fuck right off. If she wants to let it go, you should as well. NOTHING should be your move here. No apology, no explanation, nothing.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 09:29 PM
3

Or should I start giving more thanks and kindness for her to know how we should treat each other? Do you thank the dog when it shits on the carpet?
/r/askTRP01/11/19 08:50 PM
15

Fair, although I'm a pretty big proponent of microdosing for just about anything. Some dudes are so hopeless they probably do need it as a crutch.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 08:00 PM
0

Okay, so I will continue believing everything you just wrote is tripe. Cheers.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 07:30 PM
33

I'm fairly experienced with all manner of psychedelics and can confirm most of them at low doses are wonderful for socializing and totally demolishing inhibitions. There should definitely be some kind of guide for picking up while micro-dosing or something. I could see it really helping a lot of shy dudes out of their bubbles.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 07:19 PM
0

The amount of them that are actually hot is unfortunately rare. Wow shit, did you just hear about subjectivity yesterday or something? Okay, my experience doesn't match yours even a little bit. Now what?
/r/askTRP01/11/19 07:14 PM
11

It's easy to fix that shit? Have you ever been with a woman? What you think you're "fixing" is actually just stop-gapping, and "small" things are just wicks for powder kegs later. You see a line of string, I see a trail to explosives. Look, the point is: women aren't worth compromising with. You matter more than her quibbles. So if a chick gets in my way, even 1% in my way, with anything, I say, "Oh, well, she's cool and hot and stuff, just like the last however many chicks were... guess I'll ju…
/r/askTRP01/11/19 06:42 PM
19

A flake is fuckery. Honestly, even a comment that rubs you the wrong way is fuckery. Never put up with any amount of bullshit and be ready to drop 'em at a moment's notice. There's always more.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 06:12 PM
32

> Are guys meeting so many hot girls that they can just ghost a girl this hot? Am I missing something? Nope, this is pretty much the jist of it. Bitches ain't shit. Even hot bitches ain't shit. Do you know how many hot women there are? Like, so fucking many. Do you know how much aching they're worth? Not an ounce. Not a single fuckin' smidgen. So, yeah, at the first signs of fuckery, drop 'em like they're a bag of hitchhiker body parts. They ain't shit.
/r/askTRP01/11/19 05:38 PM
3

Mmm, I have. Quite. Thank you! Also women are X and men are Y and I don't understand how to articulate a viewpoint unless making the broadest generalization possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/19 09:58 PM
12

> I'm pretty sure those words don't even mean anything Welcome to PPD. You just described like 90% of the sentences on this sub, including this one.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/19 08:45 PM
1

Just want to point out that I totally agree with you and anyone who agrees with atlas on this point doesn't give a fuck about scientific discourse. You're saying, "How do you know this claim is true?" and atlas says, "Cause I saw some pictures once." It's absolutely, 100% fucking retarded. What is with this sub and not giving a fuck about objectivity and trying to spin their anecdotes as truths, then shitting on scientifically/rationally minded people when there's kickback to unverifiable ideas?…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/19 06:55 PM
1

You clearly don't even read through the links you post. Literally in the second line of the link you just posted, exactly what I've been saying: While an association between the two has been observed, it is not possible to say, based on this study, that casual sex causes mental distress, or whether feeling down leads to more casual sex. Fucking lol dude. You're shit at this.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/19 05:47 PM
1

Where? Where does it say that? Care to enlighten me, 'cause I just read the paper, and no it doesn't say that. Also, just so you know, a single paper isn't conclusive evidence of anything... so even if with this, it's not enough data to support a conclusion. However, I would happily accept your claim if the paper actually supported it, but it doesn't, and you simply don't understand how to parse through scientific data without your own confirmation bias taking over.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/19 05:38 PM
1

Yeah, still has nothing to do with your specific claims, and if it did, you'd probably post the exact points within the paper that reinforce your little theory. Also, fucking lol at the TLDR (the second comment), which still says zero -- NOTHING -- about your specific claims, since this isn't a paper about anxiety, depression or objective attractiveness. For exclusively sexual relationships the appearance of the man is the only major factor for its happening. Data shows women tend to want commit…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/19 05:34 PM
1

This data has nothing to do with this specific claim: > women inclined towards casual sex typically aren’t drop dead attractive, and oftentimes have some kind of depression or anxiety disorder. The abstract you posted says absolutely fuck all about the relative and or objective attractiveness of women who prefer casual sex and says nothing about depression or anxiety orders. Plus that's just the abstract and not the actual paper. So good try, but no dice really.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/19 05:24 PM
1

So your entire comment is anecdotal and unverifiable, so I'll just add my own anecdotal and unverifiable comment: all the women I know that are predisposed to casual sex are actually drop dead attractive and are all mentally normative. So what now?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/19 05:01 PM
21

Pretty much all research on this topic points to the opposite conclusion. Sex is vital to a healthy brain state and reported states of well being. Humans are social animals, intimacy is a requirement, not a suggestion. Also having a romantic partner isn't that difficult. At its best, it's quite breezy. You're making it seem like having a relationship is some monumental task that drains all life out of you and turns you into a husk. That's not realistic, and it ignores the multitudes of benefits …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/19 04:43 AM
2

I'm sorry that you think it's nitpicking to point out when someone is being wrong. This is a debate forum -- you said something hugely debatable, so I debated it. If you're going to be a sadsads about being wrong and making nonpoints over and over, maybe somewhere else on the internet would be a better fit for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/19 02:51 AM
1

I don't ask this to be offensive, but are you retarded?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 11:46 PM
1

how you interpret "prioritize". If that's where you outrage coming from, I'm a little weirded out. Not 'outrage', that's your word, just a discussion about saying things, and then backtracking, talking about a whole bunch of miscellaneous shit, and then ending up on a totally different point than you did here. This isn't what I was arguing about, and like I said in earlier posts, I can name other super influential historical figures that were definitely more outspoken about their sexuality. Alth…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 11:33 PM
2

Interesting, I imagine it's very different for different people/friend groups. I have three sets of friends where this has happened. First two groups, all high school/early college friends -- no drama. In fact, we sort of freely traded/swapped gf's in high school, few dudes fucked friend's sisters, it was all good in the hood. The groups here are comprised of mainly physics/engineering/econ kids, I guess we were all just super, uh, I don't know the words for it really, laissez-faire, I guess, ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 10:34 PM
1

Maybe try reading the sentences before and proceeding it and using a little reading comprehension... Franklin is basically saying, "You're not going to take my marriage advice and gonna' fuck people, so fuck old ladies instead." Here: that in all your Amours you should prefer old Women to young ones. You call this a Paradox, and demand my Reasons. Plus, that's not even half of it. There were literally entire texts/poems/stories written/sung about Franklin's promiscuity... Who fucking cares? Peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 09:55 PM
2

Degeneracy? You're moving the goalposts and using new words now. I was calling into contention a specific point in your post, not your whole post. I agree with some it, actually. Still, though, you clearly are not a scholar of history. And I mean ... I can go down the list of wonderfully intelligent and important men who were insane womanizers. I really only took issue with the statement that "smart people have a different set of priorities", which is just a silly blanket statement that isn't ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 09:41 PM
1

because smart people have a different set of priorities. See Bill Gates or Elon Musk or whoever else achieved anything in life other than high n-count. Yeah, like that idiot Ben Franklin... what a total dipshit. Also isn't Elon Musk fucking Grimes? Didn't he have a smoking hot super model wife before her? Like, lol, wtf are you talkin' about
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 09:14 PM
2

I mean, instinctual implies it's instinct, which it isn't. I think you mean 'cultural and/or social programming', but I understand. Very happy I don't have this unfortunate affliction myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 08:48 PM
2

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 08:31 PM
30

It doesn't cure depression Sometimes it does. It "cured" mine, or, really, sleeping with a bunch of women at once made me significantly happier than before and less susceptible to low moods. Sex is a necessary part of NORMAL cognitive function. Frequent sex literally does make you happier and healthier. Men need to focus on their mental health, their physical health, and their hobbies/dreams You can do this while also sleeping with a bunch of different women. What the heckin' heck are you talkin…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 06:37 PM
3

Eh, this is PPD, there is no 'wrong' or 'right' most of the time, I'm just trying to suss out your thinking here. Personally I think interpersonal rapport is more important than previous partners or prior promiscuity. Ho's are turned into housewives all the time, if you know what I mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 05:30 PM
1

So just a brief thought experiment... Imagine you find a chick who is not only super into you, but also checks all your 'perfect romantic partner' boxes, but she just so happened to sleep with some dude you know, right? You'd give up that opportunity -- that other person -- because you feel slightly uncomfortable about a single perceived indiscretion?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 04:42 PM
2

Can you extrapolate? Why? Why does it matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/19 04:33 PM
1

Cool. I'm glad you can admit you were wrong and talking complete nonsense earlier. Thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/19 09:27 PM
0

Did you forget how to look up simple questions on the internet or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/19 09:25 PM
2

I'm not who you were speaking with before, and I'm an American living in America, and they are true. I guess you looking outside sometimes is as credible as reports by the CDC. If you're too lazy to look, Percent of adults aged 20 and over with overweight, including obesity: 71.6% (2015-2016) Also the Brits and a lot of other countries are just as obese as America, or close, so don't let anyone tell you that. But yeah, like 70% of the country is overweight and your personal experience means FUCK…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/19 09:12 PM
1

Wow dude, it's almost like your tiny anecdotal sliver of experience has nothing to do with population statistics. How could it be?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/19 08:43 PM
1

This is long, but I never miss an opportunity to brag about my total luck on the internets: I'm 6'2", thin, have two degrees, I'm well read and play three instruments and am dumbly pinpoint focused on a single ambition. I don't think I have to extrapolate more here, but I've never and likely will never fuck super lower tiers. Sub6 and below and I'm getting the fuck out faster than you can say, "Damn that bitch is ugly" Plate 1, E, I have been fucking her on and off for ten years. This is a bit o…
/r/askTRP20/09/19 09:30 PM
2

Yeah man, you can do it, especially with the stats you listed. I'm thin af, but tall, and make an average salary and I'm plating three 8's at the moment. If you're in shape and make good money, you should be crushing way harder. If I can do it, with minimal effort, dudes like you can crush supremely. Stop with the low numbers, though, 6's ain't shit. You can go higher. I believe in you.
/r/askTRP20/09/19 08:14 PM
8

This. > She wants to do whatever she wants and have freedom Lol, then why is she in an exclusive relationship?
/r/askTRP20/09/19 07:45 PM
2

Fucking 4's and 5's isn't a success, so those don't count. Make outs with single moms is... okay, if they're hot, but you're saying they're 6.5's...I don't get it. 6.5 is okay for a normal girl, but with the baggage of a child that isn't yours...that number should be much lower. If you manage to plate the 7's, you're doing well. If you don't, you're not doing well. I think plating multiple 7's should be considered the low bar for actual success. If I can do it, everyone else can do it if they pu…
/r/askTRP20/09/19 07:35 PM
5

If I could float a fucking space-pear across the dinner table to bitches like Annie does I'd do it every chance I got, so you wrong af my dude
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/19 06:33 PM
40

worrying about running out of shit to talk about. Problem identified. None of this shit matters. Have fun with it, amuse yourself and completely cut out your inhibitions or this will likely never go well for you. Embrace the fundamental absurdity of life/pick up and this stuff becomes pretty god damned breezy.
/r/askTRP19/09/19 04:07 PM
4

Not an analogy, but here's 3 quotes that might alleviate some babyish anxiety around here: “Women and cats will do as they please, and men and dogs should relax and get used to the idea.” “There are no good girls gone wrong - just bad girls found out.” “I require three things in a man: he must be handsome, ruthless, and stupid.” I think if you comprehend these three quotes on more than a basic level, you have all the philosophy you'll ever need when it comes to picking up women and being innatel…
/r/askTRP19/09/19 03:52 PM
1

the idea that they never had any societal input or influence before their right to vote is low IQ feminist propaganda Literally no one said this and I even said the opposite of it in my posts, but okay, keep arguing with the air, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 12:36 PM
1

EXCLUSIVELY oppressed. Wow, what a non point. No group of peoples has ever been EXCLUSIVELY oppressed. You can compare and contrast oppressions. Women have been more oppressed than men, comparatively. Almost all men have never ran anything let alone civilization so, they're still suffering from the ultimate form of oppression. Men ran businesses, owned land, provided for families and drove industry, even the little ones. They also had the RIGHT to drive civilization with a vote, to at least infl…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 03:13 AM
0

My point is that there never was a caveat connected to women's right to vote. Whereas for men, there still is. Voting has never been tied to conscription in the United States. Voting rights were tied to property ownership over here, I'm not talking about Great Britain, and even if this is the case, which it isn't, I still wouldn't agree with it, and I think we can both agree that men make better soldiers than women for obvious reasons and women should have no obligation to fight 'cause they'd mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 03:01 AM
1

lol, what was your super good point when you said, "THEY GAVE women the right to vote in exchange for nothing" The fact that men had to GIVE the rights to women proves a power dynamic antithetical to your point. Not only that, but there's nothing to 'miss' here... you think women are not oppressed and 'have value by default' and I think women have been objectively oppressed as recorded by the historical record for like, you know, forever, except in a few key matrilineal nations. If you can't agr…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 02:40 AM
6

They gave women the right to vote in exchange for nothing. Okay, we're probably just gonna' not agree on this, but this is bananas-tier logic and I hope one day you grow out of it. Intrinsic rights are, you know, intrinsic, women are people, they deserved the rights to begin with and didn't need to 'exchange' a damn thing. I honestly cannot believe I am explaining this to another human being in 2019. My goodness...
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 02:32 AM
2

First two points, I agree with. Last point, historically ignorant and objectively incorrect. Women have ALWAYS had value and worth in society by default? Do you mean biological value? 'Cause I wouldn't consider not having the right to vote 'having value and worth' by default. They couldn't even make political decisions until the 1920's... that's the opposite of the value and worth, they had no say beyond biological function and continuity and house chores, except the really influential ones, of …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/19 02:19 AM
1

I mean, there's a lot of good responses. I'd say just ignore it, don't answer. Just ask something totally unrelated and start a new conversation.
/r/askTRP11/09/19 08:13 PM
1

They don't have elderly parents. What are you talking about? I mentioned I don't wanna' talk about family stuff 'cause there's definitely a rift in how we see these things. I am far less conservative than you about relationships. Different strokes and all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 07:25 PM
1

Two of them are, one of them isn't, so you're right. Not sure what the other user's problem is, she really doesn't seem to understand other lifestyles and is shrieking down my throat for no reason. Makes me sad. :\
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 07:22 PM
1

You deleted your comment, luckily I saved what you wrote: You don’t enjoy them enough to be exclusive with them, LTR them, sacrifice them, or marry them. How do you know how much I sacrifice for them? You're making a lot of assumptions. And we're all too realistic for LTR's... I think LTR's are generally a crapshoot and I don't consider myself a monogamous person. I can respect monogamy, why can't you respect other lifestyles? 99% of woman want sex in the context of a loving, sacrificing marriag…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 07:14 PM
1

these women probably lack confidence I only call them plates 'cause it's the colloquialism around here, I genuinely enjoy them all a lot. And let's see...'lack confidence'... interesting claim. Why? 'Cause they enjoy spending time with a guy who halfway has his shit together and treats them well? Who genuinely enjoys spending time with them? I don't get it. I really like all these girls, I wouldn't be seeing them if I didn't. Why do we have to be exclusive for it to be appropriate to you or mean…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 06:38 PM
3

This is essentially right, but I'll add that some of the party girls still look good past 30 if they take care of themselves. I know plenty of 8 - 9 30+ chicks and they all party like fucking crazy, they just also take care of themselves the rest of the time. Overall, though, yeah, this is the right answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 05:58 PM
1

This year the two youngest have been 19 and 22. In hindsight, the 19 year old was too young, there was a clear generational difference, could hardly understand wtf she was about, and besides sex with a hot 19 year old, she def wasn't worth it. The 22 year old on the other hand, well, there were no noticeable big differences between her and the 27 - 30 year olds I'm sleeping with (current plates are 27, 28 and 31). So I think 21 - 22 is my cut off at the moment. For older, I'd go as old as I can …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/19 05:16 PM
4

I didn't call you an idiot. Learn to read. Also you aren't elaborating on your point at all. Pointless repetition isn't an argument. How is it submissive? Are there no circumstances where it's not submissive?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/19 08:43 PM
6

Have you ever given oral sex? If you think controlling a chick's brain/making her practically seize with your mouth is somehow submissive, you're fucking nuts or just wholly inexperienced. If I can make you a jibbering idiot in a couple of minutes, that's not me being submissive, that's me being triumphant.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/19 08:10 PM
1

Boring as shit life -- 30ishk a year job, all I do is write, read, play guitar, hang out with friends occasionally, travel every now and then, hallucinogens and some other [not super hard] drugs, run/walk/hike a lot. That's about it. Dating has never been an issue, but I'm also 6'2", thin and live next to one of the biggest universities in the world, so I don't think it's my lifestyle or personality that has contributed to this. Just luck and a small bit of shitty game.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/19 07:59 PM
5

Interesting, I'm the exact opposite. In my late teens/early 20's I was all about style, mostly really alt/vegan girls, now that I'm approaching 30 I prefer the casual ones with mom jeans. Hell, if they can somehow look hot in mom jeans, to me that means they're hotter than the dressed up chicks 'cause like, if you're not even trying and you're hot, you're actually hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/19 04:54 PM
3

Considering that the first link is a link to false premises, which is what I'm primarily talking about, I don't see how you could consider that 'irrelevant'. If anything it is entirely relevant, since it is a logical fallacy it seems you have not learned about yet. Sex by definition is not slutty behavior. That is a false premise and that is exactly why you needed all those links. You are starting arguments with totally incoherent starting points and coming to totally nuts conclusions. If you th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/19 09:15 PM
3

Well, the first link is about false premises, which you seem fairly fond of. It means your premise is bullshit, thus your conclusions are bullshit, kind of like the comment you made. The premise was bullshit, thus your conclusion was bullshit. Super intellectual, right? I don't know why you decided to get all super pussy on me and make this about a nonexistent argument you're having with yourself about my intelligence (something I never alluded to in any way), but okay, you do you boo.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/19 09:05 PM
7

> The act of having sex is sexually promiscuous. > Thus having sex is inherently slutty. You can not separate those two. Okay, you clearly need all of these. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_premise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_conclusion_from_a_negative_premise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_conclusion_from_affirmative_premises https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illicit_minor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illicit_major
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/19 08:17 PM
6

She doesn't have a source, and clearly has never heard of things like the levée en masse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lev%C3%A9e_en_masse) or Pospolite ruszenie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pospolite_ruszenie). Levy's like this have been happening for... a long time. Most nation's armies consist of men from that nation, not rando mercenaries, hasn't really changed much throughout the centuries... (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription#Medieval_levies)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/19 05:37 PM
1

I quoted it with multiple addendums about how we can not draw conclusions based off single studies, and how all the information we have is conflicting. I also stated there's really no way to know. You did none of these things, so that's a pretty shitty argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/19 09:07 PM
2

You have no stats to back up the worldview that 'women become less happy over the years' except for a single study. I do not believe a single study warrants a worldview or a hard-edged belief.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/19 08:13 PM
1

I mean, there's global stats, too, and they're kinda' the same. Also I still think your first comment is not necessarily true. There seem to be just as many studies correlating education with happiness as there are studies correlating education with unhappiness, so there can really be no clear conclusion at the moment. https://www.gallup.com/analytics/232838/world-poll.aspx Jebb and his team analysed data from the Gallup World Poll, an international survey of more than 1.7 million individuals fr…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/19 08:08 PM
1

I'm not sure if that's true. There's a lot of conflicting data on education and happiness. These things are just too big and changing all the time that it's difficult to get any real consensus. https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/degrees-happiness-graduates-report-higher-well-being#survey-answer The analysis was based on the results of four questions included in the Office for National Statistics’ Annual Population Survey, which was conducted between April 2015 and March 2016. Overall, 107…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/19 07:02 PM
9

There's some research on this. Only a little though. Pretty conflicting, too. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271621233_Are_Women_Happier_than_Men_Evidence_from_the_Gallup_World_Poll This paper provides evidence that women are either happier than men or that there is no significant difference between women and men in nearly all of the 73 countries examined; when comparing men and women with the same life circumstances, women are happier than men in nearly a quarter of the countries. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/19 06:19 PM
1

Agree with some things you wrote, disagree with some others. Here. Yeah there are a few weird chicks who have fetishes for dudes considered conventionally unattractive. Lot of problems with this. For one, 'conventional attraction' is such a wide array of different features that I'm not even sure it means anything. I get it -- facial symmetry good, musculature good, height good, Superman chin good, yeah, those are all culturally normative 'conventionally attractive' features in men, and there's l…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 11:21 PM
2

I know this is a troll post but I'm bored at work so I don't give af Hi, my silly anecdote is I can carry the heavy box up the stairs and you can't. I can also beat you up so bad that your face will look like baby food. You can't do either of those things and that makes me laugh. So I guess have fun being benevolent, altruistic and better. I'm sure these qualities will make it better for women all across the world amen.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 09:37 PM
0

> because no woman actually wants a LTR with a man she perceives as having a lower value. Too many generalizations for my liking. Lots of different types of women are perfectly happy with lots of different types of men. While I do believe in biological realities (lets say, VERY FEW 9's ON AVERAGE fuck obese dudes), it's also a biological reality that individual neuronal landscapes are highly varied, so generalizations when it comes to sex and gender should be taken with huge grains of salt. Ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 09:17 PM
0

Okay, well now I'm just going to keep replying to you out of spite, so my contributions to this thread will continue until yours stop. Do you like this game? This is a good game. I like this game. Lets keep chatting, babe.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 06:22 PM
2

I'm not sure what random anecdotes add to the discussion, beyond "well in my world it's like this so what you said isn't 100% accurate to my own reality", which is about as useful as saying nothing at all. But okay, I am more than happy with you no longer commenting. I am grateful for it, actually. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 05:54 PM
3

Okay, so those were the responses YOU'VE seen, they're not the responses I've seen. So congratulations, I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 05:46 PM
11

I do agree that it's mostly like this, yes, for better or worse. It's because an average woman can literally get fucked/get a relationship whenever she wants, so her loneliness is perceived as a decision to not get dicked. 'You don't need no man, you're beautiful just the way you are, being alone sometimes is good for your individuality/mental health, etc.' An average man literally cannot get fucked whenever he wants, at least not in general, so his loneliness is perceived as a consequence of hi…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/19 05:41 PM
2

Yes, read behind some of those reasons. Mostly bullshit, based on superstitious nonsense or paranoia or monarchical faggotry, all mentioned in my first post. AKA frivolous nothing. Aka bad reasons. Aka they were all mostly stupid and wrong and dumb assholes and the ones who werent were few and far between.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 11:54 PM
5

No, they were fought over mostly frivolous nothing, which I mentioned in my first post. Also plenty of cultures have raped and slaughtered for no reason or no good reason. Hell, some cultures even glorified being cool murderous badasses. Look up Beautiful Rides. From there, you can branch to a lot of sects of male violence and degradation and suffering for bullshit reasons. And I mean... Even the history of sports is weirdly fucking bloody. We used to kick people's heads around for kicks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 11:48 PM
2

I already admitted in my first post men were the doers. Like I've been saying, read a little more closely. Plus I like words, so I'll use as many as I like thanks :)
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 11:11 PM
1

All I have to say: you clearly have not read much history.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:56 PM
1

Maybe read my post a little more closely. I took issue with the last paragraph of the op's post. The 'provide and protect thing' and the whole rationale behind his post, using history to justify his position while ignoring the whole swathing bloody rest of it, seems way dishonest to me. Men can provide and protect as well as be dumb vicious murderers and not be good for the progress of the world. They can also be hugely good for the progress of the world and also suck so much dick it's almost un…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:55 PM
1

You need more nuance in your world view. That's all I think. I listed my point and added an addendum. Men bitch about it too, so who cares if women bitch about it? They have a right to be. They have to fuck and live with the slaughterers, after all. Doesn't sound so nice. Honestly I don't see why we don't ALL deserve to bitch about bad ideas and the predilections of our ancestors and stupid things men and women do? Who cares?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:42 PM
3

Once again, no, that's not my point. My point is succinctly stated in my first post. Men have caused more suffering than women by a huge margin, so saying that they're just the 'providers and the protectors' like the OP did seems like a blatant misreading of history and also glosses over like all the terrible shit they've done, which is like MOST of the terrible shit. I took huge issue with the way he is presenting history there. Also I think you need to read about some more cool women, my frien…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:24 PM
1

My posts are perfectly coherent to anyone with even a smidgen of reading comprehension, which you seem to lack in spades, so I can see why you had an issue with them. My original post is all about why I think the original poster's last paragraph is totally off base and wrong. It's all I've been arguing this entire time. If you want to go off on some tangential bullshit about women's impulses during war, go right ahead, it has literally zero to do with what I was talking about and has nothing to …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:17 PM
1

You don't get just say "traditionalist" and rant incoherently as if it were an argument. It's almost like you only picked two sentences out of my paragraph-long argument to argue against... Here, I'll do it for you: I don't care if anyone thinks it's cowardly, they're stupid and wrong. Yay, easy! Fewer wars, fewer people being slaughtered for no good reason, is objectively better and objectively increases the wellbeing of more living human people than the opposite, which is more wars and more pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 10:00 PM
4

lol I don't give a fuck if traditionalist shitty women of the past thought some guys were cowards for not fighting in WWI... it would have objectively been better for both parties and the well being of millions upon millions of people if we didn't slaughter each other en masse, or gas each other, or shoot mortars at each other from pits. How is this not self fucking explanatory at this point? Are you saying the clusterfuck of WWI was a justified, good war that was necessary to fight? Are you peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 09:52 PM
4

It was entirely necessary, unless you wanted to be conquered by the barbarians next door. That's what I'm saying. You're saying you'd rather be the "perfect society" that becomes the barbarian's slaves. That's your choice, but I prefer survival. That's not what I'm saying and after your responses I doubt you could realistically echo my actual thesis here at all. You're essentially telling me that murdering children and raping women was necessary to the maintenance of civilization because some wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 09:48 PM
8

Men did the shitty necessary work that was required for the cultures to survive as long as they did. Oh yeah, butchering each other was necessary. Raping and burning cities to ashpiles was necessary. Patrilineal/monarchical nation-states were necessary. Bad religious rules were necessary. Fighting wars where hundreds of thousands die because the 'wrong inbred weirdo' gets the throne ... necessary, you say. In what world has the rape of thousands been necessary? In what world was the Drowning at …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 09:30 PM
5

Yeah, and, so? Men were the ones starting the (generally laughably pointless) wars. They were the ones raising up inane, backward, insanely corrupt religious and political institutions. They were the ones calling for rapes and pillages. In other words, men started it. Even when men started having good ideas about how civilized nations should be run, we still continued murdering each other for hundreds of years and plugging our ears at the smartest of us, usually for land and meaningless politica…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 09:06 PM
7

I agree with a lot of what you wrote, but there's glaring issues with your last paragraph. I just don't understand your reasoning here, or how you can just gloss over thousands of years of abject slaughter, revolutions, genocides, rapes, bad ideas (see: religious institutions, monarchies), hysteria's... all perpetuated, sanctioned and started by men. If you want to be intellectually honest about this, I think it's fair to say that men are the movers and shakers of the world. That's absolutely tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 08:36 PM
2

Lol -- is it really so difficult to believe that some people on the internet actually get laid sometimes and it's really not that hard if you're not completely retarded?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/19 01:35 PM
2

They'd only allow roulette.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 09:47 PM
1

The term is too indistinct for me to really be able to answer the question. I know a couple chicks who are 'the whole package', and they are, well, they're the whole package. There's this one chick I know who is an 8 with a degree in Astrophysics, probably the smartest person I've ever met, wonderfully insightful and near-perfect in most contemporary categories. Also a tall hot slender redhead. But I wouldn't really consider her a 'Stacy' because 'Stacy', for me, conjures up connotations of vain…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 09:15 PM
1

Not sure how to answer this question. Pretty much every 7+ girl (not including the hyper religious ones) I know acts like how this sub would define 'Stacy'. They have their pick of the litter, they're insanely fixated with their social media presence, they have a gaggle of pathetic sadsads following their every move online and off and in general kinda' act like they're Marie Antoinette or some shit even when they're just some bimbo with an associate degree in Communications.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 09:01 PM
3

Yes, because casual sex isn't a biological imperative. I was happily monogamous with one woman for all of my 20s, this is actually pretty normal. Sex is a biological imperative, so not sure what you're talking about. People should be able to choose between LTR's and casual sex at their leisure. Neither is better than the other and both can be accomplished honestly and healthily. So you saying "casual sex isn't a biological imperative" ... well ... that's just objectively untrue. Not only are bio…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 08:53 PM
3

Are you seriously comparing Star Wars figurines to a biological imperative? Sex is absolutely necessary for well being and cognitive function. Star Wars bullshits are not. Thus your example feels like a case of false equivalency to me and I can't take it seriously as a rebuttal. It would be perfectly fine pointing out that obsessing over that which you can not have isn't healthy. It depends on the relative importance of the thing. So you can hold SW action figures in great regard, fine, that's g…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 08:07 PM
2

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 06:25 PM
4

Individuals ought to be allowed to determine what's important in their own lives, don't you think? If someone prioritizes sex for good reasons, I don't see anything wrong with it. Sex is an important part of mental/emotional stability for most humans, so I don't see why it shouldn't be used as at least one variable for a successful life. It's not the only thing that's important, but it is extremely vital to billions of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/19 06:11 PM
-2

> “Does that mean you’re gonna rock me to bed tonight”. I would cringe/die to the fucking moon if I even heard someone say this, let alone say it myself. Some of this shit you guys think will work is totally fucking whack.
/r/askTRP27/08/19 09:17 PM
1

Something something blatantly stupid and unverifiably complex generalization something something
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/19 03:19 PM
1

That's from 2005... sorry if I don't take a single dataset from 14 years ago too seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/19 09:49 PM
2

I don't see why anyone would care about N-count unless it's so ridiculously high that you're legitimately afraid of getting AIDs or turning into radioactive goop or something. Also, maybe this is tangential, but is an N-count of 20-something in your 20's/30's really that high? I'm an average male by most contemporary measurements and my N-count is high 20's as of this year and I feel like I've had a fairly average sexual experience, above some in my peer-group, well below others, but nothing out…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/19 09:43 PM
5

> , there's so many thousands of recorded instances of women who hook up with the guy who literally murdered their husband, Source? Who the fuck has conducted this kind of research? This sounds like absolute bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/19 08:15 PM
1

Describing my life right now. Went through an insanely tough breakup last year, then a string of emotionless hookups after that, now I'm with two new chicks and I have caught feelings for both of them. The cycle never stops. I think the trick is just...don't give af. That's all a normal dude can really do. Shit is fuckin' brutal.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/19 08:58 PM
1

I mean, I'm probably more on the side of RP than you think and what you're saying doesn't make any sense and kinda' just makes you look pathetic to any rational individual who could potentially stumble on your comments. You can believe in some tenets of RP without completely losing your rationality and saying shit like, "it's all about YOU and WOMEN DON'T MATTER LOL". It is an objectively oldworld viewpoint that has no place in contemporary society and only serves to further plunge you into the …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/19 12:56 AM
1

traditional anglo cultural paradigm of masculine is Beta Traditional anglo cultural paradigm? Would you care to enlighten your captive audience in this thread, or do you want to keep using words you don't actually understand? Also I don't give af if you're a woman or a seven foot yellow bird or a gay Jew or whatever you identify as. Doesn't matter to me. With the shit you've been saying in this thread, you sound like one of two things: a) a sexless loser, or b) a troll.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/19 12:48 AM
1

I come from a military family. Not only are you insanely wrong, but the men I've met who most fit in the traditional paradigm of masculine have all been respectful, courteous and understanding of women. Wanna' know why? 'Cause women are peopleeeeeeee you fucking sexless dumbshit
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/19 12:30 AM
5

That's because it is selfish as hell and is exactly what a tru-sadsad-browbreaten-beta would say, a mindset born and bred from not being able to actually connect with women on a sexual and emotional level, a way of thinking that probably ought to have been left in the diaries of sad-sad sexless betas in the 19th century. It's a complete dismissal of women as other human beings with individual wants, desires and intellects, and is all about some kind of totally misguided male-centric hedonism. It…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/19 12:25 AM
2

Lol, that's clear, just having some fun. Plus, I'm on this sub for a reason... shit like this is legitimately interesting to me, and maybe I can beat some of the retard out of him in my own way. Maybe not, but still, might as well try while bored at work.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 09:56 PM
1

Cry more, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 09:52 PM
2

> LMAO. It's not complex at all. Any guy I know who is above 6 feet , has broad shoulders, and a strong jawline instantly gets pussy. It's very simple. Anecdotes are not evidence. I don't give a single shit about 'guys you know'. Lots of people exist. You are generalizing and generalizations are not credible evidence. Everything you said right here is fallacious reasoning and shouldn't be taken seriously by any rational individual. > Already tried that for years. Women absolutely care about heig…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 09:46 PM
2

Eh, I see a lot of really good ideas here, too, and a lot of really well thought out comments. This is just definitely not one of them and the height narrative here is so silly to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 09:37 PM
5

This is ridiculous. B I L L I O N S of women exist. Are you saying there is no variety there at all? ALL of them think exactly the same way and think the exact same things are attractive? Honestly this idea is so on-its-face stupid that I hope no one but you takes it seriously, and I hope no one responds to this thread in any more detail than I have. If you actually believe this and aren't just a troll, I recommend you go out and actually meet some women. Height is important to a lot of women. B…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 09:28 PM
1

I do not believe we have any relevant data points that point to this conclusion, and anecdotally I have not noticed traditionally attractive women being any worse/meaner/more controlling than average looking chicks, so I can't really support your conclusion here.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 08:09 PM
2

When I say 'normal' or 'average', I'm referring to having a normal human female sex drive, not whether or not they're considered good looking. I bet even most 5/10 chicks have backup dudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 08:00 PM
2

Actually, I think I should amend my answer -- it's 100% for sexually average chicks. I've met a lot of hot girls who either have low libido's or are demisexuals or insert other relevant variable here _______, so the concept of 'backup partner' doesn't really come into play when discussing them. My answer really only applies to sexually 'normal' chicks, whatever that means.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 07:55 PM
3

I'm not red pill or blue pill or any pill really, but in my anecdotal experience, it's 100% for the attractive ones, at least. The uggos and the homely ones probably have some, too, but I don't have enough first hand interaction with them to make a claim. But yeah, this is called the mate switching hypothesis and I'd wager it's true in most instances. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916308534
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/19 07:50 PM
1

No, I meant I can speak to women and not make myself look like a complete retard. Once you realize bitches ain't shit talking gets really easy, but I'm sure you know this. I'm not particularly funny or anything. ​ I did list height as a positive attribute, you know. I'm well aware it helps a lot. But I think if you mess with the variables, it nets you tons of different results, and we shouldn't be ignoring what women as individuals want, which varies greatly. In general, chicks care about height…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/19 02:09 AM
1

I never once said sense of humor in my post, man, nor did I say that's what makes my luck. I actually listed all the variables I think contribute most to me pulling on average. Sense of humor wasn't one of them. Not sure what you're on about. Okay, well I know plenty of average dudes who pull. Which anecdote is better? All I was saying is that a minority of average dudes pull -- I don't think this is that controversial of a claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/19 01:47 AM
2

I'd say there's a minority of 'average' men who get casual sex fairly frequently, it's just that the quality of women generally goes down. Most of my friends are 'average' and I'd say about 30% of them (out of say, like, the 20 people I'm closest to) have frequent to 'normal' amounts of casual sex. I hear about them getting laid every now and then, every few months or so. Then there's the once or twice a year friends, which, you know, they are trying but largely boning trolls. The guys who get l…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/19 01:27 AM
1

My GF is a high end accountant and makes way more than I do (I'm a supervisor at a small data management company). I make ok money but she makes 2x more. She has multiple degrees and accounting certificate bullshits, and I only have a single degree, in Philosophy, so it's pretty worthless. We're super into each other and have been for a long time (a decade of having sex with one another on and off, and about a year of a real relationship). How do we make this work? Teach me your ways sempai
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/19 06:21 PM
1

I think you're pretty much right on the money, just want to point out that you can fuck loads of chicks and *still* complain about it on the internet. Your general point is right, but your reasoning here is fallacious.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/19 11:52 PM
1

> i guarantee a good mechanic is smarter than your average English major. ​ As a pretty dumb guy with two pointless degrees in Philosophy and English, you're probably right. Your post reminded me of this short piece by Asimov, which I think is right on the money when talking about intelligence: ​ http://talentdevelop.com/articles/WIIA.html
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/19 11:23 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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