emptypillbox Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
10	Moral Value of a Person	Discussion	emptypillbox	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 02:55 AM
7	What type of amoral?		emptypillbox	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 12:39 AM
6	How to reconcile the existence of non-RPers?		emptypillbox	/r/PurplePillDebate	04/02/15 04:53 AM
5	Were RPers every BPers?	Question for RedPill	emptypillbox	/r/PurplePillDebate	21/09/15 11:53 PM
2	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy		emptypillbox	/r/PurplePillDebate	11/02/15 05:31 AM

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
1	What would you say is moral case against red pill? There would be no moral outrage if TRP did not WORK as a model for understanding women and getting laid. I thoroughly disagree. The values within TRP are harmful, I believe, to men and women both, regardless of whether they work.	/r/PurplePillDebate	05/10/15 12:32 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? I think that you are doing a very fuzzy reading of the OP and further comments, and I think we're not going to get anywhere. You also seemed to have attributed to me ideas that I never said. For example, reconstructing the conversation for a moment: You said: However, I'd disagree with the bullet points you have listed as honestly defining a BP mindset. And I responded: I don't have any bullet-points defining a BP mindset. I have some bullet-points that give the suggestion of an RP mindset. You …	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:28 PM
1	Were RPers every BPers? From which you infer that the reverse was the previous BP mindset. Indeed not - in fact, I suggested that the previous BP mindset of RPers has not changed. I gave no impression of how many non-RP mindsets there might be - there might be plenty. Why, I was BP whatever I thought about ALL those things. Yes, but I'm trying to figure out what you thought about all those things. Still no response on that front, however. That may be useful for "characterising what type of BPer I was"... But not for fi…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 09:54 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? However, I'd disagree with the bullet points you have listed as honestly defining a BP mindset. I don't have any bullet-points defining a BP mindset. I have some bullet-points that give the suggestion of an RP mindset. The distinguishing feature for me was very simply the understanding that RP was broadly correct. Nothing about my character, or my worldview, or my politics, or my interest in sex. My "BP life" was not characterized by anything EXCEPT not having that knowledge. So, in order to det…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 09:24 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Higher Libido alone means a higher value placed on sex. No it doesn't. Higher libido doesn't necessarily correlate with high value placed on sex or relationships and an association with self-worth. The effects scale with the amount in one's bloodstream, independent of other variables. Even if we accept that the effects scale with the amount in one's bloodstream independent of all other variables (genes, diet, stress, environment, etc.), this indicates that there is variability of sex drive acros…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 07:34 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Why do you assume that I'm not doing?	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 05:35 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? The "chains" reference was rhetorical You mean metaphorical. So was my response. I was under no illusion that there were actual chains involved. If you want to understand what is being discussed here I started the discussion, and I was trying to keep to the topic I initiated. then you must understand the importance of getting some. That is the topic under discussion - whether it is universally important or not. You are starting to bore me, dude. I'm honestly surprised you replied as often as you…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 05:23 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? You are welcome to think so, but what you are saying is in the realm of philosophy or religion- man "should" not place importance or identity there. But, RP doesn't deal in what should be. It deal in what is. First, I haven't made a normative or ethical statement regarding chains. The chains in my metaphor indicate a binding association between two elements, so that the effect on one is tied to an effect on the other. Were you treating it differently? If you made a normative/ethical reading of m…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 04:50 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? Men are value oriented because that is how we are wired, with testosterone. To disagree with this, you would have to somehow show that men (on average) do not have 5-10 times the amount of testosterone in their blood as women. This is poor logic, or incompletely stated. That men have more testosterone than women does not, in-and-of itself, imply that men will value certain things. Certain levels of testosterone might be associated with valuing certain things, but that would be the case independe…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 04:44 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? Um, yep. I think you are having a different discussion to the one I started.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 04:32 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? This doesn't really engage with the premise of the OP, which is whether there is a similar set of values that pre-RP BPers and RPers hold that non-RPers do not hold - e.g. is there a prerequisite set of values that one has to hold that makes RP acceptable to them?	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 03:27 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? I think you are saying that almost all people place high value on sex/women/relationships between adolescence and adulthood, and that men will retain a high level of this (to some extent or another) until they "control" this facet. What type of control is this? I can imagine two types, at least: if sex/women/relationships are related to personal-worth/identity, then success with the former equals satisfaction with the latter, or disconnection between the former and the latter, so that the measur…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 03:24 AM
3	BP vs RP: What N count for a woman precludes her from being marriage material? Please don't answer that "partner count doesn't matter". This is a HYPOTHETICAL question for those people. Doesn't this just assume a type of premise that not everyone accepts? What is the point of this type of question?	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:44 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Fair enough. Sunshine here in Aus.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:39 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Okay, but my post in not about the two bullet-points on their own - it's whether these bullet points are specific to RPers, to RPers and pre-RP BPers, to all men, and whether they are prerequisites for becoming RP.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:38 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? One of the claims of the OP is that people who hold that men are value-oriented a certain way believe that all or most men are value-oriented that way. I believe that you fall into that category, as your contention is, If you are a man, then both bullet points apply to you. Have I got your contention correct? (You will not be surprised to find that I disagree with both your characterisation of non-RP positions and your RP contentions, and think that the truth is somewhere in the middle. Your pos…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:37 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? Well, let's see your response to the OP to put this response into context. Do you think that some men, all men, almost all men, no men, or some other amount of men, place a high value on sex/women/relationships so that they are associated with success/personal worth/identity? If not all men or if not most men, do you think that these values are precursors to RP thinking, non-RP thinking, or whether they are adopted when one becomes RP or non-RP? Then I can put your low-expectations idea into som…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:27 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Agreed, that's why we call guys who hold lower value with ease natural Alphas I'm not convinced that we do agree. The attitude towards abundance and the attitude towards importance/value are distinct. (I don't think "alpha" is defined by either of these things.) In turn I assumed that your omission implied an assumption of irrelevance. Omission of what? You seemed to draw out conclusions from things that I didn't say - I don't see what omission assisted you in thinking this was correct. I know i…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:24 AM
3	Were RPers every BPers? I still think this is not quite the topic (it's hard to tell, because you've made a list rather than make some reasoned out sentences, but I'll give it a go). You are suggesting that these factors push one to RP? I understand that, but I am suggesting that there may be value-oriented factors (which I called the internal or specific worldview) that are necessary for someone to accept RP - i.e. these factors are not sufficient to move someone to accept RP. all men care about is getting their dick …	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:18 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? When you say "both of [my] points", do you mean the bullet points? Part of my contention is that RP sees these as universal features of males, whereas non-RPers do not. And this is why I ask whether RPers were ever BPers in the way that non-RPers here are.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:08 AM
3	Were RPers every BPers? This is only the 'general worldview' that you're talking about. I'm making a specific point that perhaps people who changed their general worldview to RP held, already, a specific worldview which did not change. And, whether this specific worldview is different to that of non-RPers that engage here - i.e. whether RPers BP-phase is identical to all non-RPers current phase.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:05 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Right, but that's the "general worldview" change. I'm asking whether people who changed their general worldview to RP changed their specific worldview, or if only people who hold that specific worldview change their general worldview to RP.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:02 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? Not universally so, no. The whole 'unplugging from the Matrix' metaphor is de-condiitoning from this toxic One-itis/beta Game/fem-centric mentality, so acceptance phase, successful RPers no longer place high value on sex; they hold abundance mentality and have means to acquire it with relatively little effort. I think that 'abundance mentality' is not a shift away from placing high-value on sex/women/relationships as associated with personal worth/success/identity. It is an attitude cultivated s…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 01:00 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? Do they? My impression is that RPers think male values regarding sex (the "high value placed on sex to the extent that personal worth is associated with it") is something they see as universal to all men, but which they do not admit to. (e.g. they say that sex is important to men, that lack of sex is one of the most frustrating and perhaps emasculating parts of their lives, but not to place pussy on a pedestal). I tend to see that non-RPers think this sex-centric value-placement is unusual or ab…	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 12:50 AM
1	Were RPers every BPers? I see. Do you think this is universally so? My argument is that there are at least two vague categories of men - those who place high value on sex, etc., and those who do not place as high value on sex, etc. Those in the first category will connect with RP whereas those in the second category will not.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 12:43 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? I'm not sure I see the connection...? I'm not suggesting that men were happy or unhappy, just that those who sought out RP had some pre-existing characteristics that made RP 'gel' for them, whereas men that do not have those characteristics would be the ones that do not turn to RP.	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 12:33 AM
2	Were RPers every BPers? Heya. I'm a little unsure what you're saying. Is the "first point" you mention the "general worldview" shift, or an agreement with the relatively static nature of the first bullet-point of the "specific worldview"?	/r/PurplePillDebate	22/09/15 12:26 AM
4	Physical attractiveness is not significantly subjective. And important. Being fat, being thin, having big boobs, having a flat chest - all these things were more or less attractive at different times. There's also quite some variation within my social groups as to what is found to be attractive or not - especially when it comes to face and attitude. I'd be interested in reading the first study you linked to, but I can only seem to see the abstract. What's the variation in what is "common"? Is there any more information I can get? I also want to be wary about drawing…	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/09/15 07:40 AM
1	What alternative does BP offer to the despondent male? I'm starting to run short on time, so I can't give as long a reply as I have previously, perhaps. But let's see. one crucial aspect you're forgetting is that by default, it requires that other person to want to have a relationship with me as well. And that means a couple of things. It means they like me, that they are willing to talk and socialize with me, that we are both able to do so, and that they have love and affection for me ( It isn't really a relationship otherwise ). And I can totally …	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/09/15 07:13 AM
3	Qs4BP: Do you think TRP is "separated from reality"? Do you believe TRP is "emotionally driven"? I once made a thread about evidence, and in that thread a RPer said that anecdotal evidence from RPers was, even if it were not scientifically rigorous, good evidence. Anecdotal evidence from non-RPers, this same person said, was untrustworthy because they were likely lying or deluded. To me, this demonstrates the type of mindset that I find prevalent, though I will admit that this example is an extreme one. The way that RP approaches evidence and pattern-identification is similar to way that cr…	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/09/15 06:43 AM
1	What alternative does BP offer to the despondent male? There's only immediate, available truth - and those truths are that there are plenty of men out there struggling as hell to date someone and asking out thousands of women to date them, but women don't do this for men. This is not an immediate, available truth to me. I have not observed it from the people I see, I think 'thousands' is something that I would want at least a little bit of record keeping for, and I've certainly seen desperate, lonely women. As for change, you don't understand. every…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/09/15 10:53 PM
3	What alternative does BP offer to the despondent male? Let's take a look. I wrote: If they have friends - if they have the ability to form that sort of relationship - then they have the basis to explore how they interact and they'll find a way to connect with someone. You wrote: Wrong. I have friends, many of the "hardcore" FA men have friends. But males aren't females, contrary to what BP believes. I can be myself with my male friends. I can be not confident, not socially skilled, not charming, whatever. I can just let myself go and talk about what…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/09/15 03:58 AM
2	What alternative does BP offer to the despondent male? This post demonstrates, to me, at least, the gulf in RP/non-RP communication. I guess there are at least two types of questions - factual and hypothetical. In the factual questions, the extent to which SMV is important, and what factors affect it, is up for debate, and we should be seeing sources and whatnot. With a hypothetical, we're looking at the validity rather than the soundness - what are the reasons that someone believes something, etc. Here, you've asked for the non-RP point-of-view, an…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/09/15 02:12 AM
2	What alternative does BP offer to the despondent male? So what can a guy like that do They want a partner with a similar personality and status to like them for the personality and status they have, but women don't want them. So then women put the onus on them to "adapt" into becoming someone else that women do like, but you can't force someone to be happy about doing something they aren't comfortable with or don't want to, just to get validation from others. In any other social settings, this is usually seen as a really shitty suggestion, to just c…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/09/15 01:08 AM
2	Red pill and blue pill insurance companies People effectively use generalizations before entering in professional and platonic relationships, too. I'm not sure that the employer/employee relationship is analogous enough - not only is it more contractual, but the purpose of employment is to access things from that person (i.e. work). As to the friend example that you raise - this is more analogous because the engagement as a friend is for being with that person - but that also allows you to make a continual judgement rather than a discret…	/r/PurplePillDebate	30/08/15 06:17 AM
4	Red pill and blue pill insurance companies There are times when one-on-one judgement is the best approach and there are times when group-trends judgement is the best approach. An insurance company that deals with lots of people and has to rely on the contributions of large numbers of members is going to find group trends the most appropriate strategy. A relationship between two people is going to require an understanding of the individual. Generally, in the case of an interpersonal relationship, there can be ways to build trust over time…	/r/PurplePillDebate	30/08/15 12:45 AM
6	Why is it "wrong" to manipulate people? "Manipulation" can be a pretty fuzzy term, and I think that that causes some disagreement here. Let's imagine that "manipulation" denotes a scale where, on one end, you have "influences someone", and, on the other end, you have "completely and unambiguously deceives someone to produce certain behaviour". If a salesperson influences your decision, well, that's just sales and advertising. But if they lie to you, make false promises, misrepresent the product, contract, or process, we generally want…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/05/15 05:18 AM
5	Do you believe this video describes reality at all? I don't buy the simplicity of the market analogy. Saying sex is an exchange, and simplifying men to suggest that they fairly uniformly desire sex only over relationships and vice versa, is just missing out on so many other factors. Whether or not the conclusions follow form the premises is a bit of a moot point to me, because the premises are faulty. I think the video oversimplifies the premises and overestimates the impact of this market-model on marriage rates.	/r/PurplePillDebate	13/04/15 12:33 AM
1	What would you tell a frustrated man to improve his relationships with women? Believing there is no "generic" advice assumes each situation is different Or it assumes that there are at least a few distinct categories and that it is important to discover which is which. But I think the RP likes to ignore the idea that people have different goals, inhibitions, strengths, struggles and contexts, and they imagine that the surface information given in the OP example is therefore sufficient to provide some meaningful advice. I believe this is not so. There's a lot of room betwe…	/r/PurplePillDebate	12/04/15 07:59 AM
1	What would you tell a frustrated man to improve his relationships with women? You wrote a lot just to openly admit that you gave a cop out answer when OP is simply asking to examine the hypothetical situation and put forth advice based on your own hypothetical prejudices that may or may not be related to your actual prejudices. I don't feel that it was a cop-out - the point is that there is no "generic advice" that's suitable without knowing more. I think a lot of RP is predicated on the premise that there is generic or universal advice, but I'm explaining that I don't bu…	/r/PurplePillDebate	10/04/15 11:44 PM
2	What would you tell a frustrated man to improve his relationships with women? I think this misses the point. We are here on the PPD subreddit, after all, so the context of our discussion is presumably that there are some RP and non-RP perspectives. There is also the implicit suggestion - it is the premise of this forum - that the two differ in significant ways, and that there is something conceptually common about RP advice (it is cohesive) and maybe something cohesive about non-RP advice. With that in mind, I take it that the answers will be somewhat judged as to whether…	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/04/15 01:46 PM
3	xPost from TRP: TRPer has rant about his white trash step-mother disrespecting his father in his final days And does this confirm TRP's view of things? I don't see how one story can ever confirm RP view of things. Sounds like the woman was a dick at the end, though I have no idea what their forty years of marriage was like, except that it, in fact, lasted forty years, which demonstrates some sort of longevity for the relationship. Sounds also like neither of them took the hint to have themselves checked out. Your health is critically important, and it's not necessarily someone else's job to make you g…	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/04/15 02:13 AM
4	What would you tell a frustrated man to improve his relationships with women? The advantage of real people over hypothetical people is that if they are my friend, as proposed in the post, I would know them a lot better than this paragraph and a bit in the OP. And that's where real advice would come from. Just like I have the non-RP idea of "treat women as individuals and not statistics", so do I have the same idea about men.	/r/PurplePillDebate	09/04/15 01:46 AM
1	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? I'm not generally of the opinion that you can easily make one ruinous mistake by starting in the middle with women. Having a messy divorce? I think we ruled that something as important as marriage still required a lot of thought there in the middle - it's hardly some sudden risk (or a bad batch of heroin?!). Same applies for moving in together and ending up living with an ex. I can't really comment on avoiding a broken heart, because I think that the circumstances surrounding it are likely to be…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 11:47 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics Hmm: maybe you should post a definition of realism and romanticism in the OP so we can keep the conversation on track. It's interesting, also, that you think I said that men have to be convinced to take pragmatic steps by realistic women (is having a baby or taking the next step necessarily "realistic" - I don't think so), and read into my example that men are thinking that things might be able to stay the way they are - not something that I said or indicated. I think it demonstrates that we're …	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 06:34 AM
2	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics Nor is all good science conducted through numbers. I, too, have a "fuckload" of life experience, but the problem is that your life experience is hardly going to convince me that mine is wrong, and vice versa - partly because we are disembodied voices over the internet. But at the very least, one could add together our two sets of life experiences to form reasonable doubt that either of us, individually, had gotten the whole picture. And without some sort of rigorous methodology, that's all we ha…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 05:09 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics You said male disposability is about men being valued for their output. I said a lot more than that. I said it gave men lower intrinsic worth, for example. Being forced into being disposable in war is not a "higher risk" as if they had a choice in the matter. Again, I think you've missed the distinction. You're either disposable or you're not - it's a value-judgement. You don't get "forced into being disposable". You might get forced into a situation where you are likely to die, and one of the r…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 04:24 AM
1	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? This happens all the time in serious relationships. A classic example is trying to make things work long distance -- you know full well it's going to be difficult at times, you decide to do it anyway Seems like the common-sense, non-absolute component is there. Men do irrational and downright stupid things when they're infatuated with a woman -- just listen to the news section of any morning radio show for examples. Back to the men listening to women point I raised earlier - is this something th…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 04:14 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics I don't care why it's there - it's there. No, the point was that the social "narrative" does not universally or even mostly cover individual views. That's why I disagreed with your point number 1. I guess our differing anecdotal evidence will have to battle it out, but my impression from people I know is that while mothers are certainly dedicated to caring for their child, and see themselves as irreplaceable in their lives, so do fathers, and one is generally not seen as "primary". This is espec…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 04:04 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics So in addition to not accepting male disposability you can't accept that we see women's lives as more important I disagree with you on these points, yes. I don't believe you've established sufficiently that they are real. You could call male disposability "tough masclulinity" if you wanted, but there's no getting away from the idea that this "masculinity" involves being disposable. I don't call "disposability" "tough masculinity". I think that they are distinct. Men weren't just told they should…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 03:45 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics I've told you what I think causes more male deaths and men in riskier jobs. What evidence supports 'disposable' that I haven't covered in 'idea of tough masculinity'? Reporting women and children's deaths as particular tragic doesn't imply to me that men are disposable, but that they think that women and children are generally less liable to be able to defend themselves or less likely to have aggravated the situation. Whether that's true or not is another story - though I don't generally see wom…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 02:39 AM
0	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? It's interesting how disagreement is "shaming" when it comes from RP and "rational" when it comes from BP. I think that you are making some stuff up, now. I didn't say that whenever people on RP disagreed that that constituted shaming - but shaming is very definitely present in the RP subreddit. Shaming involves an emotive, loaded and ideologically-reinforcing set of language, whereas disagreement need not. Both are definitely present in RP, and redditors are most definitely shamed for what are …	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 02:33 AM
2	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? Anyone who gets married takes it pretty close to absolutely I would like to suggest that marriage is a pretty particular, more involved and rather drawn-out event (in that there are a host of steps and often a lot of time involved from inception to execution) than "I'll never leave you" and the various contexts that might surround that. Marriage is more than simply a statement - it is a publicly-declared, well-planned, legal contract (in general; there are Vegas weddings and whatnot, but I think…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 02:33 AM
1	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics So why the reluctance to use the word "disposable" then? Because I think 'disposable' and what I have said are significantly distinct. 'Disposable' suggests that men are valued only for their output, whereas a "tough" "just do it" culture has a significantly different set of values: that of masculinity being capable, self-reliant, and resilient. I think that these are two distinct things.	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 02:09 AM
1	BPers - if feminist terms can be used to diminish the accomplishments of some men in STEM fields can those same terms be used retroactively to rewrite the history of other men who made breakthroughs in their era? I think there's a conflation of two things here: 1) good or bad science, and 2) opportunities for individuals to participate in science. The t-shirt, the "old boys' club", etc. are all examples of (2). They don't discount (1). Isaac Newton did some good science that he could do because he was semi-aristocratic and had some money, but the latter doesn't mean that it wasn't good science. There's room for commentary on both, I feel.	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 01:11 AM
2	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? To a certain extent this is mainstream, as you say I'd say that it's very mainstream. Take the "I love you" example that you gave. The naive interpretation: If she says "I love you," she loves you And the sceptical one: She loves you, but what would cause that to change? Well, even in your own example, the scepticism is not about whether she loves him, it's about what might change that. But that's not non-mainstream - I'm pretty sure that everyone understands that people can change! "I'll never …	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 12:59 AM
0	Men are romantics pretending to be realists; women are realists pretending to be romantics 1) Women feel that is their role to be the primary caregiver for their children (whether this is a self-appointed role or the reflection of societal expectations doesn't really matter). I don't think this is true. I think that there is a lot of societal expectation through tradition and conservative thinking (that is, the general lag of morality, not some political viewpoint) that suggests women be the primary caregiver, but I think that individual women are pretty split on whether this is appro…	/r/PurplePillDebate	07/04/15 12:29 AM
1	"Be yourself" is not bad advice. I was writing to someone else in this subreddit about "just be yourself", and I think that you've missed the most important middle-ground - "be yourself" and "self-improvement/directed self-determination" are not mutually exclusive. One can "be oneself" and not simply "wait". Your depiction makes it sound as if there is a passive, "be yourself" option, and an active "don't be yourself" option, but there is an active "be yourself" option that I think is common sense. I hope you don't mind if I co…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 11:56 PM
1	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? Given enough time on TRP you'll see exactly this sort of discussion. ...it does force you to look at the world from a dramatically different perspective. I'm not sure that exactly that discussion does force one to look at the world from a dramatically different perspective. It is the simplified, more dogamtic, as you put it, discourse that shows a different perspective. There's nothing non-mainstream, or even non-romantic, about different people being different and reaching a relationship thresh…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 11:50 PM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? I think that RP goes a little further than "be the best version of you". It specifically notes which qualities are "best" and which are "worst" in many instances, tends to shame (or ban) those that disagree and praise those who agree. I would go so far as to say that it is not extremely clear on that point. It has definite ideas about what masculinity is, what femininity is, who men are and who women are, and it proposes a conformity to those ideas. The phrase "be the best version of you" on RP …	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 11:38 PM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? I assume that this link gives an accurate enough impression of your take on "just be yourself". Two things interest me about this. One is that it seems to differ considerably from my take on it, which is somewhat threefold - three different sort of layers, perhaps. The first is "don't pretend to be someone you're not". That doesn't mean, "Don't strive to improve yourself." An example - you think women value humour and you want to be funny. "Just be yourself" means don't try and force humour, don…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 01:25 PM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? Out of curiosity, what do you think is meant when people say, "Just be yourself?" I'm sure that it's probably a vague enough phrase that you could interpret it in various ways, but I think me and my friends all have a similar understanding.	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 07:36 AM
2	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? Ah. Do you subscribe to one side or the other? I'm personally not convinced that non-RP has a well-established set of claims that they announce with any substance, though I could be wrong. To me it seems mostly that RP make distinct claims, and non-RP disagrees.	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 07:17 AM
1	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? RP has difficulty differentiating statistical correlations and probabilistic outcomes - the latter suggests identifying "law-like" features in the social landscape, which does reduce complex, nuanced ideas into oversimplified "rules of thumb". Statistical correlation, on the other hand, leaves room for the diversity of human behaviour and other known and unknown factors. What interests me is that in your "AWALT" you seem to suggest that "all" can be derived "under the right circumstances", which…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 07:15 AM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? So you're saying that RP and non-RP theories are roughly as rigorous as each other? Do you think that RP suggests that its claims are more justified, substantial or rigorous as non-RP claims?	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 06:46 AM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? Why thank you. I'm a politics researcher. Don't know what your expectations of our writing abilities are, though.	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 04:36 AM
1	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? Hmmm - are you saying that that makes it justified to claim that RP has scientific support or is factual? Or are you saying that RP is "as good as" anything else out there, given that all our methods are pretty biased? Or are you saying something else?	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 04:20 AM
2	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? No, why?	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 03:39 AM
3	Discussion: Is true friendship between men and women "impossible"? I don't understand the RP idea that there are very specific laws that mean we can easily predict the outcome of interpersonal relationships. There may be trends, commonalities, correlations, but saying something like, "x is impossible in y situation" is really difficult. It is even more difficult given the variety of demographics involved. Are male-female friendships impossible? I would say "no". I've definitely seen them, and I have female friends who are my best friends. It is definitely not a…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 01:16 AM
9	BP'ers, how do we know that most of your dislike of TRP isn't just some irrational emotional reaction? I think this thread demonstrates something interesting about RP/non-RP interaction. I'm non-RP, and I have the general opinion that RP uses circular logic to cherry pick data that supports premises that they are emotionally invested in from anecdotal, personal experience. I find it highly unscientific, and references to science, data, logic and the like are generally only viable if one already accepts a host of RP premises from the get-go and ignores all other interpretations. But how does a RPe…	/r/PurplePillDebate	06/04/15 12:53 AM
4	Hypergamy extends even into academia? -- Women in academia are less likely than men to cooperate with lower-ranked colleagues This doesn't sound anything like hypergamy. I repeatedly see twisted definitions of hypergamy on this site - sometimes it means selecting a partner of higher value (the closest definition to hypergamy I've seen RP use), sometimes it means multiple women sleeping with a small cross-section of men, sometimes it means women sleeping with lots of men. Today, apparently, it means being less likely to co-author publications with a same-gender assistant professor, which is a lower rank. That's right. S…	/r/PurplePillDebate	03/04/15 01:02 AM
1	Alternative Theories to Redpill Trust and friendship: be a member of a mutually trusting/trustworthy group of friends. Trust will build confidence, trust and friendship will bring you contacts - that's the essential "mating strategy" and basis for "personal development". Be someone who can be trusted, and trustworthy friends will be honestly self-reflective with you.	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/03/15 04:32 AM
1	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... Stubborn, then. I wrote a rather long post before, and if you insist that this trend implies or supports hypergamy, I think it would be fair of you to respond the particular objections I raise to this rather than simply, stubbornly, repeating yourself. I often hear that RP is scientific and fact-based - care to use some critical reasoning to make the link between women breeding and hypergamy, without using circular logic? I get the impression that you can't, but you might be able to prove me wro…	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/03/15 12:23 AM
1	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... The point of my earlier posts is that the trend does not inherently support the idea of hypergamy, and this is a conclusion that you have assumed from the outset. Re-pointing to the trend doesn't support your conclusion any more than it did before, which is none.	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/03/15 12:18 AM
1	Female RPers and Male BPers the side you disagree with seems to be more in your favour so why do you think it's bullshit? Do you have something to back that up as well, or is this more "common sense"?	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/03/15 12:16 AM
1	Female RPers and Male BPers the side you disagree with seems to be more in your favour so why do you think it's bullshit? Oh, I see - in this subreddit in particular. I got the impression from OP that he or he was talking about the population in general.	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/03/15 12:15 AM
13	Female RPers and Male BPers the side you disagree with seems to be more in your favour so why do you think it's bullshit? You'll have to do a little better than that. It's plainly obvious - and the existence of this subreddit clearly reinforces this - that one person's idea of "common sense" far from universal. I, for one, disagree with you, and the idea that I trust your "common sense" over mine, when I have no idea why you support the idea you do, and all you can write in defense of it is "common sense", is laughable. Isn't RP supposed to be scientific and rigorous - isn't that part of the integrity of the RP? So…	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 07:35 AM
11	Female RPers and Male BPers the side you disagree with seems to be more in your favour so why do you think it's bullshit? I think that the majority of men lean RP and the majority of women lean BP I'm curious what gives you this impression.	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 07:17 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Cheers. Sorry that we went round and round there for a while. Hope you're having a good day.	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 02:17 AM
2	Moral Value of a Person But utilitarianism also involves calculations based on what an individual values Not measuring value would be utilitarian. I'm confused by these two points going together. By 'individual values', do you mean that utilitarianism calculates what each person values, or that each person conducting a utilitarian judgement uses only their own values? Because utilitarian generally suggests neither of those things. If that's my fault due to my writing then my bad, but what I am getting at is that there …	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 01:56 AM
2	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... So, stubborn then?	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 12:40 AM
1	How does calling an argument racist/sexist invalidate it? I do like a good pretzel.	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 12:39 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person How isn't measuring someone's moral value utilitarian? Is this question missing a word? Are you asking if not measuring someone's moral value is utilitarian? Necessarily utilitarian? Or are you implying that utilitarianism necessarily requires measuring someone's moral value? Or if something can be utilitarian even if we don't measure people's moral value? Utilitarian is primarily a consequentialist theory - the moral value of an action isn't derived from inherent moral value, but by weighing up…	/r/PurplePillDebate	28/03/15 12:38 AM
2	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... This is a hypothesis. I get the impression that you already held this hypothesis and will take any evidence to back it up. But this set of data suggests a whole range of interpretations. If you're happy to be intellectually dishonest and rely on confirmation bias, then I guess that's up to you, but don't pretend that it is science or even critical reasoning or even basic logic, because it's not. In this case, you've started with the idea that partner-selection must gravitate women towards "highe…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 12:14 PM
2	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... You might have noticed, had you read my post, that the ratio of women to men reproducing does not support the idea of hypergamy. Just saying, "More women reproduced than men" does not suggest that people selected partners from higher social classes, status groups, or castes. That's the factor you have to take into account if you are going to use the term 'hypergamy'. It would appear you are repeating some numbers without any idea of how they might relate to hypergamy.	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 11:52 AM
1	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... I get the feeling that you didn't read what I wrote. You might notice that the article you link doesn't suggest that a large number of women are chasing the top 20% of men (apart from the various other problems I mentioned).	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 11:46 AM
2	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... It's the up part that is not being properly taken into account.	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 11:37 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Utilitarianism is not purely quantitative. I didn't say it was, but I did say it is generally associated with maximising some measurable value of utility. You said: Measuring the value of a person is inherently utilitarian And I disagreed that measuring the moral value of a person is inherently utilitarian - the moral value in a utilitarian system is generally, but not necessarily, the output after utility is measured. I also mentioned self-determining consent as an example of inherent moral val…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 08:23 AM
2	Where is the Future of Feminism headed? I think more and more men have been moving away from the identity of 'masculinity' and more and more women have been moving away from 'femininity', both purporting to 'reinvent' each multiple times in the process. I think that the 'conservatives' (for want of a better word) that are strongly associated with these gender-roles will become more and more vocal about them, but will eventually be seen as outliers. At the moment I think that people caught up in the shift don't internally associate, bu…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 07:07 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person I think I have to disagree. Utility is a measure of value. If something has no utility, or someone is indifferent to it, then it would either have nil value or be irrelevant/unimportant to them. However, many on TBP see TRP as negative, indicating that it is not of zero utility, it has negative value. Thus TRP must have a negative value. I'm confused as to in what manner this is an objection specifically to what I said. I didn't say utility wasn't a measure of value. Nor do I understand why you'…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 07:02 AM
1	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... No, hypergamy means selecting a partner from a higher social group/status group/class/caste than you are.	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 06:53 AM
2	Feminist leaning blue pillers, our dna records show that hypergamy is natural and normal. It wasn't so much the case during patriarchy, which seems to be a short period during which women decided the one man one woman system was better for them, now women are dismantling that ... There is something that really irritates me: hypergamy means "marrying up". Statistics that x number of women reproduced for every y men that reproduced don't demonstrate hypergamy. Hypergamy has to do with a moving outside a status group of some definition (including castes, defined social status groups, informal social status groups, class, and various other types of groups). It doesn't mean, "Sleeping with lots of people". It doesn't mean "changing partners". This irritates me because the ter…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 06:41 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Measuring the value of a person is inherently utilitarian though No, it's not. Utilitarianism is about maximising some type of utility - moral value needn't even come into it. Nor does measuring moral value necessarily mean a quantifiable rather than qualifiable type of value, but utilitarianism is generally associated with the former. In the case of blue vs red the difference as I see it is not one of whether or not they are thinking in terms of their own self interest but rather what that self…	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 06:27 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Those two things are completely distinct from each other. I know. I didn't raise choosing friends and associate it with moral value - you did. I assume you had a reason, but now you seem to be suggesting that you didn't?	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 06:24 AM
3	How does calling an argument racist/sexist invalidate it? I just want to jump in here - he is not statistically more likely to commit a crime. People with significant factors common to Mr. Tyrone (e.g. history of violent crime) have a statistically higher rate of recidivism.	/r/PurplePillDebate	26/03/15 06:15 AM
5	Is it really fair to rely so much on evolutionary biology for things like dating? One important thing to take into account is that a lot of RP stuff is evolutionary psychology, and that evolutionary psychology has a greater set of criticisms levelled against it. One of the major reasons that evo-psych is criticised is that it is generally unfalsifiable; human behaviour is taken as data points, and then an evolutionary reason for those behaviours being those that survived is given. There's no real way that we can go back and check out whether those reasons are accurate or not …	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 10:22 AM
1	Women see men as pure utility Here's a philosophical take. Let's assume men and women are definitively different in their experiences. Then we have a problem akin to Nagel's, "What is it like to be a bat?", where he describes the impossibility of ever knowing what it is like to be a bat while we are a human (that is, even if we became a bat, and then got turned back into a human, our human mind would interpret our memories/experiences differently to the bat mind). With this problem, if men and women are so different, then it…	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 01:30 AM
1	Is it Wrong or Crude for a Man to refuse the Friendship of a Girl who doesn't want Sex with Him? Here is my take on it: For any individual girl, I can see nothing too problematic about this. However, it strikes me that if this is the way that all girls, or (if I am remembering correctly from a previous thread), all attractive girls are treated, then I do find this to be a little problematic. This says something about the way that girls are conceptualised. One could argue that this could be conceptualised as "girls are just for sex and nothing more", but I know from the previous thread that …	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 01:12 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person I've written a lot elsewhere, so I apologise if you wanted a longer response. But I think your last paragraph is well-written - a concise way to state the opposite of inherent worth, perhaps.	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 12:59 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Well, all relationships are in a way transactional Hmm, I disagree. But I think this is an interesting look into your perspective, to have such a belief. Community-mindedness, fairness, and mutualality don't strike me as necessarily transactional - not to say that they can't be, but I don't believe them to be inherently so. I can see where such an idea would come from, though, because we often describe these things as involving "giving and taking", being "one-sided", and so forth. So what are th…	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 12:57 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person I will admit that I couldn't parse your first sentence. Sorry. By 'personhood' I'm not meaning the legal sense, just the condition of being a person (akin to agency, but including people that arguably don't have agency, like comatose patients, etc. etc.).	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 12:28 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Value people for being people, what the hell does that even mean? So you're all equal then, and I am to just go with the first person that comes my way as youre all the same? You're not the first to respond in such a way, but I do find it interesting that there are a few responses that suggest valuing people for being people equates to some type of absolute equality. Equal inherent worth doesn't necessarily mean equal in all ways.	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 12:26 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person ? I wasn't trying to be patronising. I never limited your choices - in fact, I raised empathy. It just seemed strange to me that you seemed to suggest you pick a certain option, but by mentioning it, you in fact picked it. I know that intonation doesn't come across in the written word, though.	/r/PurplePillDebate	24/03/15 12:23 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Sorry, what is specifically utilitarian about intrinsic moral worth (moral value for having personhood)? Is that not also, potentially more, deontological?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 08:14 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person So, I take it that you fall under the latter view...? No. Just because I may choose friends based upon shared interests, etc. etc., does not preclude me from treating people as if they all have equal intrinsic moral value. My point was - if everyone is equally wealthy, or equally poor, then someone's monetary status is a moot point when making any choice. If you needed to make a choice about someone, their monetary status would never factor into the equation. I see where you are coming from. Thi…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 08:13 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person I am very conservative politically so there is no need to expound on this too much. Of course you can help someone regardless of moral worth as long as you don't bring the state into it. This more has to do with value, which I talked about above, than to moral worth. Hmm, this is getting more and more away from the question I thought I was asking. Whether or not you can help someone is not so much a moral question as whether or not you should, and to what extent you would help different people b…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 07:16 AM
2	Moral Value of a Person How do you choose which friends to make, if questions of "value" aren't in play? Well, I wouldn't say that value, as in, things that I would value in a friend, like trust, aren't in play. And I wouldn't say that values, such as qualities, like humour, aren't in play. I don't see becoming friends with someone (which is how I would phrase it, given that I think it is a rather unconscious, organic process) is a terrible moral dilemma, so moral value doesn't come into play. If you believe that every…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 07:10 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person That does indeed help! I want to share my perspective, not to say that you're wrong or you're right, but just to illustrate that our perspectives differ. I do things because I like to do them - they interest me, they captivate me, I think that they will be useful to me, or that I will have fun by doing them, or that they make me feel good. This could include working out or earning money (though in my case it doesn't), but these things are done for internal, self-determination reasons, and not ex…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 07:06 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Well, most people including me, treat others with at least the minimum moral worth. So, just spitballing then, let's give a few examples of the minimum common moral worth and see where we stand. For example, some people are of the opinion that everyone has the same set of (formal) opportunities, and whatever happens happens - that is, if you put yourself in a stupid situation, you deserve no help. At the complete opposite end of the scale are people who believe that every should have the same su…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 06:22 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person So kind people have more moral worth, and you would treat them differently. Back to your statement: I don't treat everyone equally, that is blue pill thinking. You are suggesting that, given moral judgement, it is non-RP thinking to treat people as having equal (or even near-equal?) moral worth, and that this is incorrect thinking? What about treating people as if they have a substantial minimum moral worth, even if you don't consider them equal?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 06:01 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person You judge their moral worth by their kindness and friendliness?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:54 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person This is going a bit off topic, but you mind if I ask you a bit more? Intimacy is purely sexual/physical. If there is an attractive girl I know, and we aren't going anywhere in terms of sex for whatever reason, I feel I am too attractive/valuable to be in that situation and have a lot of other options where I can get my desires satisfied, so I stop contact with that specific girl. Coupling this with your other statements (the only value girls have is "sex and intimacy" where intimacy is "purely s…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:53 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Sure - but I'm really interested in how you morally value anyone, not just for relationships. I'm still behind on this "biggest blue pill whiteknight mangina" "trampling" example, if you want to clue me in.	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:40 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person Sorry, but I do want to clarify - you treat all people with kindness and friendliness, regardless of their utility, qualities, etc. (let's currently ignore extreme cases like someone breaking into your house to murder you)?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:37 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person Interesting. That redditor does give advice and show compassion, as well as including the quote you've quoted. In fact, suggesting that his story can help him means that our redditor probably doesn't believe that no one will respond well to it, but that it's not the worth the risk. On the whole, I wouldn't say that this necessarily aligns with the "utility only" idea - it's a mix of both.	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:35 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person What makes somebody "yours", and what sort of moral value do they have that distinguishes them from those people who are "not yours" (and who you value by their utility)?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:22 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person Top comment seems to have changed from the description given - currently they are offering a place to stay, etc. I think it's tough on reddit to quote something by whether or not it is a top post, because it can change.	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:20 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person Well, considering only moral value, what would your answer be? Are people to be morally valued based upon their personhood, or based upon their utility to you, society, or something else?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:18 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person Thanks for answering. I get your personal story about being "used and abused" - I wonder if you think that this is the general circumstances/treatment that other people encounter, making your attitude tending toward universal, or whether you think that there are a significant number of people who would be justified holding an opposite view? In regards to moral value, are you inclined to treat people more fairly that have greater value to you, or treat all people roughly the same? However, if wer…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:17 AM
1	Moral Value of a Person No one values anybody for just being a person. Well, this answers the question, and more! So, first, I gather that the view you have is that you don't value people for just being people. Second, you think that this is universally true, regardless of whether or not people say otherwise - they are conceptually incorrect, ignorant, or perhaps lying. I can't quite figure out if you're suggesting that no one deontologically considers every person to have moral worth (e.g. the ideal that everyone has …	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:10 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person This answers the question pretty well. I'm a little unsure of how your opening questions relate, though. Perhaps you could expand upon why you included them? Are you genuinely curious how I make friends, or are you suggesting that you view is universally or near-universally correct?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:03 AM
0	Moral Value of a Person Could you describe to me on what basis you value someone?	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 05:00 AM
2	Moral Value of a Person When making a moral judgement (decision), how do you evaluate or factor people into the judgement? How do people obtain some value that is judge-able? One view is that people have intrinsic moral value (moral worth) and that will affect your judgement (decision-making, treatment of others), while another view is that people are only as valuable as some function that they may provide that affects your judgement. The question is mainly focussed upon how you treat other people (in part, how you car…	/r/PurplePillDebate	23/03/15 03:30 AM
3	Still Think Seduction Heuristics Aren't Evidence-Based? Two things: I can't seem to find anywhere an argument from non-RPers that heuristics are useless or ineffective or immoral in general, though I can imagine that some particular heuristic usages would be suggested to be so, and Nothing about this study screams RP at me. Are you suggesting that it is, or are you suggesting that non-RPers should use these sorts of studies to combat RP?	/r/PurplePillDebate	25/02/15 11:59 PM
2	Study confirms that women with fewer sexual partners have higher quality marriages (confirms TRP theory about 'alpha widows') Edit: Now I can see the response in the thread - I have no idea what trickery my inbox is playing on me, but now I'll put the response in the right spot. I'll just respond here to some of the things that /u/We_Are_Legion replied about, even though the reply itself seems to have gone missing, along with the original post. /u/We_Are_Legion said: Why do you think I would make personal decisions such as who to sleep with and have a relationship with based on a study? It's a good question. I get the …	/r/PurplePillDebate	21/02/15 02:29 AM
0	Study confirms that women with fewer sexual partners have higher quality marriages (confirms TRP theory about 'alpha widows') Edit: moved this post to the right spot, too.	/r/PurplePillDebate	21/02/15 02:27 AM
13	Study confirms that women with fewer sexual partners have higher quality marriages (confirms TRP theory about 'alpha widows') I'm very confused - what is the point of your post? Two of your linked articles focus only on data pertaining to women, with the more thorough one specifically stating that it cannot make a case either way, due to insufficient data, regarding the sexual history of men. (Rector, et al, 2003, & Teachman, 2003) One of the articles states that casual sex is correlated with depression for both genders. (Walsh, 2013) One study covered cohabitation, education, length of marriage and much more, but not …	/r/PurplePillDebate	20/02/15 11:39 PM
0	Study confirms that women with fewer sexual partners have higher quality marriages (confirms TRP theory about 'alpha widows') Edit: I replied to the wrong post. My apologies, I've moved the reply up a... parent? Child? I'm sure there's a term.	/r/PurplePillDebate	20/02/15 11:37 PM
3	How would you defend your pill in one sentence? I'm just not RP - I don't buy into there being a proper BP set of beliefs or principles. I guess my sentence would be: I think that the RP depersonalises women.	/r/PurplePillDebate	19/02/15 02:53 AM
4	Women are incapable of empathizing with men or male needs/desires But no one gives a shit about mid tier investors. Risk adverse behavior is what's holding them back from being great or a failure. Why is it that having a comfortable amount of money is depicted as unsuccessful or unimportant?	/r/PurplePillDebate	14/02/15 01:50 AM
6	Women are incapable of empathizing with men or male needs/desires Empathy is seeing you as an equal eye to eye with your problems to lend support. That's... not the definition of empathy. I know that RP appropriates terms for its own internal use ('hypergamy', for example), and I think that within RP context we can simply agree to those definitions for the sake of moving the conversation forward, but redefining empathy is probably a bit too far because it's not a term isolated to technical or specific domains like hypergamy is. Empathy is about understanding s…	/r/PurplePillDebate	14/02/15 01:47 AM
1	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy Do you think that RPers should consider the morality of implementing sexual strategy? I'm not saying that people should exclusively use a certain ethical system because I think that one in particular is absolutely right, but rather, I'm responding to posts that indicate that moral consideration (of any sort) is not given.	/r/PurplePillDebate	12/02/15 05:27 AM
1	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy I don't think that the characterisation is true, but it was put forward by a RPer and I think it therefore indicates something about RP attitudes towards morality which I wanted to investigate.	/r/PurplePillDebate	12/02/15 05:25 AM
1	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy I'm not advocating any particular moral system, I'm just asking whether RPers feel it necessary or unnecessary to consider moral questions when thinking of implementing RP strategies.	/r/PurplePillDebate	12/02/15 05:24 AM
3	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy Difference in what manner? Do you mean that, if you wanted some food, there is no difference between buying food and stealing food? Or that there's no difference, say, between having consensual sex with someone and raping someone? Or is there a more subtle point that you're trying to make?	/r/PurplePillDebate	11/02/15 08:26 AM
2	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy Are you saying it is or isn't okay to steal Photoshop?	/r/PurplePillDebate	11/02/15 07:45 AM
3	Moral Implementation of Amoral Strategy Sorry, so are you saying, "Don't be moral"?	/r/PurplePillDebate	11/02/15 07:45 AM
11	Why do Bluepillers/Feminists insist on throwing around the word "entitled"? I haven't seen anyone - in this thread or elsewhere - call this person 'entitled' (or 'feeling entitled'). I've seen people in this thread explain that he isn't. And I've seen people in this thread explain why he "would" be called entitled by others. Isn't this, then, just a strawman that some RPers are happily agreeing with?	/r/PurplePillDebate	11/02/15 05:01 AM
0	What type of amoral? Out of curiosity, then, does this mean that you would not suggest that killing a baby or raping someone are wrong? Or if they are wrong, in what manner does their being wrong significantly differ from moral wrongness?	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 11:34 PM
0	Existence of the Alpha Male Does the RP subreddit itself suggest that there are not really alpha males or beta males but people with alpha traits and beta traits? And doesn't the RP subreddit itself suggest that you can be most successful in LTRs by having a good balance of both traits? If that's the case, I'm not sure what there is to be gained by lumping some of the traits together under alpha and some under beta unless you also subscribe to the theory that people tend to fall into one of the two categories only. I'm not…	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 08:08 AM
1	What type of amoral? The facts of the situation are irrespective of moral implications. To act on said facts would have moral attributes though. So "sexual strategy is amoral" is only true for the facts of a situation, but not for practical application, because as soon as someone makes a decision based upon that information they're making a moral judgement. Is that the sort of thing you're suggesting? I can see that use of the phrase - but I've definitely seen it used for the application of strategy as well (that is…	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 07:23 AM
1	What type of amoral? I'm not really debating whether or not it's information - it is information. I'm asking whether or not you think that moral judgement is inherent within the information as it is or as it is embedded into its context - that is, how "sexual strategy is amoral" relates to the information.	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 07:16 AM
2	What type of amoral? Sure it's more of a craft or engineering field than a science. I don't agree with that either, but that's beyond the point. Are you saying that discussion of what sexual strategy is effective should be avoided/group-censored/suppressed due to concerns of morality? No, and I can't see what it is that I might have written that would give someone that impression. I said that you suggest that RPers do discuss the morality of sexual strategy and that this supports the idea that you don't think that i…	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 05:38 AM
3	What type of amoral? This sounds most similar to the moral nihilism option presented above. What do you think of any of the critiques mentioned in the OP? (e.g. Is it just in love and war that all is fair?)	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 05:35 AM
5	What type of amoral? This is a moral position and so I'm just going to take away the understanding that you disagree with "sexual strategy is amoral". I don't think I share your beliefs about the world (that people are amoral in general), nor your reasoning (that this implies no reason for a moral code that extends beyond your own happiness), but that's a different question.	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 05:33 AM
2	What type of amoral? So people should have moral consideration about sexual strategy, even if the community from which the strategy is generally communicated is not?	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 02:57 AM
2	What type of amoral? Sexual strategy is a pass/fail(get laid/don't get laid), it never considers if the strategy is moral/immoral as it is not relevant to if the strategy is effective or not. Sexual strategy doesn't consider - people consider. Are you saying that people who consider sexual strategies should refrain from considering their morality, or are you suggesting that there is nothing moral to consider in regards to sexual strategies?	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 02:36 AM
5	What type of amoral? /u/pickup_sticks makes a good point that I hadn't considered - maybe RP and I and others might be using sexual strategy with different definitions. But I can see in your post that you say "if you want to get laid then do X" is identified as sexual strategy, so I'll use this definition in my response. The thrust of the first part of your post - that sexual strategy is just information - seems to equate information of this sort with something like science. I'll say that the RP is unequivocally not…	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 02:21 AM
3	What type of amoral? This outlook intrigues me for two separate reasons. First, it is not the case that presenting something without considering the morality of it means that it is, in fact, amoral. It simply means that it is not considered. So I don't think that this is an explanation of why sexual strategy is amoral. Second - and this is more complex and basically just the opening of a discussion, I'm not making a case - this is a depiction of morals that I see here doesn't gel cohesively for me with other RP depi…	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 02:12 AM
1	What type of amoral? I'm not necessarily suggesting that there is something wrong with TRP, nor that it is comparable to killing or promoting racial violence. But the line "sexual strategy is amoral" is something I have mostly seen in response to, or in anticipation of, claims of TRP behaviour being immoral, and that is why I used negative examples.	/r/PurplePillDebate	31/01/15 01:31 AM
6	Are women attracted to money/power/status, more so than men are? Well, I should clarify for you, then. I'm not saying that no general rules can be found - science would be useless. I'm suggesting that non-RPers are sceptical of RP general claims about women. In the OP, for example, the question is, almost in disbelief, "Do BPers not believe that women are attracted to power/money/status?" But the follow-up is, "Because average-looking male celebrities get hot wives and girlfriends." That's pretty poor evidence for a general rule, so I'm suggesting that non-RP…	/r/PurplePillDebate	02/01/15 11:29 PM
2	Are women attracted to money/power/status, more so than men are? Do BPers think that women are not attracted to money/power/status? I think the important thing to remember is that a lot of non-RPers don't believe that grand generalisations about women are generally accurate. So there would be no issue with the claim, "Women can be, and some women definitely are, attracted to money/power/status" (or even that they pursue it when they are not attracted). The issue for non-RPers is when this is applied to all or most women. "I've always wondered how average-look…	/r/PurplePillDebate	02/01/15 10:55 PM
2	AWALT question: do women really get sexually deflated and eventually divorce men who lose their jobs or are defeated in their personal lives and try to seek comfort and compassion from their partners? I think it's interesting that the research (link 2) seems to suggest that divorce occurs after men become unemployed because it violates a longstanding social norm held by both parties that men are the breadwinners. This doesn't, to me, seem to be something that suggests a matriarchy (that is, the social norm suggested is not one that has only flourished since feminism flourished - the opposite, in fact), nor something that suggests the valuation is made by women only (because the man believes t…	/r/PurplePillDebate	02/01/15 12:41 PM
3	do you want to have kids? Nope, its the purpose for which your body is designed. Well, absent God or spirituality, I'd protest that your body is 'designed'. Life doesn't give you all the happiness hormones anyway unless you do all you're supposed to. If I miss out on realizing I'm a dad... or watching my kids grow up... well, look at all those things I'm passing up. This, on the other hand, I understand. I probably wouldn't have presented this as "not wanting to end my genetic legacy", however. Phrasing it that way is wh…	/r/PurplePillDebate	30/12/14 12:27 AM
3	do you want to have kids? Absent of god and spiritualism, there can be no other purpose to life. Argubly, absent God and spiritualism, this isn't some objective purpose in life either. It is as much a purpose as, "Have fun", or "Climb the tallest mountain" or "become famous so that people will remember me for years later". Can you imagine if Mitochondrial Eve or MRCA Adam decided that fucking wasn't worth it? Some of their contemporaries didn't have offspring. The continuation of the human species doesn't rely on every p…	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/12/14 11:59 PM
7	do you want to have kids? What is so important about your genetic legacy? (Not yours in particular, but the idea in general.)	/r/PurplePillDebate	29/12/14 10:29 PM