TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ianturpiesmoustache Archive

View 0 posts and 2,222 comments by ianturpiesmoustache on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 2,222 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
6

You've not "essentially been a girl" for any length of time, you've just fucked some dudes. Admittedly, a lot of chicks do that, too, but that doesn't give you any insight on what it's like to be the opposite sex, any more than a lesbian knows what it's like to be a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/16 02:08 PM
3

I wasn't trying to say it didn't happen at all, or even that it was particularly uncommon, just that I doubt the people who rushed out to try some bondage represent a meaningful percentage of the people who read the book. Also that reading or liking the book has no bearing on whether someone has "unrealistic expectations" in their real life. I'm sure some people did whatever happens in Eat, Pray, Love, too, but not all or most of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/16 01:44 PM
5

I agree that books provide escapism, but that doesn't mean that all (or even most) people reading books are displaying some secret longing - I love Clive Barker, but I sincerely doubt that's a reflection of my craving for rapey ghosts and pin-headed demon dudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/16 06:10 AM
9

Exactly how prevalent do you think this is, then? Of the millions of people who liked the book, how many of them do you think actually did any of this shit? A few (unverified, even) anecdotes in a book doesn't make a phenomenon, and the fact that millions liked the book doesn't mean any of them have "unrealistic expectations" just because you say it does. People like stories, and a buttload of people liked that one, but that's about the extent of it for the vast majority of them. Again, 50 Shade…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/16 05:05 AM
6

Millions of people (mainly women) liked a book, that's it. If liking a book truly reflects on your life and gives you "unrealistic expectations", there's a whole bunch of shit women and men need to stop reading ASAP.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/16 04:00 AM
5

There's a massive difference between giving shit to a friend who knows and understands your sense of humour, and trying that business on someone you just met because you want to fuck them. Negging isn't just "banter", it's attempting to make someone defensive so they try to impress you, or some such vapid garbage. People don't generally try to put friends on the back foot for their own benefit, but apparently all bets are off if you want to bone them. I don't understand the logic at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/16 09:30 PM
1

It has fuck all to do with TRP/TBP, which is what this sub is for. There are plenty of subs for discussing feminism, men's rights, and the debates between them. /r/periodplaybyplay "Subreddit not found"... I think I just found my new project.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 10:39 PM
0

That part that says "specifically relating to /r/TheBluePill and /r/TheRedPill." is just for show?! Sweet, now I've got a place to start my own period thread each month describing the volume, viscosity and amount of clots I've been dealing with. It's a sex/gender issue, after all, so this is clearly the place for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 10:06 PM
10

I used to fight my brother and sister for control of the Atari back in the 80s, and then the Mega Drive in the early 90s - around that time we got a PC so we got into games on there, too. Video games aren't a "male dominated space" so much as (in my opinion, anyway) dudes tend to make it a major part of their identity more than chicks. Apart from that I was into reading, legos and dolls and shit, rollerblading, climbing things likely to give my parents heart attacks (like the massive fruit trees…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/16 02:53 AM
5

There's definitely women who prefer giant man-beasts, but judging by the percentages on the pictures, not that many of them (and certainly not a majority). As long as you're fit and healthy, I think that's enough for most chicks.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/16 06:36 PM
3

Glad to be of service. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/16 04:35 PM
9

This picture represents women's ideal body types (from those specific options, anyway). I think it's fairly representative. Personally I'm not a fan of Brad Pitt (left), I'm more into young Henry Rollins (second from left). I like fit, I like slender, but I don't really like "built" at all, so anything past Pitt's level of muscle is a no for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/16 03:42 PM
2

I reckon they'll survive without my adoration - there's heaps of chicks into the naturally hairless/shaved/waxed look... I just happen to like 'em furry. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/16 09:35 PM
11

I'm one of the (apparently) few who love body hair. Wear your hair with pride, dude - no laser hair removal, no shaving, no waxing. Let it grow like the fuzzy forest of fun that it is!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/16 03:44 PM
1

No, but you wouldn't know that because you have no idea of the context. But that's cool, you have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/16 11:22 AM
1

It's in the context of an entirely separate conversation, and I was in fact replying to someone else's comment on the same thing. Perhaps go to that thread and read what the fuck I'm on about? Just a thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/16 10:47 AM
1

The friendzone is bullshit. And as for everything else, you're just making shit up. You can say all women are lying about their preferences all you want, but you've no proof and reality shows me otherwise. I love how you can ignore studies that have actually been conducted by doctors/psychologists and be like "nah, I know how women think so I don't have to believe evidence to the contrary". It tells me that discussing this with you further is a pointless fucking exercise. Have a good day/night.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/16 04:45 AM
1

And what about men? Are they just so honest and noble that they can't lie about their preferences, or something? Bullshit. Women are answering the question, too, you just don't want to hear their answer because it doesn't fit what you already believe. I'll just reiterate this from the link, seeing as you seem to be ignoring it or possibly didn't even read it: Women with partners who had a great sense of humor enjoyed more orgasms and stronger ones as well. Not everything is lies to "make women f…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/16 12:17 AM
1

Yeah. Right. If being funny was that sexually arousing every man would be asking Jerry Seinfield for lessons. Maybe they should. Seems like there's a fucking good reason one of the top responses women give to "what do you want in a partner?" is a sense of humour.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/16 06:19 PM
2

There's no point in my trying to argue against "women demand physical perfection" because it's just nonsense. And I don't understand how a guy being funny would make a woman sexually attracted to him. I sure as hell don't find funny women to be attractive if they aren't physically attractive to me. Believe me, it happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/16 05:22 PM
2

No, dude, just no. Women don't focus obsessively on one thing and demand perfection or else there's just no attraction. If a woman says she likes tall men, that doesn't mean she cannot ever be attracted to someone under 6'0. If a woman wants a funny guy, that doesn't mean he has to be spitting top level comedy routines. I honestly feel like you're confusing preferences with deal-breakers, or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/16 02:23 PM
1

And I'll tell you again here: your assumptions are flawed. You're essentially boiling down all of female attraction to "women like tall men". Women do like tall men, but that's not all they like, and not all of them like tall men as much as they like funny men, or kind men, or muscular men, or even the "perfect" face or body, or whatever. It's horseshit to think that all women are after the exact same thing and you're screwed if you don't have it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/16 05:24 AM
1

No, it is absolutely not the truth for the vast majority of people, in the world, the western world, not even on reddit, or there'd be a lot more subscribers to the sub. Reddit has a majority male demographic, after all, and TRP is fairly notorious. There also wouldn't be any ex-redpillers, which there are. You can say TRP is your truth, but you can't speak on everyone else's behalf and say it's their truth. And it's not because they're all alpha male models and beefcakes, it's because your trut…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 08:48 PM
1

You can assume whatever you like, but that doesn't make it true. Your view of the world and how relationships work is not infallible, it's not universal, and it's not everyone's truth. If you can't accept that people just have different views from you then I don't know what to tell you.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 08:41 PM
1

You honestly think everyone who disagrees with TRP or identifies as a BPer is some "Navy Seal" looking guy? That's beyond ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 08:32 PM
1

A hundred thousand guys (or even chicks) could say the exact opposite of everything TRP believes. If they did would you believe them? I sincerely doubt it. Your views are coloured by your experiences, the same as mine. I'm not about to take the word of a group of guys over what I know to be true in my life just because there's a lot of them. There are a lot of Scientologists, too, but that doesn't make them right or even worth listening to.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 08:22 PM
1

That's what they like to think, yes, but it doesn't make it so. Their "truths" don't jibe at all with my experiences or opinions, so they're of no value to me. I'm not interested in their shitty views on women, over-generalisations, assumptions, game-playing, power struggles, or any of the other crap they're dishing up.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 07:58 PM
1

Dude, I'm not about to put stock in anything on the red pill forum. They "confirm" a whole lot of bullshit over there.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 07:48 PM
2

Your assumptions about women are way off, and there's clearly no point in keeping this discussion going because you just keep repeating the same things over and over. So have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 07:45 PM
1

Meh, then those are women hitting the wall, or they have been pumped and dumped by Alphas and they're trying to see if they can have better relationships by being in one with a beta. I doubt they have much of an active sex life. Again, that's what you assume. You've no idea why those women are with those men unless you are them or ask them. Then there are personal preferences for men. Some men like short women with big boobs, dark skin and a big ass. Then there are men who like tall, leggy women…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 06:52 PM
12

I'll try to CYV about the comment you've linked, because you've completely misrepresented my views here... where did I imply that shorter men do well with women because they're shorter? In fact, the comment of mine just above that one is this: "Everyone gets to pick the traits they desire, and they also get to choose how much importance they place on those traits. Quite a lot of women do like/prefer tall guys, but that doesn't mean all of those women have height at (or even close to) the top of …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 06:33 PM
1

There's probably a whole bunch of reasons, like whether they have good social skills/like socialising/go to parties or hang out in large co-ed groups, confidence, common interests, priorities (ie, is studying/your degree more important than getting laid as often as possible), etc, etc. As for the article, it's literally just some dude bragging. For all we know he's completely full of shit, and even if he's not, that doesn't mean his experience is universal.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 06:16 PM
1

Its just that h the hot women you see with short or unattractive men are women who are dating rich men, or they're with their drug dealers lol. That's what you'd assume, sure, but that doesn't make it reality. Again, not everything is about looks, and neither is it about looks and/or money. Women don't feel sexual attraction for men below their league. What you consider their league, or what they consider their league? Because there's no actual external rating system, and different people are at…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 06:06 PM
2

It's the definition google gave me, for the context we're discussing: accept or agree to (something that one considers to be less than satisfactory). Like I said, you're welcome to your opinion and to use the word how you see fit, but in my opinion the above definition is accurate. As in, if someone started dating a guy who they thought was fucking amazing but happened to be shorter than their ideal, I would not say they "settled" for that guy. If they were dating a guy who was an overall good p…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 06:02 PM
3

That's not what I see, dude. I dunno where you're looking to find all these studly alpha guys getting all the attractive women and everyone else with a fat, ugly chick. I've seen plenty of "hot" women with short or unattractive men, and I've seen plenty of (from your description) what you think of as "hot" men with fat or unattractive women. Not everyone is obsessed with looks or values it as much as/above other attributes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:43 PM
1

You're welcome to your opinion. The dictionary definition of settle in that context is something that is "unsatisfactory", not something you're not too fussed over, and that's what I'm sticking with.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:32 PM
3

No, it's not. And never mind the rest of your list, either, all you have to do is look around at the couples you see in the street and you'll see plenty of examples of guys who don't have a "perfect" face, aren't particularly tall and aren't particularly ripped who manage just fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:22 PM
2

I'm not offended, where did you pull that shit from? It's just not a word that accurately describes the situation, to me at least. Settling would be something that you find unattractive but are willing to overlook, not something that isn't your ideal but also doesn't particularly bother you.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:21 PM
2

No, height is nowhere near "the one thing" women look for in men, and it's kind of absurd to suggest it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:12 PM
1

Like I said, it's about the importance people place on things - if you want to view it as "settling" because someone didn't get their absolute physical ideal, that's your beef. If I prefer a guy who's over 6'0, but end up with someone who's 5'9 because of his personality/sense of humour/whatever, that just means that personality is of higher importance than height, not that I've "settled" for him.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 05:10 PM
1

Everyone gets to pick the traits they desire, and they also get to choose how much importance they place on those traits. Quite a lot of women do like/prefer tall guys, but that doesn't mean all of those women have height at (or even close to) the top of the list of what they find attractive, or consider it a deal-breaker if a guy isn't as tall as they'd ideally want.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 04:36 PM
-1

Some care a lot about height, some couldn't give less of a shit, and the rest fall somewhere in the middle. Just like guys with the size of tits or arses - different people have different preferences and turn ons.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/16 03:42 PM
3

Yes, and the couples who haven't had sex for a long time are generally terribly off emotionally - and the couples who fuck other people, well those are transient and not even statistically significant. Where are you getting this information from? It seems like you're making shit up that fits how you think these people feel. You're taking one factor and trying to split it into two. Sex and relationships do not come apart. Period. Sexual bonds have a purpose, that purpose is reproduction. Pair-bon…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/16 07:51 AM
2

You're normalizing asexuality here. I'm not normalising asexuality by acknowledging it's existence. And it's not the only example that I used, or that fits in this circumstance. What makes two people a couple if it's not exclusivity and sex? How it different from friendship? Do you feel the exact same way about your friends as you do someone you have a crush on? Would you live with them for life, sleep in the same bed (even without sex being involved), share the same parts of yourself with your …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/16 07:17 AM
3

Sex is the key feature nearly all relationships. Without sex, you have friendship. And friendship is ever so common. No. There are asexual couples, there are couples who for whatever reason haven't had sex in a long time, there are couples who have sex with people outside of their relationship. None of those things downgrades a relationship to a friendship. What turns you on is the determining factor in the type of person you want to have a relationship with. I'm not talking about "what you find…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/16 06:44 AM
2

Sex is just sex. While they're definitely linked, sex is not the basis of, or main contributing factor to, a lot of relationships. What turns you on doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the type of person you want a relationship with, beyond hopefully liking the same kind of stuff as your partner. I'm not into the whole cucking thing at all, but if my partner was it wouldn't change my opinion of him any more than having a piss fetish or liking BDSM would. Humiliation is a large part of a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/16 06:19 AM
2

Of course. It's two people who get off on (or at least don't take issue with) the same kind of sexual activity. It says nothing of the rest of their relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/16 06:07 AM
1

Exactly. I don't care what anyone personally finds liberating/gross/whatever, but as soon as they start getting uppity about it and attempt to force their views on others is when they become wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/16 03:04 PM
16

It's up to the person to decide how they feel about it, not for others to tell them how they should feel about it. Some women think it's awesome to be publicly naked, some think it's not. Neither camp is wrong, unless they're trying to shove their views down someone else's throat.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/16 09:32 AM
1

I didn't take it personally at all, I just don't agree with his point or the way he chose to make it. If people want to break the rule and downvote, a lack of flair is hardly going to stop them. Sure, they'll have to actually read the comments to figure out who they hate, but it'll come down to the same thing - voting based on disagreeing with someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/16 08:26 AM
5

I know you would never do this not you, but many people not that you would ever unconsciously be influenced by them, never! I know, right?! You're so much better than the arguments that happen here, and so above taking a side. If only we could all be as centred as you! But seriously, as much as I don't identify with either blue or red pill, I'm not going out of my way to try and ridicule or patronise either one of them. I may not see the value in aligning myself completely one way or the other, …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/16 07:22 PM
0

I wasn't having a go at you, I just hate the phrase itself. It's like getting robbed and someone calling it "nonconsensual gift giving". That shit's robbery, just like "nonconsensual sex" is rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/16 03:32 PM
0

I'd say sex itself, and anything that can be paired with the word "sex" (like oral or anal). "Nonconsensual sex" isn't the right term, and to be fair I don't think it counts as losing your virginity unless you were a willing participant. Handjob doesn't count - it's basically masturbating, just with someone else's junk.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/16 03:26 PM
1

Probably the same answers you'll see in the make up thread - some don't bother at all, and the rest have varied and personal reasons depending on which dude you ask.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 07:39 PM
3

I don't wear make up because it doesn't interest me in the slightest, makes me want to constantly scratch my face and I think I look weird with it on. Other women obviously feel differently about it. If you expect all women to have the same answer, you're going to be disappointed.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 06:51 PM
0

Kinda like young Henry Rollins from the "famous picture" in the OP (second from the left). Slender with a touch of muscle.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 05:24 PM
2

They were still asked, "When are you going to get married." I will admit the pressure was usually greater for women. Absolutely, but they were asked. They were not assumed to be defective or a person of no use/value if they didn't have a life partner. They were also not as discriminated against in workplaces, including on something as arbitrary as marital status. I'm not saying this was every single case, but it was a fairly common sentiment for an unwed woman to have to live with. This is not i…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 08:26 AM
2

This was true for both men and women. Wrong. It was perfectly acceptable for men to be older and unmarried, or attempting to get married in their 30s or 40s rather than when they've barely finished puberty (or barely started puberty, in a lot of cases). That was an "even in the case of" argument. Sorry I did not say "even in the case of arranged marriages". It's still irrelevant, regardless of your inclusion of "even in the case of". Men are forced to support children they father, whether they w…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 07:57 AM
0

That's not what that literally means. Yes, it is. I'm using their own words to interpret the meaning, while you're assuming what they meant based on exactly fuck all apart from your opinion. Stop being obtuse, and please don't reply unless it's going to be meaningful and not a waste of time. Why don't you stop calling people names for disagreeing with you, and give up trying to tell people what to do? It's poor form on a debate sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 07:48 AM
2

This is feminist bullshit. At no time in recent history in the West did women ever have little/no say in the matter of who they get to fuck. Oh, come off it. In the not too distant past it was social suicide to refuse to get married or wait until you were older if you didn't feel you were ready. Women who chose to remain single were seen as "suspect", and people were called old maids and turned away from "decent" society often in their mid twenties if they didn't have a husband already. All that…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 06:30 AM
1

Read the OP again. Pay particular attention to this: giving 1 woman to each man as a reward for his contribution to the community and his abiding to laws in order to keep every male citizen satisfied. People are romanticising a time when women were given to men for being good boys, as opposed to having any choice in the matter or any other options in life.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 06:22 AM
14

No, I'm pretty sure what they meant was that we have feminism to get rid of the idea that women exist to satisfy men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 06:21 PM
7

Support your claim. Link to a post or two that's anything like this. Unsurprisingly, a lot of them get deleted, but here's a few: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/3m0tt3/if_feminism_is_about_equality_why_have_feminists/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/3q2wvd/if_you_had_control_of_the_government_now_what/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/45c2o0/why_isnt_sexual_inequality_a_public_issue/ https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/42hin…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 06:19 PM
6

I fail to see how something that may have happened a few generations ago is relevant here. I'm talking about the whingers who bring this up every few months on this sub, ranging from "Wasn't it super great when women had to get married to whoever asked them or be shunned for life? Curse this sexual revolution!" all the way to "Should the government provide me with sex, and if the answer is no, why are you such a man-hating misandrist?" This straw man again... It's not a strawman when it's exactl…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 05:34 PM
5

Isn't it funny how these men didn't give a shit when it was "if you don't like it, fuck you" to women who wanted to have some kind of choice in who they had sex with for their entire life, so much so that they long for those days to come back around? Yeah, the poor, poor dears. They should totally get sex just for existing, otherwise it's so unfair!
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 05:03 PM
4

Better that than sit around bitching online about how much better things were when women had no choice, for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 04:29 PM
4

my personal opinion is that society is slowly becoming conscious of how a free sex market is not for everybody but will this lead to a restauration of a more rigid pre 60s life style or virtual reality and sexbots will be the real game changers in a more or less distant future? My personal opinion is that dudes who whinge about this stuff need to back the sexbots/virtual reality horse, as women aren't about to go back to having little/no say in the matter of who they get to fuck and spend their …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 12:57 PM
2

There is a difference between saying "I believe men are more logical than women" and saying "men are more logical than women". Like someone else commented, this is a debate sub. If you want to make a positive claim, you need to back it up. If I said men have 7 testicles but 5 of them are hidden, I'm pretty sure someone would ask for proof before they accepted that as fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 07:23 PM
4

A common request on PPD is to support one's viewpoint with research/studies/empirical evidence. On the surface, this seems reasonable. But how often do you use this standard of evidence for other decisions in your life? People are asked to back up claims that are made as statements of "truth", not their personal life choices. If someone says, for example, that women are less logical than men, it's fair to ask if they've got any sources for that. If you someone explains why they chose to be with …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 05:20 PM
1

I live in the same reality as everyone else. I'm not claiming I can control other people's thoughts, I'm stating that I don't put up with that kind of bullshit. If someone wants to judge me for who I sleep with, bully for them, but they can bugger off and do it elsewhere. They're not worth worrying about or wasting time on.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 05:15 PM
3

Bae? Christ, kids these days, with their crazy lingo... No, my dude doesn't lift. He's all skinny and awesome. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 08:40 PM
2

I didn't exclude taking many factors into account in that one paragraph. But you keep trying. Nah, you just stated with certainty that women with high numbers aren't worth dating, marrying or having children with. Based on their number. Please stop following me around and leave me alone. I ain't following you, just responding to a conversation you decided to get involved in. And you don't get to tell me what to do, so... no, I'll talk as long as I like. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 07:13 PM
2

"TRP isn't doing anything to devalue these women. They did that to themselves. Sluts can have integrity in the manner in which they conduct their public and professional lives. It's just that having sex with a lot of men means they're not good relationship material, wife material or motherhood material. So N count is simultaneously one of many factors to take into account, and so important that women who have a high one aren't "good relationship material, wife material or motherhood material"? T…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 07:06 PM
1

Okay. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:34 PM
1

Holy shit... your comments speak for themselves, dude. You won't even back up your own views anymore, so I'm going to say again "have fun" and peace the fuck out, because you've clearly got no interest in honest conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:33 PM
1

I'll say whatever I feel like, thanks. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:30 PM
1

You certainly have in the past - you flat-out admitted you downvoted one of my posts at one point. To be fair I don't know if you do anymore, though. And I don't know who did it either, but I know it wasn't me. Whoever it was should have just replied to you instead, downvoting (especially without commenting) is pretty shitty.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:27 PM
1

Oh, come on. You spent the first half of the conversation telling me what it was indicative of, and how you can tell what a woman's values and attitudes towards relationships are just based on the number of partners she's had. Literally your first comment was: It is indicative of a woman's attitude toward sex, love and relationships. It is indicative of whether sex in her mind and heart is connected to, or disconnected from, love and relationships. It indicates her private character; how she con…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:23 PM
1

I don't downvote, dude. I know you do, but I don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:22 PM
1

And like I told you in our other conversation, that's not what I'm talking about, and never was. I'm not saying there can't be a problem ever, and I'm not saying that everyone who sleeps around is a super great person that deserves rainbows and sunshine, or that being promiscuous is never indicative of, or the source of, some underlying issues. I'm talking about judging people for their number, not because of some other shit that you're trying to pretend I'm talking about. The number itself. Tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:14 PM
1

It's not conjecture. Conjecture is made up shit, based on nothing at all. No, conjecture is based on incomplete information or deciding something without sufficient evidence. Which is absolutely the perfect description of judging someone just based on the number of people they've fucked. It does have something to do with them if that woman is making sexual decisions based on her past; or is depriving that man of sex because of her baggage and hangups about her past; or if she is making current s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 05:41 PM
0

It is useful and correct. No, it isn't. It's pure conjecture. Like I said, it could mean any of those things, or it could mean just about anything else. You do not get to decide what is and what is not important when men evaluate women. You do not get to decide what I want to know about. You do not get to decide what I base my relationship/sexual decisions on. No, but I get to decide what is important when I evaluate men, and if they're acting like a whiny child about sex that had nothing to do …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 05:21 PM
3

It is a useful and correct judgment if it's based on her presentation to me But it's not. It's based on one facet of a whole, and not even an important one. It's like judging someone for not liking seafood or something - it doesn't effect you, it's not life-altering. If someone acts like a "slut", whatever the fuck that means, and you dislike that, it's whatever. If you're considering dating someone because you like them and they're a good person, then find out that they've slept with more peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 04:36 PM
3

Maybe. I'm entitled to draw conclusions based on a woman's presentation and her past sexual conduct. And no, it doesn't indicate she likes sex. It could indicate that; but it doesn't necessarily indicate that. Sure you are, but that doesn't make your judgement correct or useful. It just means you're judging people superficially rather than choosing to get to know them, which is absolutely your right. I just think it's a stupid thing to get so hung up on, and am not interested in being judged tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 04:14 PM
7

All that it indicates for sure is that she likes sex. That's about it. Everything else you say that it "indicates" is assumptions and judgements, not facts. I mean, it could mean any of those things, just like not giving your partner your phone password could mean that you're cheating, but it could also mean you just like your privacy. If people want to immediately jump to conclusions about what could be true rather than get to know the person and find out, that's cool, but it just seems ridicul…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 03:52 PM
3

No, you don't got it at all. It's more like "I don't want to be judged for stupid shit that means literally nothing to anyone but me". I'd expect to be judged if I did something bad, like if I was a drug addict/dealer or a cheater or a murderer or a criminal or an animal abuser or anything else that may have some kind of tangible negative effect on my partner's life. I don't want to be judged for sleeping with people that I chose to sleep with because it's facile and entirely unimportant.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 03:17 PM
6

And they can also have a devastating effect on my life if I choose to be with a guy who does either of those things. Me previously having fucked some guys safely, consensually, not resulting in pregnancy and outside of monogamous relationships does not do the same for a guy who's with me.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 02:57 PM
7

It's not really just about negative judgement - it's such a fucking non-issue to me, I don't get why people even give a shit either way. I'd probably be just as concerned if I told a guy my number and they were super excited or really impressed for some reason... it's just sex. It's a thing people do to get off, it's not inciting genocide or curing cancer. There are so many more important things to be worried about when it comes to a relationship and who you choose to let into your life. I would…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 02:43 PM
7

I'm fine with being judged for what I do, but not who I do. There's nothing wrong with liking and engaging in sex, and someone who thinks there is something wrong with it is not someone I want as a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 02:22 PM
11

My personality, intelligence, achievements, humour, worth, usefulness, compassion, professionalism... pretty much anything except vapid, shallow nonsense like how many people I've fucked.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 02:09 PM
13

My best friend knows my count, because we talk some weird shit when we're drunk. She asked, I told her, we laughed and high fived. I don't think I've told anyone else but only because it doesn't come up in general conversation that often. She's never "outed" me, since I doubt any of them have asked her. None have even asked me, but if my partner does ask I see no reason to lie about it. I'm not ashamed, and I'd rather not be with someone who's going to judge me for my personal choices, so it's i…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/16 06:14 AM
2

I get that. My point is that this is not something men do nearly as often. This is nothing more than your opinion. I'm not telling you not to have one or that it's wrong (like you're pretty quick to tell me mine is), but it's disingenuous to try and call it a fact unless you can back that up somehow other than "look around on this sub!". Then your opinion is wrong, and it's that simple. This is like saying a skyscraper is small or that Michael Jordan wasn't good at basketball. Bahahahahahaha, ye…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 03:43 AM
2

It happens ALL the time. This isn't an isolated incident. It's every time there is any discussion about the male body on PPD. Some women will come out and call a ripped figure "disgusting" or something. Because they think it is. It's that simple. It's not something women do, it's something individuals do. I wasn't saying ALL body types should be appreciated. Of course I think certain body types are gross. Fat women are disgusting as are anorexics. But those are NOT aesthetic body types. They are…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 03:25 AM
2

You seem to be stuck on this, considering the amount you mentioned it: YOU did. YOU called him gross. You can't back out of this now. I KNOW, I WAS THERE WHEN I SAID IT. AND GUESS WHAT? I MEANT IT! It's literally a personal opinion, you can stop trying to attribute it to anyone or everyone else now. It's not a woman thing to say a body type is gross, men say that shit, too. I can't help but notice that you failed to answer about body types that you "appreciate" on women, but I'm not entirely sur…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 02:56 AM
3

I shit you not she thinks I look 'healthier' with chubby 'rosy' cheeks and a bit of a pot belly, she also worries I'm ill or something is bothering me when I turn down dessert or seconds. My grandparents were the same way. Gran was forever tempting us with "sweeties" she had in her cupboard/pocket, and Grandpa was a huge fan of feeding us cheese and biscuits before bed (it gives you good dreams, apparently). I think it's just the way of grandparents in general - they want to have some kind of me…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:35 PM
1

well he pretty much had an eating disorder for the entirety of the Thin White Duke so…(RIP) And he wasn't a sex symbol then? I'm pretty sure he was. likes to run, point taken He's fit, for sure. Good looking bloke... just not ripped in the slightest. "I know it's hardtop believe I lift weights" You're damn right it is. He's skinny as shit (but also hot, so good on him) Well he's getting fat in old age, but yeah he works out 6 days a week He's been going through a widening since he turned 25, pre…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:02 PM
1

Where do you think the goalposts are being moved from, exactly? Do you think every single male sex symbol lifts? Like, David Bowie (RIP), Ewan McGregor, Jay Baruchel, Leonardo DiCaprio, etc? Believe me, as much as my personal preference tends towards "heroin chic", it's not just me that doesn't appreciate a shitload of muscles. Most women prefer lean and fit to big and bulked out, just based on the stats. That picture you posted is not skinny-fat, it's slightly overweight. There is a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 06:25 PM
2

Well, you don't have to lift to be attractive, you have to lift to obtain that particular body type. Attraction has many more components than just "body", even if women prefer that body type - and if you look at the overall judgements in the article listed (ie, when women were shown every single picture at once rather than limited selections at a a time), 23% chose Brad Pitt as the most attractive. It was enough to put him at the top of the list, but it's also less than a quarter of women in tot…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 12:07 PM
3

It's not cherrypicked, it's a factual, working definition, and more importantly is the general usage of the word. Are you honestly arguing that when I said "overweight" people would mistakenly think I was talking about people who are muscular? Jesus, the pedantry is killing me. Just because BMI has been used to measure whether people are overweight doesn't change that. I'm not incorrect in saying that most doctors have stopped using BMI for individuals because of it's inaccuracy. ABSI has become…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 09:05 AM
3

Overweight, by definition, means excess body fat. That's not my definition, that's the definition, regardless of whether you agree with it. The majority of doctors have stopped using BMI for exactly that reason - it is a flawed metric as it doesn't take into consideration muscle mass or overall health. There's no need to get hung up on phrasing when the meaning is absolutely clear, even if it is incorrect (which mine was not).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 08:43 AM
2

The definition of overweight is the exact way I used the word. Nobody says "overweight" and means someone's really muscular, come on now.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 08:33 AM
4

You're allowed to be disappointed, sure, but that doesn't make you right and everyone else wrong. I'm disappointed that more dudes don't look exactly how I'd like them to, but that's just the way the cookie crumbles.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 08:02 AM
3

Like one guy might appreciate all those different physiques as being very good even if they have one particular preference. So what? Women do the same thing, they can appreciate that men who are huge and bulky have worked hard to gain that body type, but that doesn't mean they want to have sex with them. Your OP is about the type of physique women want, not what they can appreciate. I can appreciate that Hugh Jackman worked like a beast to look like he does in the Wolverine movies, but that does…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:54 AM
3

I don't think any of them are overweight in the sense that I meant (and I'm sure you know that). Muscle mass is far different from excess body fat.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:30 AM
4

You can absolutely determine if someone is overweight by looking at them, and health is indicated by a number of factors (eyes, hair, skin, etc). You may not be able to tell everything about their health, but it's far from impossible to be able to make a fair assessment by sight alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:21 AM
3

Being healthy and not overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:15 AM
5

I could not care less. Also, on what planet is being athletic/slightly muscular going to make you 'hard and gross'? I don't care if you care, I'm just giving an opinion. Also, Brad Pitt is not "slightly muscular" in that photo, he's built like a whippet. Nothing but skin and muscles. Yes, that's the point I was making. I wasn't disagreeing with you, but the way you worded it kind of made it sound like not being able to "appreciate" male bodies the same way that men do is some kind of failing on …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 07:03 AM
3

Not only do I not agree with what you yourself are saying, but you're also misinterpreting what I said. What I'm actually saying is that women do appreciate male aesthetics, just not the same ones as men. Women overall prefer fitness and low body fat to bulk.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 06:56 AM
2

Some women have the same delusions, sure. But as we're talking about men's/women's preferred male body types, I don't see why that's relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 06:32 AM
2

Pitt is first, then some skinny as fuck dude, then another skinny fuck who apparently benched and curled a few times, maybe, and the men chose Zyzz as the ideal body. The "skinny as fuck" dude that came in number 2 is hot as fuck compared to the others in the list - if he had chest hair I'd be all over him. I like his body more than Brad's, because it looks like Brad would feel like touching a painfully overstuffed leather couch. All hard and gross. I'm convinced that most women, and many people…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/16 06:08 AM
1

For realsies. Those are just the things that piss me off the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 01:30 PM
3

No, I'm not trying to prove a point, I'm just answering the question.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 01:20 PM
1

For casual sex and LTR, all are dealbreakers except ex-con, depending on the crime committed. Personality is just as important as looks, more in some cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 05:31 AM
13

Violence/cruelty to animals or people, arrogance, condescension (towards myself or others), dismissive of/aggressive towards women or other groups, unemotional/unempathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 04:26 AM
5

Words mean things. Yes, they do. And one of the things veneration means is respect. Sorry you don't like my word choice, but that doesn't make it wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 07:28 PM
3

And "respect" is not "veneration". They're synonyms. I don't see the need to be pedantic about word choice when the meaning is quite clear. Common courtesy < respect < veneration. There's an "in between". Again, the context of the question is the one I'm answering in.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 07:22 PM
7

Well, I'm just going by the question being asked - I don't see how it can mean the literal definition of respect when it's talking about an entire gender that you don't personally know. If what the OP is asking is "does the average modern man deserve literal respect just for existing while having a dick", then no, I don't see why they would.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 06:53 PM
8

Yeah, I definitely meant a baseline level of respect, rather than veneration. You can't really say "I respect someone" and mean it that way unless you actually know them. I guess I find the whole OP question a bit misleading, as I don't necessarily respect anyone "as a man" in particular. I'm respectful to people in general, and I do respect men individually for their achievements, personality, etc, but it's not a different kind of respect just because they have a penis.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 06:35 PM
10

Respect is the default position until someone shows me they're not worthy of it, so yes, in my opinion men in general deserve it. There's plenty who don't once I get to know them, but that goes for women, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 06:19 PM
1

Well, I can't deny your experiences, but I can tell you that the attitudes of people in countries where marriage for love is frowned upon is unlikely to be the same as people in countries where that's not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/16 05:09 PM
3

See, that's why I questioned it. From your initial comment which was clearly meant as a statement of fact to "it was arbitrary", "I'd put money on it", "seeming prevalence" and "it wouldn't be far fetched"... at least it's much clearer now that you're speaking just to your experience and opinion, rather than trying to paint it as some kind of overarching truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/16 11:45 AM
3

That "many women" marry men they consider below average, that many of those women go into denial, and that they don't actually love their husbands (despite apparently having convinced themselves that they do). Because I'm pretty sure you're just making up what sounds right to you, rather than basing your opinion on anything tangible.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/16 10:52 AM
1

In your opinion it is, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 06:15 PM
4

if there's no real attraction then divorce a logic consequence. And there are plenty of other circumstances where divorce is the logical consequence. I mean, you can assume it's all down to women's lack of attraction to their husbands, but I'm not buying that for a second. I have many accounts from friends who started going with hookers because their wives after two kids almost stopped having sex with them because they felt no real physical attraction for their husbands. I know it's anedoctal bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 05:23 PM
4

How does it imply anything of the sort? That's not what "no fault" means.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 05:18 PM
7

Which says what about the motives of the people involved? How does that actually prove any of what the poster above has said?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 04:04 PM
6

You say all of this like it's a fact rather than an opinion, so can you offer anything to back up your claims?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 02:32 PM
13

If I married him, I wouldn't think him below average, so with my husband. I prefer scrawny, anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/16 03:59 AM
1

It's not snarky to point out that I don't need someone "fixing" my sentences, but unnecessarily trying to correct other people's sentences could be considered that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 05:53 PM
1

You inserted the words "mentally stable" into what I wrote for no reason and stated you "fixed" it. I'm saying it was unnecessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 05:36 PM
2

As an aside, I may have grown and matured a lot since school, but your username still makes me giggle. I guess some things never change. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 05:27 PM
1

I remember reading some studies on it a while back. It was related to the divorce rate vs. the rate of people who remain in marriages they don't like. I'm gonna look and see if I can find it/them to read, because it sounds interesting. It doesn't match with my experience, but that doesn't mean it's wrong, obviously. I mean in that particular respect. I look back at the kids I knew in school and the majority of them are lonely and unhappy. I'll see them in the pub in my parent's town and their un…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 05:07 PM
1

By unstable, I mean they respond to that kind of behaviour. Not in my opinion. I don't doubt that it happens, I just don't think it's quite as common as you seem to think it is. The majority of relationships end up pretty codependent. I'd say the majority of marriages end up unhappy, with both parties afraid to leave. I'm honestly not sure why you think that. Are you going by studies, or what you've read elsewhere, or personal experience? Because I haven't seen or heard anything to that effect, …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 04:34 PM
2

I don't think the majority are unstable or have dysfunctional relationships. A lot of people, maybe, but not most by any stretch.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 02:51 PM
1

Haha, that's how I remember it, too. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 02:39 PM
2

What feminists might those be?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 02:31 PM
2

... that really didn't need to be fixed. I doubt anyone thought I was specifying that mentally unstable people love stability.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 02:17 PM
3

Of course women can be shitty... they're people. They're as capable of being shitty as men are. I've not seen any BPers (and I'm not one, btw) deny that some women are, just that all women are by nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 02:00 PM
2

Then they were with shitty women, and they're well shot of them. That doesn't mean they should do the exact same thing to someone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 01:42 PM
0

Being suppliant... is extremely easy for most young men, as that's how they've been taught to act towards women their whole life. No more than women have been taught to defer to men. A lot of people teach their kids bullshit, but that doesn't make it the majority's experience, or something that people don't often grow out of when they're of an age to think for themselves. And being nice is generally something that kids are taught to be to everyone, not just women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 11:18 AM
2

But you're arguing that women want this to be the case, or at least you were. If what you're saying is that some men/women would want to hold that power over their partner to "keep them in line", I'd agree. If what you're saying is that some men/women will put up with that shit to keep a partner, I'd agree with that, too. If what you're saying is some garbage about women wanting men because their friends do, or refusing to date someone if he's not impressive enough to people other than her, no a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 09:53 AM
2

You're better off focusing on being desirable to your partner than to their friends, is what I'm saying. And whether or not your friends/various other women find the guy attractive is not going to make you more or less attracted to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 09:37 AM
2

Not at all. Being attractive to one person in no way translates to being attractive to their friends or anyone else. Not all women have the same taste.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 09:32 AM
2

You don't need to be attractive to everyone else to be attractive to your partner. And you don't need to impress anyone's friends to do so, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 08:58 AM
4

Women don't want men who seem to have no options and that do not impress their friends. That is what I mean. That's nowhere near the same thing as "They prefer thinking they have barely gotten a hold of you to thinking they own you." Either way, I still say it's bullshit. Women aren't typically going into relationships with men because of what everyone else thinks of them, or to impress people.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 08:40 AM
1

Or, niceness allows women to walk all over you. Nah, the majority of women aren't interested in "walking all over" someone just because they can. They prefer thinking they have barely gotten a hold of you to thinking they own you. Bullshit. Most people prefer stability in relationships to being kept on their toes and feeling like they have to constantly win over the person who's meant to be in love with them. Of course, there is a middle ground, but erring towards submissive is never going to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 08:32 AM
8

Because not putting in the effort to be nice is easier for them, so they have to think up a good excuse for it. Saying niceness is weak, or feminine, or submissive means they can pretend that's why they're arseholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 07:31 AM
5

Nah, none of what you said is at all close to describing reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 08:28 PM
5

I usually try to get them laughing, I find having a giggle it helps me and them relax and builds some kind of rapport early on. From that point it's just talking and asking questions to see if there's any mutual interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 10:52 AM
12

It depends on the person, whether it's something they perceive as a flaw/issue, and how well you know them. I know a guy who's 6'9, and he hates when random people bring up his height (I've seen him be pretty rude to people who ask him about the weather up there, basketball, etc). As his friend I can give him shit about it without it being an issue... but if I brought it up constantly I'm sure he'd get sick of it. Some women might find it insulting if it's something they dislike about themselves…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/16 09:58 AM
1

I don't know why you're trying to equate physicality with values, because they're not the same thing. Like, at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 10:16 AM
3

Why do you want it to be "about men" so bad? I don't, that's the point. Haha, sure. We just love doing boring, tedious shit for half a day, every day. Not everyone finds their job tedious or boring. The point is, if you could not work and be supported by your partner instead, why would you work? Because you want to work, or because you don't want to be entirely dependent on someone else, etc, etc. The default position for women is not "be a homemaker". Don't worry, then you get half his shit. Wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 05:52 AM
3

Because not everything is about men? Because they actually enjoy working and contributing? Because almost everybody has to work these days, whether in LTRs/marriages or not, and often even when kids are involved? Because even if their partner/husband has the ability to look after them financially, there's no guarantee that they always will? There's countless options outside of "men and women are the same", and I never actually said that, anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 05:26 AM
0

It's just plain wrong - kinda like saying that fat people aren't looking to attract people who want fit people. No, it's not kinda like saying that at all. Do you think men who value "femininity" in women are looking to attract "unfeminine" women - or will overlook the fact that she's "unfeminine" because of something else she brings to the table? Because I certainly don't. You're putting the cart before the horse here: they want to attract certain people and bank on them not valuing the trait t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:45 PM
0

You're making a lot of assumptions here. Who says that the guy they end up falling for automatically doesn't value "feminine" women? I'm making the assumption that someone who doesn't value "femininity" in themselves aren't going to be looking to attract a man who does. That's one assumption, and it's fairly obvious. People who value fidelity aren't going to be looking to attract polygamists, are they? Apart from that, it's not that the only options are "full blown tomboy or butch" on the one ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:17 PM
1

It doesn't read like she thinks her credentials should make her more attractive to him, she was comparing their relative life positions to show that (in her opinion, anyway), she has more going for her than he does.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:12 PM
3

The problem is that by focusing primarily on her career through her 20's, a lot of women end up losing time they should have spend looking for a man, and once they realize that, all the good men are already taken. First off, that's only a problem if it's a problem to her. If her main priority is her career, that's a choice that she's made for herself. Women are no more unaware that there are sacrifices to be made for something that you want than men are. Second, since when does having a career s…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 03:49 PM
2

Yeah, my tits are almost as good at finance as I am. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 03:01 PM
2

I've often seen any kind of strength being conflated with being "unfeminine", which is absurd. And as women who are "unfeminine" obviously aren't looking to attract men who value "feminine" women, I doubt it would worry them that you have a problem with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 02:41 PM
2

Lol, my role doesn't have quotas. But you keep telling yourself whatever you like, I'll just keep outperforming, and outearning, most of the men in my field. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 02:29 PM
3

No, that's not what is happening. Those women aren't pissed off that men don't find them more attractive because of their careers - or even that their careers make them attractive in the first place - they're speaking specifically about men who find them less attractive because they have careers. That's how I'm reading it, at least, since it's never actually happened to me I can only go by what I've seen elsewhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 02:27 PM
4

Even if it's not their primary or even secondary motivation, a lot of those women feel that their lifestyle has the added bonus of being attractive to men, when it is not. What makes you think that women feel this is the case? I've never even heard of this before, that women think that their careers will help them attract men or whatever. Where are you getting this notion that it even factors into their decision making process? There is no point in complaining and shaming men for this, as attrac…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 02:17 PM
0

Hahaha, yeah, my job is so easy! That must be why I got the promotion that 7 of the men I work with also went for.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 02:04 PM
-2

Like I said to the OP, you've missed the point. I'm talking about the reason women become educated and forge careers, and saying it's not to be more attractive to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 01:39 PM
1

No? Nobody's goal is to be a corporate slave. Not only do women need to work these days (whether single or in a couple - most households are of the two income variety for a reason), but they often enjoy working. Sorry if you don't, but I happen to like my job. I'd be bored as fuck if I didn't have anything to do all day.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 01:36 PM
-2

I'm not saying every action taken by men is a bid to be more attractive to women When you said "ultimately everything most men do winds up boiling down to making himself more attractive to women", that's exactly what it sounded like. i'm saying alot of them can be distilled down to playing a part in increasing attraction as an incentive to do those things I still don't agree with this. I don't think people who are genuinely ambitious even care if what they're doing is making them more attractive…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 01:31 PM
-4

if i could be with the object of my desire without having to make a real effort would it make sense for me to make an effort? If literally all you want in life is to have that one object of desire, I guess not. If you care about anything else, then yes, it would absolutely make sense to make an effort. ultimately everything most men do winds up boiling down to making himself more attractive to women, sure you can rationalize that everything he does is for his personal sense of worth, for his fut…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 12:43 PM
3

By their school, mass media and their parents. No, they're really not. They're being told that there's no shame in being strong and independent, that there's value in having an education and a good career, and that there's more to life than being "hot" and living for the sake of men. Can you show me examples of girls being told that having a good job will attract a man? They are also told that focusing on their career doesn't jeopardize their romantic prospects; they're told they don't have to c…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 09:25 AM
5

Well, some people are idiots, aren't they? If a woman is strong because she thinks it will attract a man, that's pretty stupid. If a man has a problem with a woman being strong, that's also pretty stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 08:42 AM
9

Everything you just typed is nothing more than your exceptionally biased opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 08:09 AM
-2

Who he hell told you men do everything for themselves? Mostly TRP, as I was responding to a RPer. You know, men have ambition, honour, men build their lives for themselves (as opposed to women building their lives for men), etc. I don't believe that shit at all. This is one reason RP has hit me so hard. Because I realised it was a dead end, with no happy ending. Now I know that I will never qualify for intimacy in my 20s, and will then be used as a disposable utility for her provisioning in my 3…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 07:40 AM
2

This is what girls are being taught. That men like strong, independent women. Where are they being taught that? Telling girls to be strong and independent is not saying "guys will love you for it!". It's just telling them that there's more to life than being attractive to men. Indeed. That's not what girls are taught though. Again, where? I'm not seeing this "teach girls that men will love them for their career" business. ..OK? [So can you explain all the woe-is-me women crying WHERE HAVE ALL TH…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 07:31 AM
8

Firstly, that's not what you said. You specifically stated that women "think climbing the corporate ladder increases their attractiveness and raises their expectations from a potential mate". Which is what I said was nonsense. Being successful has fuck all to do with impressing men. Secondly, so what? If a woman's main goal is being educated and having a career, then finding a husband (or her love life in general) is less important to her than that. That's the way priorities work. You're pointin…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 07:07 AM
19

Millennial women have been taught that having a career and academic accomplishments raises their value, and their societal value. While true, this gives them the impression that she gains SMV by slogging away her career. What makes you think women are going through education and getting good jobs for men? There's seems to be this underlying thought process in a lot of places that anything a man does in life is for his personal sense of self worth, for his future, for money and stability, etc... …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 06:48 AM
8

Okay, so even by your definition of a "chad", none of them fit. No physical flaws? Well, Ralph Fiennes has crooked teeth and is quite odd-looking. Alan Rickman's teeth were also crooked, and he was born with a jaw issue that caused it's movement to be quite limited - hence the way he spoke. David Bowie, again with the crooked teeth, the eye, and he also slept with men (is that a "chad" trait, now?). Daniel Radcliffe is 5'5, for fuck's sake. And as for "gets laid with any woman he wants"... Alan …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 03:50 PM
7

None of those guys were "chads" at any point. Ralph Fiennes may have a pretty face, but that's about it in terms of what TRP considers a "chad" (I don't think he lifts too much) - and no, playing a Nazi does not make you "alpha".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 09:57 AM
1

You can assume as much as you like, but no, you're very unlikely to be right.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 09:32 AM
1

No, not at all. Especially since you don't know if someone is dressing as their authentic self or for work/society/the weather, etc, unless you actually get to know them. You can assume a lot about people from what they're wearing, but that doesn't make your assumption correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:51 AM
1

No, I don't agree with him, and I listed a bunch of situations that can change how you dress outside of "displaying your personality".
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 04:37 AM
3

So does that logic just apply to giving head? Or do things like rimming, pegging, fisting and threesomes come into it, too?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 02:45 AM
3

I get that; if I was with a guy who didn't want to go down on me, I'd not be with him for long, either. But that's not the point, and doesn't answer the OP. *Edit: I wouldn't call it selfish to not participate in sexual activities you're uncomfortable with, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 09:59 AM
16

You can be a sexual person without liking every single sex act in existence. Not everyone likes giving or receiving head... I've been with a guy who didn't like receiving blowjobs, which was surprising to me, but that was just his preference. If a guy is repulsed by the idea of rimming his girlfriend, and doesn't get off on giving all that pleasure to his woman, can he still be a sexual person? I think so.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 09:27 AM
9

That entirely depends on whether she's repulsed by the idea of giving a blowjob, or repulsed by the idea of giving a blowjob to him. If it's the latter, I agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 09:05 AM
7

Above average in looks and fitness. Above average for looks in my opinion, sure... in the opinion of people who subscribe to TRP, not so much. I like fit men, but not muscular. Has a non-nerdy, masculine job. I don't really care what a guy does for a living, but in the past I've dated a male nurse, a guy who works in a supermarket and a call centre worker. My current partner works in finance, like me. Has exciting hobbies such as rugby, rock climbing, dancing, or aviation. Aviation is the only o…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 07:37 AM
6

It's what the people who subscribe to that sub find attractive, yes. That does not represent all women any more than TRP represents all men. But, just for shits and giggles, check out the top posts of all time. Mixed in among the usual suspects you find on that sub are Ralph Fiennes, Hugh Laurie, Alan Rickman, David Bowie (with all his pretty Labyrinth make up on), Daniel Radcliffe, a female model dressed as a dude, and Donald Glover (for anyone saying that it's all white guys).
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 07:15 AM
9

I think what they mean is that PMS is no longer even an issue for women who have gone through menopause.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 05:41 AM
2

They should change up the Ken doll. He's always been weird-looking, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 01:23 AM
5

Yes, if I don't assume a doll is an SJW because of the colour of it's hair, I must be slow or something! Makes total sense. Listen, I don't think there's anything productive left to be had from discussing this with you, so you have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 05:22 PM
7

How many dolls are you aware of that care about social justice? The fact that it's hair is blue has nothing to do with anything, except in your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 05:07 PM
5

Hahaha, it's an SJW now? Jesus. Okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 05:02 PM
4

Yeah, you're welcome to your opinion. Considering the size of her waist, I'm still sticking with average, but she just happens to carry weight on her arse which is entirely normal for a shitload of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 04:48 PM
6

I never once said this, please don't put words in my mouth to fit your narrative. How on earth am I putting words in your mouth? First you said they weren't desirable, then that they were only good for fucking, then that if they did find someone it would be someone that doesn't like them/that they don't like. If that's not what you're trying to say, you're not coming across very clearly. Fat people can find love, happiness, and relationships - but please, for the sake of everyone, stop pretendin…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 04:39 PM
9

Well, your partner kind of should find you attractive. It's not unheard of (or a bad thing in any way) that someone approaches or ends up with someone who fits their physical ideals, for fuck's sake. That doesn't mean that's all they value - especially if they're in a LTR or marriage. You seem really invested in believing that anyone with a body type you don't approve of is doomed to a life of loneliness or settling for someone they don't want. I don't get it, but you keep doing you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 03:53 PM
6

You're assuming that people don't actually desire that type of body, or that someone who looks like that can't get who they actually desire. Neither of those things is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 03:40 PM
6

Funny, I've never known a woman with a similar body to have any trouble finding a guy that wants to sleep with her, have an LTR with her or marry her. Your opinions are not everyone else's.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 03:26 PM
8

This barbie is invisible to the majority of desired men. I guess that explains why TRP cares so much. It's cool, you know, that a lot of women are shaped like that - doesn't make them desirable, though. Ya feel me, ya diggy? Not to you, maybe, but some people admire more than one type of female form. Ya diggy?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 03:03 PM
2

So on TRP, there's been a whole outrage over the new Barbie model. That is too cute! Glad to see they're worried about the big issues, like dollies for little kids. Now, I would call this just a bit curvy and certainly a more realistic body type than the previous one. Yep, pretty much. She's got a fair sized arse on her, but that's, you know, how a lot of women are shaped. Literally no woman in the history of the world has been shaped like the old barbie... where would the internal organs go? An…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 12:31 PM
2

I think you have me confused with someone else, as I've never posted a photo... but I'm not "low SMV", so I guess it comes down to the same thing. My taste has definitely changed... from about 13 to 20 I was almost exclusively into goth-looking dudes, all pale, skinny and wearing make up. Since then it's been pretty consistent, in that I still love skinny guys, still appreciate a man in make up, but unique or interesting looking took over from the goths specifically. I've never had an interest i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 03:45 AM
3

No, it's not fair to say she's "trying to expose herself purposely to get attention", as you don't know what her reasoning is, you're just inventing a reason that makes sense to you and imposing judgement on her for it. For all you know she's a stripper/prostitute who has to make a living regardless of the weather, or she's from a colder climate and doesn't feel the need to rug up as much as most people, or she's a 2 minute walk away from a fancy party and didn't want to have to change there, or…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 06:10 PM
2

What sort of things are you inferring from these clothing choices, exactly? Their insecurity levels? Their worthiness as a friend/partner? Their love of dance? Whether they're going to try and pick your pocket? You don't know any of these things without knowing the person, period. You can make pointless assumptions, sure, but that doesn't make them correct or in any way useful - especially if the guy in the suit grabs your wallet because you've assumed he's not a threat as he's dressed pretty sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 05:54 PM
5

I disagree. People choose to wear clothes for a wide variety of reasons, including (but not limited to) pressure from society/their peers, work reasons, comfort, they like them, the weather, they think it's what looks best on them, etc. You cannot magically read people's personalities from what fabric they're covering their naughty bits with.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 05:34 PM
6

They're just clothes, for fuck's sake. Without knowing them personally or giving them some kind of psychological examination, all you can tell from what someone's wearing is that they like those clothes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 05:17 PM
2

I've gotten a giggle out of it... that's something, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 12:45 PM
2

I don't trust any of you... in fact, I don't even trust myself!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 12:42 PM
6

Same boat, dude. I've got a male friend I've known since primary school, and we've never had any kind of sexual relationship (well... I think I asked him out in grade 3 or something, but since I was 7 or 8 it probably doesn't count, right?). I've been told that he must pay for me to do stuff for me to care about him/keep him around, or given the whole "men only talk to women they want to fuck" speech when I've mentioned it. If he wanted to fuck me I doubt he'd have waited over two decades to try…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 12:40 PM
3

Yeah, I guess if someone calls you "unusual" or "different" in the right tone of voice, it kind of boils down to the same thing. I would still say it's not quite that common outside of the internet in my experience, but my experience is all I can speak for.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 10:15 AM
3

Women love to say things that reflect good on them. The don't aren't automatically true. Dude, women don't lie any more than men do. You may not believe them, but that doesn't change reality. There's no benefit to going around telling people you like skinny guys when you secretly want a buff guy. And if you don't believe what women say, you must be looking at what they do, right? Try and tell me that "most attractive women you know" are all dating/married to people that look like Brad Pitt, beca…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 09:59 AM
4

I'm not "one of only a few" at all, it's pretty fucking common. Even in that survey I linked to they literally showed 6 pictures and got people to pick which one best describes their tastes - that doesn't even begin to cover the wide variety of body types other than the ones shown that women might prefer even more. Literally all it shows is that a lot of women like slender men with some muscles, not that you have to look exactly like Brad Pitt or you're doomed to a life of solitude. Yes, red pil…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 09:21 AM
2

Yeah, I'm trying to find anything that suggests what he's saying, but I'm not having any luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 08:38 AM
4

Yes, I do agree that bodybuilders are gross. Best look for a man is Brad Pitt in fight club. Not like the guy eats steroids for breakfeast, even if he's all natural. Not all women prefer or even like Brad Pitt in Fight Club - I know I don't, and I also know a lot of women who prefer bigger muscles than his, or who prefer less muscles/no muscles. There is no one size fits all. Also, if you'll notice, the body that men stated they wanted was the overly muscled guy on the end that only 1% of women …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 08:32 AM
3

Very true.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 08:21 AM
1

Hard for us to take women seriously regarding women's preferences for bodies when the vast majority of the women who aren't overweight want the same body build in men. Brad Pitt in fight club takes women's preferences for top ideal male form, most of the time. Brad Pitt was slender and obviously fit in Fight Club, but not overworked and bulging muscles everywhere. A lot of men tend to think all women want bodybuilders/gymbros, which is what I was referring to. That, of course, doesn't seem to be…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 07:42 AM
5

Glad I could help.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 07:28 AM
5

I'm the same way. Guess we're both just big, filthy liars.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 07:27 AM
2

You're right, it does happen to an extent, but I find it tends to be regarding more surface stuff. I guess it's just less insulting/annoying when someone doubts your taste in music or food than when someone denies your sexual preferences or relationship ideals.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 07:12 AM
3

Well, I'm not a younger person, but I did grow up with the internet. Personally I find it a lot easier to close a browser or go to a different website than to deal with snarky, judgemental folk in real life that you work with, or that you're forced to be around in some other way (school, family, hobbies, etc.)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 06:52 AM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/40behv/whats_your_favorite_body_type/ The votes have apparently changed since the last time I saw the thread, but if you keep scrolling down you'll see some of the conversations I mentioned.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 06:49 AM
9

I have honestly never been called a "special snowflake" or similar anywhere but on reddit. There are definitely expectations and judgements that people have in real life, but they tend to be less willing to insult/question you right to your face (in my experience, at least)... people off the internet are either more accepting, or just less loud about their opinions.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 06:40 AM
24

Individual women are often seen as spokespeople for the entire gender. The general assumption seems to be that we're all a homogeneous group rather than a bunch of different types of people who all happen to have vaginas. It happens with men, too, but it's not nearly as widespread. There was a thread a while ago where women were asked to rate the bodies of a bunch of men in a picture. The ones who answered that they wanted the muscled-up image of masculinity that's coveted by TRP got upvoted to …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 06:24 AM
1

If your family can physically force you or otherwise coerce you into a situation, then of course you can't be blamed. If it's a case of shaming or disappointment, then I'm sorry but you still make a choice if you succumb to that. That's easy to say, but things like guilt, shame, being rejected by your family, disobeying your religion - these are all things that can lead to depression, drug use, PTSD, suicidal ideation... so are abortion and giving up a child, for that matter. It's not as simple …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 05:14 PM
1

Well yeh, this is where libertarians fail to account for actual humanity. We're not machines and don't operate rationally so the whole ideology is fundamentally flawed. I agree. That still doesn't mean that the vast majority of single mothers aren't there because of their own decisions. The only ones who have been forced into it are those who cannot safely get abortions and those who cannot release their child for adoption for whatever reason (I'm unfamiliar with how the system works or how easy…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 04:31 PM
1

The libertarian is generally thinking less from a moral perspective and more from a Randian self-interest perspective. Right, which is what I said. They're not taking into account anything that falls outside of their very limited view of the situation. They'd also be quite happy to impose their lack of morals onto others, which comes to the same thing, really. The thinking is that if you cannot afford to feed, clothe and shelter a child by your own means, then it should be removed from your care…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 04:05 PM
-1

If you're arguing from the position that single mothers should not receive welfare, then this line of argument is totally valid. Again, only if you choose to ignore the complexity of the situation and try to make it a "right or wrong" scenario. Which doesn't make much sense when we're discussing things like bodily autonomy, the rights of the child (if you believe life starts at conception, which I don't), what is medically and legally possible, what is best for the individuals involved, etc, etc…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 03:17 PM
-1

Nobody is saying "easy" or "simple". OP is simply taking a coldly rational approach, it doesn't mean he's incorrect in his analysis. It's not "taking a coldly rational approach" to deny the reality of a situation and view something this complex as black and white "here's the right way and that's the wrong way, do this and don't do that" is not sufficient when there's so many variables involved. What he sees as the "correct" way to handle the situation is not only often impractical, but can be ut…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 03:03 PM
1

It's really not a "little known side effect", as it's been in place for a really long time and is widely discussed in media, on the internet, movies/tv shows. I never said it was a financial contract, but it is a financial arrangement that may be put in place - for varying amounts of time - depending on particular circumstances, length of marriage, etc. It's not a case of "we were married for two weeks and I wasn't working, now you owe me half your money forever, muahahahaha!", at least not in t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 11:08 AM
3

I don't deny that women are more likely to receive sole/primary custody, but some stats I've seen show that in the majority of cases women are spending roughly twice as much time as men parenting on a weekly basis, as they're far more likely to be the SAHP or take reduced hours to deal with childcare. The court is taking into account who has been the primary caregiver, not who has the vagina. Like you said, this doesn't describe all cases, but probably most.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 10:59 AM
-1

No, I'm not. I'm stating that there's a lot more to it than "just don't have sex, no problem!", "just have an abortion, it's simple!" or "just stay pregnant and give it up for adoption, easy!". Just because the option exists doesn't mean it's feasible for everyone to choose that option. Even something as simple as being a casual worker who is not entitled to time off with pay can remove a fuckload of the choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 10:49 AM
0

He already has agreed to the financial side of that arrangement, unless he is unaware that her not working means she won't have her own funds or means of supporting herself, and unless he's completely ignorant of alimony laws.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 10:46 AM
2

Really, that's only of concern to the couple. It doesn't change the fact that she's been out of work and that affects her likelihood of being hired and that he agreed to that arrangement. I don't, however, think alimony should be paid indefinitely - once she is able to support herself it should be stopped.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 08:32 AM
2

Abstinence is 100% effective. It's effective if it's actually practised but it's not feasible to expect people to not follow their instincts to have sex. You can tell people "just don't do it" until you're blue in the face, but it's a natural and strong urge for humans. Almost 50% of priests break celibacy vows, for fuck's sake. If you choose to have sex, there are a number of birth control methods you can use with varying effectiveness. The standard advice is to use two forms of birth control. …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 08:27 AM
0

I loved our 80s/90s gameshows... so ridiculous and cheesy, but better than anything on one of the other 5 existing channels at the time. :P But yeah, Turpie was the best of the bunch by far.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 06:32 AM
2

I remember that one! Admittedly I was born in the 80s, so I don't remember it that well, but I'm pretty sure my parents watched it a lot. There was a lot of top quality Aussie hosts back in the day - of course there was Turps, but also John Burgess, Rob Brough, Larry Emdur... even Rob Guest on Man O Man, haha.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 06:03 AM
0

Abstinence is not effective, because suppressing your sexuality doesn't work for any length of time. Birth control varies in effectiveness and is not always taken/administered properly (especially if people have been told to just not fuck instead of being educated about how to do it safely). The morning after pill is about 89% effective - nowhere near the 99% you suggested. Your constitution doesn't seem to stop a lot of states closing all but a few far-flung abortion clinics or demanding waitin…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 05:02 AM
0

You can't say no to the mo'. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 04:00 AM
4

Abstinence is a choice. And not nearly as effective as you'd think. Men and women find it ridiculously hard to entirely stifle their sexuality for any length of time. That's one of the reasons why women end up pregnant when they don't mean to, and when men don't mean them to.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 03:02 AM
2

All of those things can and do fail, especially abstinence.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 02:52 AM
4

Having children is not always a choice, not by any stretch of the imagination. Pregnancy can happen no matter how careful you are, and it's not quite as simple as "oh, just have an abortion!" - people can have a religious/moral opposition to abortion, they might not medically be able to have one for various reasons, they might not find out about the pregnancy until it's legally outside of their control, etc. Giving a child up for adoption isn't exactly a bed of roses, either, considering the phy…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 10:05 PM
4

If the agreement between both parties was that she would not work for whatever reason, I don't see why not, considering that being out of the workforce for any length of time makes you essentially undesirable as an employee. If she has maintained her own job throughout the marriage (or for a sizeable portion of the marriage), then no. She isn't owed anything outside of the splitting of marital assets.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 09:48 PM
1

I didn't dispute that the Brazilian govt gives money to women (for their children). What I disputed is that they're getting money specifically for being women, which is what you stated was happening. If (in Brazil, at least) women are more likely to be raising and financially supporting the child, shouldn't it be the women who receive the funds for childcare? Because that's literally all that's happening.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 09:13 PM
6

Did you even read the article you linked? It says nothing about giving money to women because they're women, they still only get the money if they have children.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 09:05 PM
17

Women don't get "free shit from the government" for being women, they get shit for their children (if they have them). If you can prove that your need for sex is as fundamental as a child's need for food/shelter/school supplies, then sure, the government will probably do you a solid. Until then, it's not their concern and nobody else will give a shit, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 08:45 PM
21

I support prostitution, but it does not need to be funded by the government. It's legal where I am, and all things considered, it's not that expensive to get yourself off - there's no need to expect tax payers to fork over the cash for some dude to get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 08:31 PM
10

do you find yourself feeling empathy for misogynists? Not particularly, at least not at the time that they're being overtly misogynistic. like if one of them got terminal cancer, would you feel bad? Cancer is a real bastard - it stole half my family. I don't wish cancer on anyone, and I automatically feel bad for anyone who gets it. would you find it funny? No. do you feel justified in using racial slurs against misogynists of color? No. would you loan them money for a life saving operation? I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 05:27 PM
0

Technically, yes, but there's no point in trying to force someone to adopt that terminology if they don't want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 03:56 PM
3

Which of these statements is correct nowadays? I think number five is the closest to being correct, but it's not all the way true. I do agree that both sexes have to compete in order to procure a (long term) mate, to varying degrees. But there's a lot of dudes (by no means all of them) who have no interest in the survival of their offspring. I think there's a societal as well as a biological reason in play - women are often portrayed as nurturing and motherly, therefore it's going to count sorel…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/16 12:10 PM
1

Currently in an LTR, sex generally at least once a day and head probably 2-4 times a week (for me and him - like the song says, you only get what you give). We're both happy with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 05:54 PM
1

Guess what? I don't give a shit. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 04:20 AM
1

Well now I know why you're angry and bitter. I'm neither, actually. I have a sweet life that revolves around me and my goals, not being a prop for someone else's. Have another cheeseburger and just relax on the couch instead of going to the gym you never frequent. You seem to think "not taking care of myself for the purpose of being hot to men" means that I just don't take care of myself, which is far from the truth. Tired of seeing all the hot women getting the good men? My boyfriend isn't look…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 04:07 AM
1

You're right it should only be your first goal. You're not right, as not only is it not my mission in life, it's also not my first goal, it's not a major concern, it's not even a vaguely important. My life isn't about to revolve around men. Followed by cooking, backrubs, cleaning and learning to make a decent drink. Those just sound like things a competent adult does.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/16 03:45 AM
-1

Interesting how I never said anything of the sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/16 01:02 PM
-2

You do whatever you like, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/16 10:55 AM
1

A loudmouth who keeps quiet when she's not in the company of white knights willing to beat up dudes for you. I'm a loudmouth alright, but I don't keep quiet for anyone, and I definitely don't need dudes to protect me. I also wouldn't hang around with dickheads who get into fights. Here's a secret. Not all women are equally hot. So unlesss your name begins with Natalie and ends with Portman I'm not believing it. You're always belting on about how easy women can get laid, so why do you think it ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/16 10:03 AM
0

Clearly you do care, or you wouldn't be replying. I answered with my own experience, not with a value judgement. I don't know how many times I have to tell you that I don't give a shit before you believe me. Answer the question. I've given you the answer I feel your question deserves. You'll not get more answers out of me by making petty demands.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 11:43 PM
1

Car crashes cause PTSD at a significantly lower rate. What's your source for that? I can't deal with a girlfriend who is afraid of sex. PTSD may manifest itself in that way, but that doesn't mean it's a given or even likely. Know the stats on that? By the way, I don't have to justify any of that to you. I just asked if you knew the stats on PTSD as related to car accidents, which you still haven't answered. You don't have to justify anything to me, but that doesn't mean I can't ask. And please s…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 11:38 PM
-1

Even if we're only considering people who have been raped, you're still more likely to be involved in a car accident. What are the stats on people who have been in car accidents having PTSD, and is that a relevant factor in your dating life? Or do you not know, and not care?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 11:08 PM
0

I read between the lines. So I never said it, but you think I meant it. Right, it must be true, then. Do you think it's not acceptable that I refuse to date people who are schizophrenic? I. Don't. Care. You're not me, you're not dating me, and you're not someone I'd date. Your opinion means as much to me as any other random person on the internet, which is not at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 11:04 PM
-1

PTSD is not defined by being triggered. I understand that, but that is often the case. PTSD is not a catch-all phrase for "unable to function". Just to be clear, you think driving a car is as risky as being raped? Considering the likelihood of being raped versus being in a car accident? Yeah, I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:58 PM
1

And like I just commented to you elsewhere: PTSD sufferers are triggered by specific events, not everyday occurrences. They're no more likely to be "unable to function as a normal member of society" than you are due to your own various neuroses. It's not the "severe" problem you seem to think it is. Being affected by someone approaching you in an aggressive manner, for example, is not as likely to affect your life as having herpes, let along having HIV/AIDS.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:49 PM
-1

Less than a third have damage so severe they can't function as a normal member of society. Where are you getting this shit from? PTSD sufferers are triggered by specific events, not everyday occurrences. They're no more likely to be "unable to function as a normal member of society" than you are due to your own various neuroses. PTSD is a very severe illness. It can be, in the right circumstances. It's not quite as life-altering as you make it out to be in a lot of cases. I don't drive a car for…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:42 PM
-1

It's literally impossible to know who hasn't contemplated suicide after small crimes Yeah, that's kind of my point. my anecdote was just a small example of how many other crimes that have no deep psychological impact there are, not part of a statistic. You used stats to "prove" one thing, and your anecdote to "prove" another. I'm going to say it very clearly - your anecdote proves fuck all. you quoted it yourself and agreed to it, 4.1 times more likely to contemplate suicide, you seem to think t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:37 PM
2

if you are a woman why are you so aggressive? Just because. I may not be the type of woman you expect me to be, but that doesn't negate my delicious vagina and magnificent breasts.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:28 PM
-1

To be clear, where did I say not dating somebody because they were raped makes them an arsehole?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:13 PM
8

30% had damage so severe it turned into PTSD. Yes, less than a third. For something that's as invasive and disgusting as it is, that's a pretty fucking good statistic. If I'm dating a girl and she says she's been raped, there is a one in three chance she has PTSD. That isn't something to sniff at. And if you drive a car, what are the changes that you'll crash at least once in your lifetime? Or is that not something that's going to affect your life? It's a very severe illness. Yeah, just so sever…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:12 PM
0

The 4.1 times more likely to contemplate suicide is a good statistic to understand how rape can affect a person. When compared to people who have not experienced any kind of crime, yes, as I've already said. I've been victim of robberies, I know people that have been too and in no way it makes you contemplate suicide. Never mind your anecdote - since mine apparently means nothing in this context, either - what stats are you basing this theory on? Show me the data that backs up your opinion on ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:00 PM
23

One of the rental cars wasn't damaged it just had the experience of having a toddler shit in the back seat. And rape is equivalent to toddler shit in the back seat of a car because... However that being said I am going to go with the rental car that doesn't smell like toldler shit. Despite what you may think, you can completely clean your interior of any signs of being soiled in roughly 70% of cases, according to the stats that people keep quoting to me. So, you're welcome to go with whatever re…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:45 PM
3

they are not "in some way" affected, unless you're talking about bullshit rape where the girl just regretted it,or got fucked too hard or some other bullcrap. "Rape you don't agree with" does not equal "rape that didn't happen", no matter what kind of bullshit qualifiers you put behind it. in the normal rape cases the women are traumatised to an extremely deep level and changed forever Source, please?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:39 PM
4

I mean, I'm not asking for a date. Yeah, I figured. I'm just curious about whether you think I really do care about people like that, or whether I'm lying. Like I said, I don't care if you care. You're not a person I'm dating, and you don't represent the people I date. Your opinion is an abstract based on a subset, not the majority of people I interact with by any stretch of the imagination. You can care about people and not want to date them. One of my friends is schizophrenic and I care deeply…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:37 PM
0

let me try to explain to you Don't hurt yourself trying. if i said: 30% of needles will infect you with aids, would your answer be why do you ignore the enormous 70% that are safe? So 30% of rape victims who are in some way affected by their experience is equivalent to them having AIDS and infecting you? Jesus Fucking Christ, is that honestly your opinion? Do you drive a car, and if so, know the likelihood of being in an accident (even if it's not your fault - like being raped isn't your fault)?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:26 PM
2

30% is an enormous percentage, If you ignore the other enormous 70%, sure, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:08 PM
3

31 percent of theses rape victims developed RR-PTSD Those are some convincing stats, dude. Less than a third is now equal to many, apparently. 4.1 times more likely than non-crime victims to contemplate suicide Have you ever been a victim of a crime? Like, any crime? If so, you're more likely than non-crime victims to contemplate suicide. Literally all of these stats are based on rape victims versus people who have never experienced any crime in their lives. Why would anyone in their right mind …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 09:01 PM
11

Honest question: do you think I care? Honest answer: I don't care if you care. My feelings don't revolve around your acceptance, or anyone else's. Like I said, if you don't want to date me, that's cool... based on the fact that you authored this thread, I wouldn't want to date you anyway, so why would the reverse haunt me? Do you think I'm lying about feeling empathy towards rape victims? I don't think you're lying about feeling empathy towards rape victims, but the fact that you separate empath…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 08:46 PM
16

Many rape victims demonstrate PTSD and other mental issues after the event. Both of your are uninformed because we just don't know the full story. And many don't. My opinion may be uninformed as far as knowing and understanding the experience of all rape victims, but I'd wager that I've got more of an idea what it's like than the OP. Probabilistically speaking, a man would likely be better off finding someone who didn't experience the trauma in the first place. Via what metric? Is there a source…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 08:25 PM
20

I question how much it is possible to get over an experience like that. You're welcome to your (uninformed) opinion, but I don't question it because I lived it and got over it. Sorry if I'm not the rape victim you imagined. We know the vast majority of rape survivors end up damaged by the experience. How do we know that? Is there a source apart from your opinion? From my perspective, the probability is that you were (even if you weren't) and I can't just trust somebody's word on that. Like I sai…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 07:48 PM
37

I was raped, and I'm not "screwed up" or "damaged", I'm just someone who had an experience - a disgusting, foul experience, yes, but that's literally all it is. I don't bring it up out of the blue, or treat it like an anecdote, but if someone asks or brings it up in conversation, I'm not going to lie about it or minimise it for the sake of someone else's feelings. It sucks. It's not pleasant. I wish it didn't happen. But it is reality, not just for me but for more people than you'd realise. If y…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 07:12 PM
4

I'm a woman and a feminist. I sure don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 04:00 AM
3

points to magnificent shit-pile, indicates it's mountainous height to show that it has not diminished
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 01:12 PM
3

Please keep advertising the lack of shit that I am willing to provide, people will flock to see the shit-pile that I keep all to myself and probably pay me for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 01:04 PM
8

K. Still don't give a shit. Please tell all your friends.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 12:57 PM
14

That's super, but it's completely off topic and nobody gives a shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 12:19 PM
40

If what we are doing is so bad, why don't they offer an alternative. The blue pill is satire. How can they mock us if they cant replicate a strategy for men to be successful with women? Because their purpose isn't, and never was, to get you laid. I don't know why you would expect a satire sub to offer a sexual strategy - it's like asking why TRP doesn't offer critiques of Seinfeld episodes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 04:24 AM
1

That was last year. 2016 still has one more really mean thing to do to us.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/16 02:22 AM
0

I said I'd not seen it as frequently, not that I doubt it happens at all. There is some overlap between TRP/MRAs, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 06:09 PM
2

Again, to be fair, I've not seen that as frequently from RPers as I have from MRAs.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:41 PM
3

You're making the assumption that people back then either didn't have as much casual sex, or that they were all in LTRs. In reality, as early as the 1920s (you know, when contraception became much more common and efficient) most young people had premarital sex. It's not up to you/men/society to decide whether a girl gets to sleep with only her husband, her boyfriend(s), or all of the 17 guys she met at a party in one night. Your value judgement - and that of anyone who isn't her - means exactly …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:39 PM
0

You're putting far too much effort into denying the story, honestly. I don't know if it's true - I wasn't there, after all - but if it's not, so what? The worst that's happening from it is people are responding as if it's true. That's not about to rewrite history or change the course of the future, it's just internet bullshit. the combination of all the elements in that story (which are individually already pretty unlikely) What's unlikely about them? Some guy reading TRP? Someone abusing their …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:21 PM
2

In that case you'd think that back in the days when people who had sex outside of marriage were completely shunned, nobody would have sex outside of marriage. And yet they did. Constantly. It's almost like... I dunno, like it's a strong, natural urge that people find really hard to repress, or something!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:15 PM
2

What effect do you imagine that it has, if not "keeping women's behaviour in check"? That's the comment I'm responding to, after all; that slut shaming is necessary to control women's sex lives for the good of society. If it's not actually doing that, then what's the purpose?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:07 PM
4

I get that, if the story's true then it's an absolutely horrible situation for her to be in. I just can't blame anyone but the boyfriend for his actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 05:04 PM
-1

I don't see why the automatic assumption would be that it's fake, but it's certainly a possibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:57 PM
-1

It wasn't the tone so much as the content.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:55 PM
6

Disturbed individuals misinterpret a lot of things, but that doesn't make it the fault of the writing, or someone who not only never advocated violence, but never actually hit anyone themselves. People have misinterpreted Catcher in the Rye, too, is that Salinger's fault? I mean, I dislike TRP quite a lot, but it's a huge fucking stretch to try and attach this to them in any way.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:53 PM
-2

That's the only reason "smacking a bitch around" isn't a good idea to you? Yeah, I definitely wouldn't recommend you living with or marrying a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:33 PM
10

However, when you take someone who might already have violent tendencies, and then expose them to writings, posts and literature about how women need to be "trained," it's not too far of a stretch for them to think that in order to "train" the woman in question they would have to get physical to "discipline" her. That's like saying that listening to Marilyn Manson caused those kids to shoot up their high school in Columbine - absolute bullshit. If someone beats women after reading TRP, that's no…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:31 PM
9

To be fair, as much as I believe a lot of what TRP suggests boils down to emotional abuse, I've never seen them advocate physically abusing women - in fact, I've seen a lot of them outright condemn it. I'd say from reading the post that her boyfriend was a disgusting, violent fuckwit as well as being a RPer, not because of being one.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 04:16 PM
9

When Bowie died, I said it was a shitty day. It has now become a doubly shitty week. Alan Rickman's voice and sense of humour were something else, and it sucks for all of us that we'll never see him get to be fucking brilliant in anything else. I want my money back on 2016 - this one's defective. May you be making Polyjuice potions for Lily in that great dungeon in the sky ... always. :(
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 02:56 PM
8

The fourth should be her last attempt. If there are any more partners after that, she should just accept that she's a slut. Accepted. Now what? Am I meant to give a shit? Is anyone else? I just think a "slut" should exist as a concept, to keep people's behavior in check. Yeah, it's worked really well so far, that's why there's no more "sluts".
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/16 01:01 PM
2

Meh, I can be a snarky asshat too. I'm also not great at expressing myself in print, and print is a bad format for figuring out intent anyway. No harm, no foul. I think most people here can be that way. That's probably why we all congregate on PPD - we may not agree, but at least in some way we're among our fellows, haha. It doesn't help that the vast majority of posters seem to like stirring shit more than actually debating, but such is the nature of the net. Yeah, the mods do a pretty good job…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 06:03 PM
1

I do believe you when you say you can separate casual and more intimate sex, but you have to understand that I've never experienced that, and can only take you at your word. Fair enough, I think that's true of most people. It's entirely possible that my views would be the opposite of what they are now had I grown up a different way, or not ever had sex outside of a relationship. FWIW it isn't the N I'm concerned with so much as how a woman got to that number. I guess I can see that, I mean, ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:54 PM
1

Understood and respectable. You know, it is refreshing as fuck to be able to have an actual, civil conversation with someone on PPD who holds such different views. I have to take a lot of the blame... I tend to get really mouthy if someone is being snarky or insulting, or if I feel that they are, anyway (which you may remember from our first conversation, haha). But everything tends to get blown out of proportion and people are often so scared of trying to find some kind of middle ground. I may …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:47 PM
1

However I'm sure you can see why our current climate seems less than savory to those of us that see high N as an issue. I can see that, yeah. I may not agree with it, but I understand. Mostly because it clearly shows attitudes regarding sex, which are pretty important in a relationship. It shows an attitude regarding sex, but no the whole picture. I know for me, I've slept with more guys than I've been in relationships with (and TRP would absolutely think my count is "too high", which doesn't fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:31 PM
0

I don't think anybody on earth can claim they've been absolutely and consistently moral. When you asked whether I'd be as nonchalant if you had tried to implement RP behaviours in your first marriage, I had to stop and admit to myself that I can be quite judgey with that kind of stuff, and that it's not necessarily one of my more endearing traits. But at the same time, it is consistent with my personal moral code, and just like I'd prefer RPers to be honest with their wives, I figured I should a…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:16 PM
1

See, in my eyes the person being judged for their past has dodged a bullet if they're rejected based solely on that. I know I personally would have no interest in someone who looked at me differently just because I fucked some guys long before I knew them. But it all comes down to personal preference in the end
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:10 PM
1

I definitely think moderate is the way to go in just about any area of life. I used to be quite militant about vegetarianism, environmentalism, feminism, etc, when I was much younger, but I think we all tend to mellow a shitload as we age and experience people and views from all sides that don't quite fit the stereotypes in our heads.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:49 PM
0

To be completely honest, no. I would judge you for the deception and not allowing her to make that decision for herself, but not for wanting a submissive partner, if that makes sense. But who knows, if you'd had the knowledge and implemented it then, I might be congratulating you on still being with the chick you married when you were 26. I don't know your ex wife, so I can't say it would've been a bad idea, just that I would personally find it far less moral.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:47 PM
1

Heh, I was 13 in 1996... kinda puts the whole "different generations" thing into perspective. I don't advocate promiscuity, but I don't shame or judge for it, either. Much like people are allowed to decide what they want in a relationship, people are allowed to decide what they want when it comes to sex, too. If you want to fuck a bunch of people, I don't see a problem with that as long as it's safe, consensual and outside of monogamous relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:42 PM
0

You live, you learn. At least you figured out what you wanted and went for someone who felt the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:20 PM
1

I hope no man hates his wife. I guess if that makes him happy, and she is OK with it, it isn't my place to say it won't work. But I sincerely hope most married men don't want that dynamic. I hope so, too. The extremes of RP are no more representative of all RP men than extreme feminazis represent all feminists. :o You've got no idea how rare it is to hear anyone even separate radfems from normal feminists on this sub. I am impressed, haha. I hope the vast majority of RP men are rational and reas…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:18 PM
1

Yeah, if most of the "debate" here is based on Reddit subs, I may not have much to offer. It mostly is, but I don't think that means you don't have a place being here to discuss or debate. I'm neither pill, but I still enjoy coming here to have a chat and an argument. Ideally a man should know that's what he wants before he marries, but the same can be said for plenty of women as well. Absolutely, which is why in the post about whether marriage is bad for young women, I answered that marriage is…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:15 PM
1

Anyone that claims to always be right, rarely ever is. Very true. I trust those people about as much as I trust infomercials. It may not save the marriage, but it'll position that man better for the next round. I'm still not a fan of the "just try it!" suggestion, at least not without a "just bloody well talk to her about it!" thrown in for good measure. :) At least now he will know to look for a submissive woman. Right? Yep, if that's what he wants and expects, that's absolutely what he should …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:25 PM
1

And just because you see Cosmo on a shelf doesn't mean women are buying it, either - certainly not in large numbers, anyway. Yeah, you're what I would refer to (and you might disagree) as an extremely mild and rational kind of RPer. You definitely seem to have put a lot of thought into it and I don't think you'd be the type to take it to an extreme place. You don't seem to hate your wife, or women in general, either, which is nice!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:17 PM
1

MRP should be about how a man can be RP and maintain a healthy marriage. A lot of what I see there seems kinda petty and/or paranoid. As I'm sure you've figured out (even though I'm totally cryptic about it! :P), I completely disagree with what it means to be RP in the first place. I don't go and troll their sub or anything, obviously. But it'd be nice if they did what they always say you should do when it comes to TRP: don't fucking talk about it. They take it into countless other subs - I've s…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:13 PM
1

I didn't say you were recruited, just that they recruit. It's well documented - probably not on TRP, but elsewhere. And you don't have to pay for RP, not even the countless books you have to read from the sidebar before you're welcome to engage on the sub? Please, they're propping up the sad careers of plenty of "writers". Not only that, but TRP sub isn't even what some consider to be true RP - they refuse to acknowledge endorsed contributors or "vanguards" as being any kind of authority on what…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 01:49 PM
1

TRP claims to not be an ideology or belief system, but at the same time it uses the same tactics as religions to recruit new followers, right down to insisting that they're the only ones who know "the truth". Also like religions, they prey on the vulnerable and disillusioned. So, apt comparison, really I could say the same thing about Cosmo as well, but what's worse is women pay for that crappy advice. Man, you guys are obsessed with using Cosmo as some kind of "female version of TRP", as if any…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 01:38 PM
3

And again, I never once said don't date or have LTRs - do you think LTRs and marriage are the same thing, or something? I don't get how when I wrote "I don't think it's a good idea to get married young" you somehow managed to read it as including a part that says "also, don't have LTRs and fuck around as much as possible, lol". Nor did I at any stage say "have fun", whether referring to sleeping around or otherwise. You are going out of your way to make up an entire comment that in no way resemb…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 01:28 PM
1

Yeah, considering he'd had cancer for 18mths, he would've had a lot of time to come to terms with it and essentially plan out a goodbye album. I haven't heard the whole thing, but the clip for Lazarus is pretty depressing at the moment - I watched it yesterday after it all happened and cried even more than I did at the one I posted here, haha. At least he's returned to the stardust now! Apart from, you know, all the David Bowie songs, I kept getting this stuck in my head yesterday, too. If anyon…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 12:27 PM
4

The whole "Don't marry young, just have fun(implied; if you're not dating with LTR in mind you're doing it for fun), you will marry when you're 25+(surprisingly close to TRP's Wall) and ~know what you want~(read: a beta provider)"? I never once said "just have fun", implied that people should fuck around, or shouldn't date or form LTRs. All I said was getting married at that age is not the best idea in general. I also never once implied that "what you want" once you're older is either a beta or …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 12:22 PM
1

Yeah, I'm doin' alright now, thanks... hope that broken heart at the end of your post is at least a little healed. :) It never occurred to me that we'd have to give him up, especially this soon - it was just so shocking and sudden. Nobody even knew he was sick, and I don't think anybody really thought he was mortal like the rest of us, anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 12:07 PM
3

What exactly did I say (apart from the really obvious sarcasm) that sounded like TRP rhetoric to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 11:48 AM
2

Yes, totally! Either that or it was all sarcasm... us tricksy sloots like to confuse the poor men folk. ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 11:32 AM
3

Right, because if you don't get married when you're too young to know what you want, you'll be shagging every second dude you meet for the next 10 years! And you'll end up "settling" for someone you're not attracted to at all when you finally do settle down (for the money, of course!). Your insight is truly profound.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 11:18 AM
1

She isn't likely to listen, and if she does, do you REALLY believe it will be well received? Why not? If she's actually open to having her partner lead, what would be the problem with telling her you're going to do so, rather than just doing it and hoping for the best? If she's not looking for a "captain", however, at least she's aware and able to make that decision before anybody wastes their time. It just lets you know not to bother putting in all the effort with her. It's pretty bloody simple…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 07:33 AM
2

So, even if the marriage ends, the RP way of life remains. Those months were still laying the groundwork for the rest of his life. I mean, why go back just because one woman didn't like it? So, why bother implementing it to save a relationship? That is practically the literal definition of "doing it just for one woman". By your logic, MRP shouldn't even exist as it is attempting to change men to keep a woman around, rather than for himself.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:45 AM
4

I think making improvement on yourself for yourself is in no way "going behind your partners back" Again, that's not the behaviour that anyone objects to. Come on, you know the shit people dislike about TRP, and it's certainly not lifting and working on yourself. but I don't see your objection to wanting a marriage that makes me happiest. At her expense? Yeah that's shitty. Again I'd hope the goal is to make you both happy, or move on. It's when it makes you happiest and you are uninterested in …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:41 AM
1

All I can say is: I would have tried. And that's fine for you, all I can say is: I wouldn't bother expending that much effort on someone who's not willing to do the same for me. Manipulative? Possibly depending on exactly which "antics" we are discussing. So what? If the end result is a happy marriage? Call me manipulative. There's no guarantee that you being happy means the marriage is happy - there's two people involved, even if you are "the captain". I'm not saying that you personally would o…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 05:21 AM
1

Yeah, the sense of "we're totally right and you just don't understand/aren't implementing it properly if it's not working" is very strong with them. They just don't seem to be able to grasp the concept that if something works for them, that doesn't mean it will for everyone, or even most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:48 AM
2

Because they want to try? They want to try and keep someone around who has shown literally zero interest in changing their behaviour or fixing the marriage? Right, I don't get it and I never will, I guess. It just screams desperation and dependence to me. I get that you and many others might just give up. It's not so much giving up as moving on from something making you feel like shit. Your marriage is bad, you've tried talking, tried everything barring being manipulative and controlling right b…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:32 AM
3

So you simply think that in all cases, a man finding RP in a crappy marriage should simply eject first? No, but I think going behind your partner's back to work on the marriage the way that will make you happiest is a shitty idea. But does a guy really need to ask permission to start working out? Take up a few hobbies? Take control of the family finances? (I'd personally have a discussion first, but the money is as much his as hers if its shared.) What exactly should he discuss ahead of time? It…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:15 AM
1

You run out of goon or something? ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:58 AM
2

RP is about changing YOUR OWN behaviors, not for the relationship But in the context of this conversation (and MRP in general), it's mean to improve your relationship, or at least not break it apart entirely. What I'm saying is that improving it for one person without taking into account the other party involved will not end in the happiness they seek unless their wife has been hiding super secret submissive tendencies, or completely misunderstood her own preferences for her entire life previous…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:56 AM
3

And if I decided I wanted to lead anyway? Then we've gotten into "not worth saving" territory. But the point is that trying to make that decision for someone without their knowledge, consent or input, is far less likely to work than being honest with them and letting them try and work with you to fix the marriage. But, I wonder, is my current wife more compatible, or am I simply better able to be a husband post RP? I tend to think its a combination. :P Don't sell yourself short or give your succ…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:46 AM
2

He was, indeed, a true alpha. No tingles like Turps tingles!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:41 AM
1

I can agree to that, but that decision belongs to the two people in the marriage. So does whether or not to completely change the dynamic of the relationship. Yet, surprisingly, you're not meant to tell your wife about TRP, you're meant to try and sneak it past them to manipulate them into compliance. Some women are happy to be compliant. She may not know she likes it until she has the chance to try. I know some are, but contrary to what TRP/some men try to say, women are quite aware of what the…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:31 AM
4

So you're blaming yourself, but it's because you weren't "leading" your wife? That's pretty much the same thing. A women doesn't need your leadership by default, and will likely not appreciate you trying to spring it on her some years into a marriage. Again, not trying to be rude, but it's entirely possible that had you tried MRP while you were still with her, you'd still be divorced. Incompatibility comes down to far more than just "I wasn't alpha enough" or "I should've taken charge."
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:24 AM
0

If a guy is determined to make an RP change, I wouldn't advise him to push so hard he causes a woman to snap. But, I wouldn't advise him NOT to make those changes either, if they were what he truly wanted. Call it quits before things get hateful at least. And you don't think something as important as a full backflip on the previous dynamic/complete reversal of ideologies is something they should actually talk to their partner about before just trying to force it on them? If you're not working wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:19 AM
2

I'm arguing that some marriages aren't worth saving, and that kind of ideological difference isn't likely to end in happiness for both parties. I'm also disagreeing with the method being used to by TRP/MRP try and "make it happy for both", especially considering they don't actually give a shit about the happiness of their wives so much as their compliance.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:13 AM
2

Well of course, women are not responsible for their actions, why would they be responsible for who they marry? You seem happy to take the responsibility away from the men who married these women. Don't men have agency or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:05 AM
1

ianturpie, fellow Aussie, you're missing the point. Sorry, I do that a lot. I suffer from female brain, you know. It's a curse. gets distracted by my tingling vagina
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 03:03 AM
1

That's not necessarily the ideal situation at all, especially if you've married someone "bitchy and entitled". Sometimes getting divorced is the ideal situation. If someone truly thinks the above description of their wife - or women in general - is accurate, I'd suggest divorce every time.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:53 AM
5

My take on RP is to accept one's failures, own up to them, learn and move on. I'd say the view above IS often touted in the sphere, but how many of those divorced wives have owned up to their share? None of us know of course, but perhaps those men have such ex-wives? Accepting failures, owning up to them, learning, moving on, all great ideas. But the failures they "own up to" always revolve around not recognising women for the hypergamous sloots that they are and how they weren't controlling the…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:49 AM
1

No angst, just incredulity that people think that kind of thing would actually work. There's a vast difference between normal, everyday "changing and evolving" you can expect from a partner and what MRP suggests. I'm not sure what answer you'd like. Do you want me to say a married guy should just be miserable? Not do anything to improve his happiness? I don't really want you to say anything in particular, I'm just responding to content, not forcing you into a corner and demanding answers. This i…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 02:39 AM
6

A captain does what is best for the ship. Most of the time that means what he wants to do. If it was really about the ship rather than himself, he'd be doing what was best for the ship in spite of what he wants to do. The fact of the matter is, TRP is advocating a relationship in which his happiness and his leadership are both beyond reproach. Which, again, is fine if you marry a woman who is into that dynamic, but not if you marry someone who doesn't want to merely be the crew on someone else's…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:56 PM
4

Staying in a marriage "for the children" is probably the worst thing you can do - for yourself, your partner and your children. They're not going to thank you for being angry and resentful for their entire childhood. Trying to RP a "bitchy and entitled" wife is not going to work in your favour, dude. If she's that way when she's in control, imagine what she'd be like if you tried to take that away from her?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:49 PM
7

Sure, and in those cases common RP wisdom is: that marriage needed to end. But according to the OP, the women that are "driving" their men to MRP for advice are bossy, manipulative, narcissistic bitches. So why are these men trying to save the relationship? And why would they even consider that these women are going to accept that type of treatment? It's mind boggling. I agree fully that perhaps men should know what they want before they marry, but I'll be frank: Knowing what I know now, I would…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:45 PM
2

I don't know who you think you're agreeing with, but considering TRP's idea of "equality", I don't think any of you fellas are qualified to tell anyone else they've got a poor idea of what it means, just quietly.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:23 PM
10

False. The man should be dominant and do things for the marriage. The captain's duty is to the ship, not to himself and not to the crew. Not from what I've read (on the sidebar and the sub) - his happiness comes first. And if he wants to be the captain, he needs to marry a first mate, not another captain.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:14 PM
8

I'm too busy furiously sniffing my cleavage and getting all hyped up for any of that business. ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:11 PM
5

My CMV is not about that, it's challenging the idea that RP ruins perfectly happy marriages. That's not what I was saying, otherwise I would've used the phrase "perfectly happy marriage" at some stage. Even if we assume that every single guy who posts on the sub is being manipulated and controlled by some conniving harpy (which I highly doubt), why would completely flipping the script all of a sudden fix things? That kind of woman isn't about to just accept and be grateful for a submissive role …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:06 PM
5

"equality" is just female supremacy when it's not addressed Nah, that's not what equality is in the slightest.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 08:58 PM
15

The issue here is who is happy and who isn't. According to TRP, the man's happiness always takes precedence. He should be dominant and do things for himself, whereas the woman should be nice and do things for him. I don't get it, is that meant to be a fairer/easier dynamic for anyone apart from that guy? If the first mate isn't happy, it's not working. Like those posts where women stop communicating with or leave their partners/husbands when they start implementing RP techniques? Yeah, I agree, …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 08:41 PM
28

manipulative and controlling controlling and bossy Allow me to put on my RP hat for a moment: Why is manipulation seen as a bad thing? Everyone manipulates everyone, it's natural, it's the way the world works - look at sales. Control isn't a bad thing, she's just a captain guiding her first mate, it doesn't mean she's better than him, they just have different roles to fulfil in the relationship. If she can be an effective leader he should be happy to follow, etc, etc. Funny how it only seems to …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 08:24 PM
6

My tits have gotta be half coke these days... I swear they've grown 2 sizes and gotten seriously pale, what with all the sports teams I've let gangbang me over the years!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 07:24 PM
3

Exactly. And it can happen at any age if you do it too fast, of course, but I think with younger folk tending to be more impulsive and less sure of who they are/what they want, the risk is much higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 07:21 PM
12

Yeah, marriage is a bad choice for all young people in my opinion. There's no need to saddle yourself with someone for life when you're in your late teens/early twenties... you barely know what a long time means at that stage, let alone 'til death do us part. Not trying to speak for everyone, but I know if I had gotten married at that age I'd be divorced or severely depressed by now for sure. My taste in men has changed quite a lot over the years, so I'd feel really bad for whatever dude I thoug…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 06:55 PM
20

He wasn't an alpha, he was the motherfucking (goblin) king - I'm pretty sure he's the sole reason I've got a huge soft spot for men in makeup, and he kick started my interest in men's crotches at a real early age, bless him. He was just an amazing musician in general, but Labyrinth is one of my favourite things in existence. I'm currently listening to this and crying. What a shitty day.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 09:08 AM
3

Done. All 26 subscribers are gonna appreciate the shit out of that, haha.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 05:36 PM
1

I'll blast 'em with this to really get their blood pumping. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 05:10 PM
2

Sadly, /r/hairymen has no content, and /r/insanelyhairymen takes it a bit too far for my tastes... ah well, I'll survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 04:41 PM
2

You're the second person who agrees with my taste in bodies, but not in body hair. I feel so alone in my love for the fuzzy guys!
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 04:17 PM
3

aside from the body hair It's not for everyone, from what I've heard from other chicks, but I love a bit of roughage. Hairy dudes just do it for me. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 02:54 PM
2

B2, C1 or D3. I like 'em skinny/average, with maybe just a hint of muscles. C1 has the right amount of body hair, though, so he's probably the winner.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 02:30 PM
1

I think both are certainly important in their own right, but being happy yourself is more important if only for personal wellbeing. If you're not happy that tends to bleed into other areas of your life and even cause health problems if left unchecked. Can't spend time making others happy or have a fulfilling love life if you're ill or dead, after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 01:21 PM
5

Simple question...are these sentiments correct? No, those sentiments are pretty lame. Making people happy is awesome, but you should have (and be focusing on) more relationships than just your romantic one, and endeavour to make everyone who matters to you happy. I definitely wouldn't advocate "building your life" around anyone, you should already have a life that you're happy with before you invite people into it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 01:04 PM
1

Neither would go against what you're saying, but one of them in no way backs up what you're saying. But yeah, I doubt either of us will change the other's mind, so it's probably a good place to leave it. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 12:38 PM
2

I did read the whole thing, actually. But again, it doesn't assert that monogamy is an evolved (ie, ingrained) trait in humans, or that men were the only ones providing for the children. That's why humans - before modern society - lived in large groups, so that everyone could contribute to raising, protecting and feeding children. I think you might be confusing "the evolution of monogamy in humans" with "monogamy is part of human evolution".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 12:00 PM
1

Monogamy is certainly the way things have been done (by some of us), and it lead to the way current western societies have formed, but there is literally nothing to say that people (or women specifically) have evolved to be monogamous or reject sex outside of a partnership.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 11:55 AM
3

I have, actually. And it was nothing like what you seem to think it was. I would encourage you to google: monogamy and evolution. Haha, literally the first link I found when I googled that: “The human mating system is extremely flexible,” Bernard Chapais of the University of Montreal wrote in a recent review in Evolutionary Anthropology. Only 17 percent of human cultures are strictly monogamous. The vast majority of human societies embrace a mix of marriage types, with some people practicing mon…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 11:31 AM
3

Feminism is not (and never has been) a sexual strategy, and you obviously get your information about feminists purely from the internet if you think most of them are "fat and/or unattractive". The offspring of women who had a large and supportive social/family group had the best chance of survival. Having the mother and father live together permanently and by themselves without other to assist with hunting/gathering/child rearing is a much newer concept than you seem to think
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 11:18 AM
8

Females have always had help providing for offspring - that's what societies are for. Raising children was very much a group effort, not one woman and one man fending for themselves. Even in animals that don't practice monogamy, they do help to protect and provide for offspring of the group. Even if we pretend that somehow women have "evolved" to dislike casual sex, that doesn't change the fact that it's popular, and has only gotten more popular as it's become more socially acceptable to engage …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 10:49 AM
4

Rather than jump to the conclusion that there's some secret reason that people have casual sex, thinking that they just like casual sex is most definitely the simplest explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 10:31 AM
2

The simplest explanation is almost always going to be correct. The human desire to fuck is strong, and sex feels fantastic (if done well, at least), therefore people do it. Some more often than others.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 10:21 AM
2

That may be true of promiscuous girls you know, but that's all. The vast majority of women who sleep around just like to fuck. It's that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 09:47 AM
22

How do promiscuous women live with themselves? With a big ol' smile on their satisfied faces.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 04:44 AM
1

But I must be, because I don't take him or the things he does for granted. I'm so pure and white, watch me flutter! It's okay, you're welcome to keep pretending you know how everyone in the world acts if it makes you more comfortable, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 04:51 PM
1

You said I likely take things he does for me for granted, then called me a snowflake when I said I didn't. What exactly do you expect me to take away from that, that I'm appreciative of what my partner does and do things for him, too?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 04:22 PM
1

That's okay, sweetcheeks, you just keep telling yourself that people that appreciate each other and treat each other well are snowflakes, and my "human meatsack" and I will just keep having a fulfilling relationship regardless of your ridiculous opinion. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 04:12 PM
1

What makes you think you've any kind of insight into a relationship you're not involved in and which is conducted by two people you don't know? I don't take him or his actions for granted. Do you think he takes things I do for him for granted as well, or do I just sit back and let things be done for me because vagina? Either way, thanks for your uninformed and incorrect assumption, it was super helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 03:47 PM
1

And what I'm pointing out is that because it's based on one study that wasn't peer-reviewed, didn't control for other variables and the way the data was analysed/reported is disputed, there may not even be as much of a correlation as people like to say there is. The "evidence" is patchy at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:56 PM
4

When your neck is wider than your head, you need to re-think your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:48 PM
5

There is an apparent connection between higher partner counts and lower levels of marriage satisfaction (based on a study that was "not reported by an academic journal nor was it peer-reviewed"), not that sex itself has anything to do with pair bonding. As written in your own link: Indeed, while the data presented in The Marriage Project's 418-person study is legitimate, experts say that the conclusions drawn from it -- especially those which cast judgement on one's sexual history and incite sen…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 01:42 PM
13

Men release oxytocin during orgasm, too. There is no credible evidence that having sex with multiple partners reduces the ability to pair bond in either gender. Oxytocin is also not magic - there's a lot more that goes into bonding with/loving someone than just hormones.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 12:45 PM
7

His body and his attitude are both foul. I feel so sorry for his wife, having to put up with his shit. Ugh.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 11:23 AM
1

It's because of the things he is, yes. And to an extent it's for the things he does (ie, the way he acts), but the distinction I'm making is he doesn't have to be doing things for me - he doesn't need to buy me things, do me favours, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 02:36 AM
2

You can't fool me. You're just a big ol' egalitarian softie. pinches your cheek
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 04:20 PM
2

ROFL. My wife is in medical, so she has a role in my zombie movie as well. See, I don't know that I have any zombie-relevant skills (I work in finance, ffs), but at least it will be an exciting movie... maybe I can knit them all some jumpers/beanies to help them feel love again, or something. Haha And ya know, now that I think on it, she may very well view our marriage as HER adventure, or maybe the way you view it as a co-star. I'm OK with that, as long as it jives with my view and we can work …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 03:52 PM
1

I think it's pretty natural to like our exes a whole lot more when we don't have to put up with their shit on a daily basis, haha. I've seen some egalitarian relationships, but I mean, you never really know what goes on behind closed doors. I know I'm in one right now, though, which is working splendidly for me. I'm not naturally dominant, but neither is he. I'm not naturally submissive, either, but again, neither is he. I'm older than him and out-earn him, but he's still got an equal say in eve…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 03:37 PM
1

My way or the highway at this point in my life. I can respect that, as I feel pretty much the same way. I'm not about to waste my time on people I'm incompatible with just for the sake of being with someone. I think the biggest difference between our views lies in what the "my way" entails. I'll do everything I can to make the journey beneficial for both of us, but this is my journey. She's welcome to tag along, or have her own adventure along side of mine, but if she's my wife, she has a suppor…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 03:23 PM
1

Beneath me is rather harsh. I don't mean to be harsh, but by definition if she's not your equal, you feel a sense of ownership, and you have the final say, that's just what it means to me. I don't mean you think she's beneath or lesser than you as a person, but that her role is. Does your employer think you are beneath him/her because they sign your paycheck? Well, frankly, yes. That's quite literally the point - I'm a smaller part of the equation, less important, with less authority. I can have…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 02:55 PM
2

I get it, man. If both of you are happy with the dynamic, there's no issue. I just know it wouldn't work for me - believe me, I've been with the "leader" type, and all they managed to do was piss me off. It's just not in my nature to be submissive in that way, and I wouldn't try and force it no matter what guy was offering to "lead" me. I certainly don't agree that "if I'm not leading, she is", as there is such a thing as equality. I don't expect any man to submit to my will any more than I'd su…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 02:48 PM
2

Yeah well, chalk it up to my spergeness, but when I got married the first time, and I said "for better or worse, in sickness and health" I pretty much took it at face value. So yeah, my "concept" of love within a marriage was sadly mistaken, since its obvious those words don't mean much to most people today. I don't think it's spergy to take people at their word, but marriage really does seem to mean close to fuck all to a lot of people. It's a shame, but I guess it doesn't really bother me as m…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 02:29 PM
1

Well, the "buddies" part comes first for me, there. You basically have to be someone I know, don't hate, and find myself physically attracted to, but don't want to have a relationship with for whatever reason. As long as that's in place, and they're into it, too, Bob's your uncle. There's me fucked. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 01:36 PM
3

It's not really that hard, honestly - treat me like a person you want to get to know, be someone I want to get to know (smart, interesting, kind, etc.), ask me out/accept a date if I ask you out, be funny (that one's super important), don't be a douche, and Bob's your uncle. There's me dated.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 01:21 PM
2

I don't accept (or expect) free shit from men, especially when I've only just met them. The only way that works is if they insist, and then I insist that I pay the next time. Valentine's Day and flowers are not my thing at all. I buy my own jewellery if and when I want it, but if there's an exchange of gifts like Christmas or birthdays, I'm quite generous myself (video games, DVDs, clothes, collector's shit, depends what he's into). Chocolate I can get down with as a surprise gift, but I'll shar…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 01:09 PM
7

Would you still be with him as a person if he was unemployed? For 5 years? And then gambled away your rent money? He'd still be the same person, right? I get what you're saying, but I'm not trying to imply that loving someone gets them a free pass on being lazy or acting like a dick. Yes, I would be with a man who was unemployed - for 5 years even, if it was out of his control and he was actively seeking to work. Gambled away money we need for other things? No, that's a shitty thing to do, and w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 07:52 AM
3

But you can see how implying I underestimate her seemed to be a judgment? I didn't mean to imply that, I meant to imply that someone trying to treat me like their "first mate" would be underestimating me. I feel that I'm worth more than being the backup to someone else's life - that's not to say that nobody else would be comfortable or happy with that arrangement. And yeah, the fundamental issue is: Submission. I expect my wife to be able to be an adult, but submit to my lead. I hope she chose t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 07:22 AM
2

For your edit: No matter what else you say about your wife (which is all well and good), you think her place is beneath you/lesser than yours. You literally said you don't want her to be your equal, and that you feel ownership over her. I don't particularly care what you and your wife do, I was just responding to what you said from my own point of view. Notice how I didn't disparage her or say she shouldn't be with you, just that I would never be in that kind of relationship. If you want to lead…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 06:30 AM
5

Exactly. I don't understand the transactional way some people (including RPers) seem to view relationships - you don't exchange money/security for love/sex, that's such a sad way to live. I'd never let the guy I'm with think that he needs to do things or give me things for me to keep him around... he's around because I want him there, as a person.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 05:50 AM
3

I am a prize, thanks! But don't worry too much, we wouldn't be walking together in a crowd in the first place. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 05:34 AM
7

However, if you aren't going where I'm going, what is the point in being together? If you don't want my guardianship, why would I give you my commitment? I agree that people who don't want the same things aren't suited, which is why I would never date a RPer. I don't need a guardian, a keeper, a minder, a "captain" or any other such nonsense. I want to be with someone who treats me like I treat them and doesn't underestimate me. I am not looking to be my wife's equal, I'm looking to be her husba…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 04:44 AM
3

Guiding my wife through a crowd doesn't make me "feel like a man", its what I do for my wife. And like I said, good for you and her. I don't give a shit what you do and what she likes, as it has no bearing on me. Guide her all you like. I simply stated that making a big deal about a guy "guiding" you across the street seems awfully defensive. I didn't make a big deal about it, I made it clear it was neither necessary or appreciated with a flippant comment and a laugh. I didn't pout and scream li…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 03:08 AM
3

Jeez some of you are uptight about your independence. Yes, it was so uptight of me to make a comment about something I don't like... but not uptight of him to start yelling like a 3 year old when I did! He was a perfect gentleman for thinking hand holding wasn't enough to get me across a big bad road, and trying to scream submissiveness into me when it didn't work the way he wanted. Ugh, I'm such a bitch sometimes. I "guide" my wife like this all the time. Good for you and her. I'm not your wife…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 02:36 AM
13

I was walking with a dude I was seeing once, and we were holding hands. As we went to cross the road he let go of my hand and started guiding me with his hand on the small of my back... I made a flippant comment about how I didn't need to be herded like cattle and he lost his shit. Apparently it was very important to him that he be able to "help" me cross the fucking road, like I'd no chance without a man there to show me how it all works.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 06:23 PM
1

or maybe it's just that they are men and what they hear has little impact when they have so much testosterone. Testosterone doesn't outweigh social conditioning. In the same way that someone brought up being abused will be affected by that, what you're told, what you witness and how you're treated for your decisions impacts who you are. Men are not exempt from that in any way, they just don't get the same negative messages about their sexuality. but then again your objection doesn't cover the fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 11:08 AM
1

Gay men still grow up hearing the same shit about female/male sexuality (ie, men want it more/more often, it's wrong for women to place value on sex, etc.)... just because people don't approve of who they want to have sex with doesn't mean they're taught completely different things about what having sexuality means as a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 02:46 AM
5

All papers should be taken with a grain of salt, not read as gospel (especially when it comes to self-reported data). Yet the fact that the data is changing with time - and that many of the differences are severely reduced/disappear entirely when people think they're attached to a lie detector - suggests that culture at the very least plays an important role. That's not to say that biology doesn't, also... there is clearly a difference between the genders, but I sincerely doubt it's as big as pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 03:18 PM
2

This paper does a good job of exploring myths about differences in sexuality between men and women based on numerous studies. Whereas past research has indicated that males initiated sexual activity at younger ages and engaged in sexual behavior more frequently, recent research suggests that these differences are changing (or were perhaps just differences in reporting). Regardless of their origins, gender differences in sexual behavior seem to be at least in part a function of culture and histor…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 02:31 PM
1

Eh, it just struck me as a funny statement, that at least seemed like stereotyped perception. I guess I could've worded it better, but essentially they're just not physically attractive to me. As I said to BiggerD when he "Well, I obviously don't like the roided-out look, either, but I also just don't like particularly muscular guys in general. I like skinny dudes, I like average dudes, and I like dudes with maybe a little pudge. But with muscles, anything other than slight definition just doesn…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 02:16 AM
1

Most likely she's talking about steroid induced big muscles which aren't healthy anymore. Well, I obviously don't like the roided-out look, either, but I also just don't like particularly muscular guys in general. I like skinny dudes, I like average dudes, and I like dudes with maybe a little pudge. But with muscles, anything other than slight definition just doesn't do it for me. So, for example, in this pic, skinny and ottermode are really the only bodies I'd be down with. It's really nothing …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 06:42 PM
3

Whoa, you're reading a bit much into what I wrote, me thinks. The reason there's two paragraphs is because I was talking about my dislike of jerks, then separately mentioning my dislike of big muscles, not health or fitness. I just really don't like the way they look - my preference is skinny to average. That's all it is. Just because I find them unattractive doesn't mean I go around muscle shaming them or anything, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 12:21 PM
4

I naturally select not to have anything to do with RPers/people with superiority complexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 10:04 AM
3

I honestly don't think I've ever met a RPer (as in, someone who knows about it and actively tries to use it), because there's really not that many of them. But there have been guys using shitty PUA techniques or with that kind of superior attitude they display, and I tend to just ignore them. Giving them any kind of attention or reaction when they're trying it on seems to give them hope that they're in with a shot. I also avoid big muscles like the plague, so I guess that helps, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 05:07 AM
7

They tend not to like mouthy women who won't defer to them or play their stupid games, so I just get to be myself. It works wonders... douche free since 2003!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/16 04:57 AM
1

would it make sense to replace all bad influences with good influences if you had the power to do so without changing anyone? Its hard for us to always act positive because we too are the product of some negativity, but would anything be harmed at all if each negative influence was replaced with positive influences except maybe the desire to cringe onto identity? Well, that's basically impossible to answer because negative influences can bring about positive results/change in people. Does a posi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 10:14 AM
2

Okay then can we also agree that while we cannot judge people in general, we cannot say one person is better than another because each person is the outcome of influences which the person had no decision in partaking, we can clearly say that there are such things as good influences and bad influences which no human being can really be held responsible for Agreed. For example me talking to you in a condescending tone, that was clearly a negative influence. Agreed? On the conversation, sure... not…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 08:34 AM
2

Can we agree that we cannot change the nature of humanity nor genetics, but only that which has influence over us? I agree with that, too. I don't take issue with the idea of changing things in general, just with the changes you've suggested.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 07:27 AM
2

Our society thinks we are so "above" history and that we are all free thinkers just because women can dress in jeans. Is your response really a result of free thinking or is it a response based on modern tradition that is disguised as free thinking. I'm really not trying to be condescending here, but I really can't put up with this bias. My entire response is based on my own thoughts and opinions, that result from (among other things) current schooling techniques - just like your post is based o…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 07:26 AM
3

Okay lets start over. I'm happy to speak to anyone who's civil to me, so sure, let's do it. Can we agree that we are largely influenced by our surroundings? Yes, I agree with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:59 AM
2

One more thing, its your lack of thorough response which I felt deserved such a reply. So my reply was less thorough than the others in this thread - the one/two line responses you've received? I sincerely doubt that was your reasoning for responding to me the way you did, for some strange reason. And that is unfortunately your type of responses which does create class differences, and it is the people who then create such responses who are the ones who get angry that there is such a class diffe…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:56 AM
3

Yes because you yourself are a product of mediocre nonsense that you have a hard time grasping the concept No you're right "Miss Chooser of your own fate", you've picked out quite a nice fate havn't you. It's not "oversmart" to be condescending and rude about people who don't like your theories, it's just hostile and annoying. I can understand that you maybe didn't mean to come across that way, though. Regarding the rest of your response, I honestly think the whole scenario is flawed. I don't fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:46 AM
5

You are being hostile as fuck for no reason, dude. If you don't want people to tell you why your idea is ridiculous, maybe consider not posting it in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 06:27 AM
5

I'm neither BP nor RP. Stage 1: At elementary school itself, 75% of the literature you read are based off of love stories, no bullshit. Really? How fucking boring. All this will accomplish is turning a shitload of kids off reading, because they've no interest in sentimental drivel. I know it would've done for me, and that would be a shame, because I looooove reading (more than dudes, even). Stage 2: Around late elementary school/early middle school you are taught the concept love, something whic…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/16 05:49 AM
3

MFW I debate do battle with RPers.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 07:01 PM
3

Very true. This place is a fun distraction, not a battlefield. I think a lot of us could do with taking this shit less seriously over the next year. Feliz Año Nuevo my dude Same to you and your little bro! :)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 05:22 AM
4

Happy stuff and things, guys! Keep it foolish.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 05:14 AM
2

I stayed home by myself last night (in Australia, so we're well ahead of you lot), and I watched two movies that sucked. I wish I'd gone to the Island of Naboombu instead! :)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 02:34 AM
1

Bedknobs and Broomsticks all the way (unless you're at the age of not believing). Never before or since have I heard the name Eglantine, which is a damned shame, and the eldest kid is the most amazing cockney. Also, Angela Lansbury.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/16 02:26 AM
1

Her body is insane, even for someone 30 years younger than her. There's gotta be some kind of voodoo involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/15 04:09 AM
2

Damn, I forgot to put Mads in my list! Yeah, he's lovely.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 08:44 AM
6

So what? Dude is hot regardless.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 06:17 AM
2

His smile is what really gets me, but he's just all-around stunning, really.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 06:13 AM
7

Dudes over 40 I wanna bang include Christoph Waltz (59yrs), Alan Rickman (69yrs) , and Bryan Cranston (59yrs). Don't really pay that much attention to which chicks are hot, but Helen Mirren (70yrs) and Jessica Lange (66yrs) are both still amazing looking.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 06:09 AM
1

Christoph Oh, fuck yeah. That dude is ridiculously, painfully attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/15 05:43 AM
3

That's how you read those responses? Christ, that explains a lot. It's some guys (and by "some", I mean about 10, not the entire sub) commiserating with the kid and a few telling him they used to be in the same boat - not that they are totes suicidal virgins right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 02:15 AM
3

Two posts is evidence that SRSmen is full of posts by 40+ year old virgins who are suicidal. is it? That's a low fucking threshold, right there.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 01:48 AM
3

Evolution has proof. You have assumptions and nothing else. You're closer to the creationists in that little analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 01:35 AM
3

It's literally full of depressed virgins. I don't believe you. Perhaps for you sex isn't important. But for others it is. You're trying to make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not. I've been very clear on what I mean, so if you're not going to answer what I'm actually saying, I've no need to keep talking to you. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/15 01:06 AM
3

So that's your argument now? I'm just pointing out that your claim about the sub appears to have changed when you were asked to back it up. Funny, that. You made the claim that one was important and the other isn't. Can you show me where I said sexual contact wasn't important? Because I've said it's not a need, and that social contact is more important, but I never said anything like what you're saying I did.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 04:26 PM
3

Really? I thought it was full of 40 year old virgins, not 19 year old ones. You seem to be reaching, here. Regardless, can you show me any studies that prove lack of sexual contact is worse than, or even the same as/similar to social isolation? Because that's what we were discussing before you decided to bag out SRSmen for no apparent reason apart from that you disagree with them, or think they're silly, or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 04:12 PM
2

oh, man, but you are talking about guys who are married to landwhales. Since when? Where are you getting that information from, or are you just assuming? The male sex drive is so powerful, man. And the female sex drive is too, man. That's why they fuck men, man. Women do not suffer from sexual frustration. At all. That's absolutely ridiculous. There's nothing else to be said if you actually think this is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 04:08 PM
3

That's a whole one guy out of almost 3000 people subbed there, so it must be an accurate representation of the entire userbase.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 04:01 PM
2

It's full of posts by 40+ year old virgins who are suicidal. Really, where does it say that?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:52 PM
5

Because social isolation has been shown to cause severe psychological damage to people - even causing health issues (on par with smoking and obesity) - whereas having sex is good for your health, but not necessarily as damaging if access is limited/non-existent. Or at least not any studies I've seen have shown it to be, but I'm open to being proven wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:40 PM
4

There's a big difference between not getting sex and not getting any social contact whatsoever. I'd say personal connection/socialisation is still not a need, but closer to it than fucking.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 03:29 PM
-1

testosterone plays an IMPORTANT role even though is not the only factor. Not nearly as important as people in this thread are making it out to be. And it's certainly not THE most important factor, which is what some people here seem to be arguing. women with the same sex drive as men are a rarity Not when you take into account the variance of male and female sex drives, they're not. unless of course you have a different definition for sex drive/libido: my definition is how easily someone is resp…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 02:47 PM
5

I still stand by sex not being a need - and by that I mean it is not required for survival. Can it be an extremely desperate want, and is it instinctual to seek and crave it? Sure. But you will not die from lack of sex, as any long term or lifelong virgins can attest to.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 02:26 PM
1

Even men with low sex drives have superior sex drivers over that of a woman with high sex drive Absolute crap. Have you ever visited /r/deadbedrooms? There's plenty of women there who disprove that theory. Their husbands/SOs aren't giving them any sex, or enough sex to satisfy them. and women can always get laid whenever they want - unless they are heavier than the titanic Even they can get laid, but that's not the point. I never said women have trouble getting sex if that's all they're looking …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 02:21 PM
1

Literally none of those links state that testosterone level is the main determinant in high/low libido. The first link says (emphasis mine): "T supplementation has been associated with increases in sexual functioning, mood, and strength (3, 4, 5), but there is yet no consensus regarding its long-term safety and efficacy (6). Nor is the association between naturally occurring T levels and libido completely understood. Although decreased libido is a concern often expressed by aging patients (7), i…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 12:22 PM
-1

But the main determinant is test levels. Where has this been proven? I'm genuinely asking, because that doesn't seem to be included in anything I've read - I know it can have and often does have an effect on libido, but that's entirely different from what you're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 11:38 AM
2

I didn't say testosterone has no effect, I said Testosterone is not the be all and end all of determining sex drive which is true. There's lots of other factors that contribute to sex drive or lack thereof.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 11:25 AM
-1

Where are you getting the information that it's linked to libido in the majority of cases? Because pretty much anything I've read has stated that testosterone plays a role in the male/female sex drive as opposed to being outright responsible for it, low levels may cause low libido rather than will cause it, and that countless other hormones/health factors/lifestyle choices/personalities also have an effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 11:07 AM
2

Testosterone is not the be all and end all of determining sex drive, otherwise a shitload of women would barely have one at all (which is nonsense - there'd be a lot fewer people on the planet, for starters). Men with low levels of testosterone can still have high sex drives, and men with high levels can have low libidos. It's not a magic horny drug, it's just one hormone among many that can have an effect on people.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 08:56 AM
7

Sex isn't a need, and neither is drinking/drug use.The fact is that most teenagers are going to try some or all of these things at some point, because they want to have those experiences and they're fairly impulsive. Abstinence only education doesn't make people abstinent, it just causes them to not have enough information to protect themselves. Prostitution is legal where I'm from - I live about a 10 minute drive from a brothel. It's absolutely a good idea for it to be legal everywhere in my op…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 08:43 AM
4

I didn't say that women are as horny as men in general, I said there are plenty of women who have a higher sex drive than you. And plenty of men who have a lower one. And plenty of people who have exactly the same sex drive. Women who have any kind of sex drive understand what it's like to be horny and frustrated, to get turned on by nothing/the slightest thing at any given point, to want to fuck right then even if they're not able to. I don't think women necessarily place the same importance on…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 08:24 AM
4

The male sex drive is not the same for all men, any more than the female sex drive is the same for all women. There's plenty of women who are hornier than you, and plenty of men who are low libido almost to the point of asexuality. So, I understand that there is no "male" sex drive where the description fits all men, and they all think/feel the exact same way about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/15 08:06 AM
3

I've got an older sister and an older brother. No pills.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/15 04:08 AM
1

People on the Internet say that nudity is natural, non-sexual, and basically harmless. I'm pretty sure not all of them do. But where I live (East Coast of the United States), it's illegal to be nude in public, which suggests there is something wrong with it. It suggests the people who made the laws (many years ago, in most cases) thought there was something wrong with it, not that there is something wrong with it. Is nudity right or wrong? It depends who you ask. Religious folk, prudes, people w…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 11:35 AM
0

I'm cool if I end up single. It's better than ending up with a saggy old dude for his money, or just for the sake of having someone there.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:57 AM
4

Oh, no! Imagine not being saddled with a significantly older man for life?! The terror is real.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/15 01:41 AM
6

My parents have a weird but great relationship. They love each other, have a good sex life (from what I'm told, and I really don't encourage those conversations), playfully tease/make fun of each other, etc., yet they also snipe at each other and have fights (moderate/serious) quite often, and have different values/views/opinions on a lot of things. There's no real traditional gender roles in play. My mum is more dominant/social/independent, loves football and drinking, and my dad tends to be mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 04:12 PM
1

Does this woman's article finally reconcile the debate? Sweet baby jesus, no, it does not. Just because one woman says something you agree with about how she personally feels, doesn't make it some universal truth about all women. She doesn't even claim to be speaking on behalf of anyone but herself, so I don't quite know why you assume she's some kind of spokesperson for all women in existence. Honestly, I'd break up with a guy who did even half of what she says she wants a guy to do... some of …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 12:53 PM
2

In fact I agree 100% with /u/ianturpiesmoustache[1] that the human race dying out wouldn't be a bad thing anyway. Yeah, we really not so hot, when you think about it - even when we know we're damaging or outright killing ourselves/other animals/the planet, we just keep going.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 10:54 AM
8

The human race no longer existing hurts literally nobody. We're all dead, so it matters not a jot - in fact, it improves quality of life for millions of other species and helps the environment. The human race surviving at the expense of half the human race's right to bodily autonomy (in relation to rape and being forced into becoming baby factories) hurts at least half the human race, if not more. So, yeah, in your hypothetical I'd vote for extinction, no doubt.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/15 07:36 AM
7

I believe this is the origin of the feminist argument against slut shaming. It's not that girls want to be promiscuous. It's that they end up in a lot of bad situations, and they're sick of being blamed for the mistakes of unruly men. Nah, there are just some women who want to fuck dudes without being judged. That's enough of a reason, it doesn't need to be explained further. If women have sex (unless force was involved) it wasn't "men's mistakes", no matter how unruly said men are. And it wasn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/15 11:46 AM
2

Me, too. I love The Strokes, and he's a hottie, so I was very happy with that comparison, just quietly. so how you doin? ;) I'm doin' good, baby, how you doin?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 05:48 PM
6

If dude-me's life/personality was equivalent to mine, he'd be financially successful (earning decent money and a home owner), not give a shit about social status, not overly fussed about relationships unless someone awesome pops up, and ambivalent about getting married/having kids. He'd be into video games, comedy shows and friends over clubbing/partying or large groups... I have to wonder if he'd knit quite as much as I do, though. I've been told before that I look like a female Julian Casablan…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/15 01:49 PM
10

Whoever they bloody well want (as long as the other people involved are amenable to such things, of course).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/15 06:13 PM
3

None of that is necessary if you recognise that it's all just as likely to come from men as from women, and pretty much straight bullshit in regards to the majority of the population. I guess there's some kind of comfort in assuming you know what 'x people' are really like, are able to see through their act, can protect yourself from their evil nature, etc, but it's just not reality. It's damaging to any relationships you may want to have in the future.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 02:56 PM
3

Women don't need "game" to have sex, so there's no point to having a TRP equivalent for women. That's not the aspect of TRP I was talking about at all. I'm specifically talking about the part where they talk non-stop about how shitty all women are, and ascribe every known piece of horrible behaviour to women alone. That's nothing to do with sexual strategy, and it is in fact the opposite of what TRP purports to advocate - taking responsibility. Sure there is a lot of shit that comes with TRP. Me…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 12:11 PM
2

Okay, fair enough. Well, for the record, I don't think Chris Pratt is hot anyway, and I'm not a fan of objectification in general. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 12:07 PM
2

Did you mean that reply for me, or someone else? What does Chris Pratt have to do with anything, and when did I suggest that men should be more objectified?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 11:29 AM
2

If you are not denying that this happens, then it's good enough for me. Of course lying to the police is illegal. My point is that even if it is illegal there weren't any consequences for the lying. I'm glad you've stopped trying to imagine what I believe rather than reading what I've written. That's about all I ask for. :) Another point I would argue, is that judging is not bad and that being seen bad is an invention to control people in a way too PC community. Everybody judges everybody. It's …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 11:27 AM
2

You basically said to every single point "no u". Debating someone who is irrationally rejecting any opposing views is, by definition irrational. Where did I say that, or anything remotely similar? And what is irrational about having an opinion different to that of the person you're meant to be debating with, for fuck's sake? Here is something that happens in the western world. Facts can't be debated. Some women lie that a man raped them, in order to get revenge. This happens quite often. And I d…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 10:49 AM
3

You don't know me, but thanks for being all judgey and not debating in any way. That's exactly what we need on this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 10:14 AM
1

I never said anything of the sort, actually. I swear, you guys just hear whatever backs up your views, regardless of what's actually written.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 10:13 AM
2

Bottom line- Men have a higher standard for a relationship, women have it for casual sex. I don't really think so, I'd say looks are the most important thing to just about anyone involved in a ONS. Men may have to compromise more, but that's due to a number of factors, not least of which is the fact that there are less women looking for hook ups in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 07:09 AM
1

Nah, dude, I'm not biting. I've got no patience for the "this is what you said! these are your views!" game when that's not what I said and those aren't my views. Have fun.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 06:43 AM
1

No, dude, it's not really at all. They'll fuck anyone who isn't ugly, sure, but they place far more importance on physical attractiveness in general than women do. Women having standards, or some women focusing more on looks doesn't negate that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 06:41 AM
5

Yes, that's what I said. They are outraged that men who exist who believe they aren't just conduits for the needs/wants of women. Period, that's all there is to it. That may be what you said, but it's not even close to what I said. If you're not even going to respond to me, and you're going to go out of your way to misinterpret what I've said, there's little point continuing this. Yes, how childish for men to not want to get cheated on. That's literally nothing to do with slut shaming. A "slut" …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 06:29 AM
2

I know, and none of that changes or challenges what I've said. Women like attractive people, I'm not denying that. I'm just pointing out that it appears that men place a buttload more importance on looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 06:22 AM
3

They are outraged men don't take what women do to them with a smile on their face. They can't comprehend men who don't want to be totally useful to women with nothing in return. That's not what they dislike and disagree with TRP about. They take issue with the way RP men are encouraged to treat women, they don't go out of their way to encourage women to treat men badly. Do you have anything that shows them outright denying that women can be terrible people, or excusing shitty behaviour in them? …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 05:54 AM
1

What makes me an arsehole, just not agreeing with TRP? And what "excusing or defending" do I or society do on behalf of women, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 05:33 AM
3

That's about right, yeah. "Female and not fat" seems to be the baseline for attraction for a lot of men, whereas women (in my experience) tend to be more specific with their likes and dislikes. I also think that men are compelled to compromise on looks based on their desire for sex. If you hold out for your absolute physical ideal (as opposed to someone you're vaguely attracted to/not totally turned off by), you're likely to not get laid for a really, really long time.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 05:08 AM
4

There are plenty of studies and surveys that back it up, as well as it just being something I've noticed. I'm not suggesting women don't care about looks, or that some women don't focus mainly on looks, just that it tends to be men that place more emphasis on that. I've met plenty of guys who I didn't find immediately attractive/found physically unattractive, yet their personalities have changed that over time. When discussing that on here, or elsewhere online/irl, men tend to say that it doesn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 03:56 AM
3

You seem to be confused about what "as much" means. Yes, women are people and like attractive people, but it's not to the same level as men (in most cases).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 03:10 AM
10

The anger you see on there comes from anger phasers and guys who have been behavior like classic nice guys. Hearing the phrase "Women aren't machines you put niceness coins into until sex comes out" gets old real fast. I'd be a little angry at that too. TRP encourages and excuses ridiculous levels of anger, and not just at the start. I've seen some epic tantrums from RPers who have been there a long time - ECs and mods included. The reason TRP gets so much hate from you guys and other detractors…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 02:56 AM
3

Women don't place as much emphasis on the physical, but it doesn't mean they have no physical standards. There's a difference between pointing out that men are more into physicality, and outright denying that women care about looks at all. People like attractive people, and want to fuck them more than unattractive people. This is not news.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/15 02:55 AM
2

You literally don't even know what you're arguing any longer. You have a good one, I'm done.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 10:56 AM
2

HOLY CRAP! Because SHE'S THE ONE DOING THE ACCUSING AND JAMES DEEN IS THE DEFENDANT. You see why that changes things, or no? SHE'S ALSO BEING ACCUSED. YOU'RE THE ONE ARGUING THAT THE ACCUSED MUST ALWAYS BE PRESUMED INNOCENT. Jesus fucking christ. Do you understand what a metaphor is? Simply replace jury with bystanders, or fucking policemen, it doesn't matter it is the same concept. Yes, but they don't work in this circumstance. If you're unable to use real life examples to back up your claim th…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 10:40 AM
1

The first step was the accusation of James Deen, all us others didn't start accusing her! This isn't about who started it, we're not 10 years old. He's been accused, you presume he's innocent and bang on about how necessary and morally just it is. She's been accused, you use the most roundabout arguments to justify not giving her the same courtesy. It's nonsense. Your view would destroy the concept of a jury because then the prosecution would just say "See! You have to find in favor of my client…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 10:25 AM
1

So if I presume Stoya is presumed innocent and that she really was raped, how does that narrative coexist in a world where Deen is also presumed innocent and didn't rape her? It doesn't, those two things are mutually exclusive. My point exactly. Your point has never been "we have to assume the accused is innocent!", because you're not willing to apply it to all accusations. The legal system has to presume innocence because to do otherwise would negate the point of having a legal system in the fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 09:54 AM
1

She has not been "accused" of anything. No, you're not paying attention to what I've said. She has been accused of lying, by multiple sources. I'm not talking about Deen defending himself, I'm talking about outside, unrelated parties saying she's a liar. So, do you presume that she's innocent or not? If not, why aren't you living up to your own moral expectations?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 09:36 AM
2

Okay, let me put it this way... she has been accused of lying about being raped. Do we now need to believe that's she's innocent of that claim? Because by your logic - that presumption of innocence extends outside of court and should be applied by all people and to all people, we should. My stance is not to oppose the legal concept, it's to not take one side or the other outside of a legal setting. I'm not going to pretend I think she's full of shit to appease anyone's individual sense of "moral…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 09:14 AM
2

I don't have to answer the same question I've answered 17 times already. I am not required to believe someone is lying when they say they've been raped, any more than I'm required to believe someone is a rapist if they've been accused. I'm not a court of law. I don't know how many times I have to repeat it, it is a legal concept precisely because it is morally just. Laws are not based on morals. Whose morals would they even be based on? It is a legal concept because people have the right to trai…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 08:40 AM
1

And like I said, I don't agree with the shit written on twitter.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 08:34 AM
2

That is just a nonsensical view. Since when has something being nonsensical stopped it from happening? This the philosophical background behind the legal concept. It isn't arbitrary. And it's only a legal concept, not a requirement in daily life.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 08:04 AM
1

I don't agree with the sentiment that women can't be lying, or that nobody should ever say they might be - that's just stupid. However, women are innocent until proven guilty, too, so to assume they're lying when you've got no proof either way is just as stupid. Here's what I said in my first message. This is where I stand.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:59 AM
1

If you don't presume he is innocent until he is guilty, then that is just as wrong as allowing someone to have free speech but condemning it. Neither are wrong. I don't presume to know whether he's innocent or guilty, and I think people should be allowed to say what they want but also have to wear the consequences of their speech. If I was a judge or even a jury member, I'd have to put my opinions aside and assume he was innocent until proven guilty, but I'm not. I don't have to think he's innoc…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:45 AM
2

The presumption that both are correct is silly, especially when the possibility of his guilt is so damning. That is why the entire CONCEPT of innocent until proven guilty exists. I'm not presuming they're both correct, I'm just not presuming either of them is wrong. I don't have enough information to judge, and neither does anyone else at this point except for the people directly involved. To lend credence to groundless accusations, rumors, and gossip is ridiculous in any sphere of critical thou…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:31 AM
-1

should someone be allowed to say things you object to? Yes, but they shouldn't be free from the consequences of that speech, except for where the government is concerned. You not thinking he has a right to his speech places you in the wrong, you presuming he isn't innocent places you in the wrong. Who said anything like this? People can say what they like, including the woman accusing Deen of rape, and Deen himself. I'm not presuming he isn't innocent, I'm just not going out of my way to presume…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:16 AM
1

But anti-Deen people have to understand this, too. Rape cases like this are hard to prove and it's not because of patriarchy (which is an example mentioned in OP). It's a problem that is inherent in rape cases. Absolutely, rape cases suck no matter which side you're on.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:11 AM
0

Yes you are right. But that's the dangerous thing. It doesn't proof anything (like you said) but it makes him look even more guilty. And something can make you look guilty without that being the case, for sure. It's a fucked up situation for both of them to be in, really. Funny thing is, I wouldn't put is past the guy. If I had to guess or bet money, I'd say he is guilty. Doesn't change anything what I think about him, so I don't need to be careful. I honestly have no idea whether he's guilty or…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 07:08 AM
4

So him suing her for slander is viable, and would make it a legal case. Right, that's what I said. He can take it to court if he wants. Where would you stand in that instance, regarding stoya's innocence/guilt in what she is saying? The same place I stand now - I don't know enough to make a judgement unless there's proof offered. I'm not assuming he's guilty, I'm just also not assuming she's lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 06:56 AM
7

The point is, it's not a legal case unless someone takes it to court. I don't believe her just because she said it happened, but I also don't believe she's lying just because someone else said she is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 06:07 AM
3

Just because it isn't a legal case doesn't mean the principles don't hold. Yeah, that's exactly what it means. Same as "free speech" is just protection from government action against speech, not protection from non-legal consequences (like being fired or people hating you). If everybody applied things as rigorously as the courts, nobody would believe anything anybody said unless legally proven - including things like "my wife divorce raped me!" and "she's a slut". This is hardly "talking shit" -…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:58 AM
1

This shouldn't change anything. Last false abuse accusation I know from my reallife, she convinced her friend to say that he abused her, too. Good for him, because said friend couldn't uphold her lies in court. It's not proof by any means, but it's certainly something to take into consideration, especially when these women are unrelated (as far as I know), and it's not just three of her friends who have reason to want to be "on her side" or feel the need to defend her. Your real life example is …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:45 AM
4

Nope, because one is doing the accusing and the other is doing the denying. She's not legally accusing him of anything, she's speaking out about something that (allegedly) happened to her and that could affect hundreds of other women who are put in vulnerable situations with him for work. If she was suing him or charging him, of course she'd need to provide some kind of proof. One side is the prosecution and the other side is the defense. The burden of proof is always on the prosecution. If they…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:33 AM
0

It isn't like the initial accusation was that Stoya made a false rape claim and then Stoya claimed that she was raped. One came before the other. It doesn't matter about the order. Without proof either backing her up/disputing her claims, there's as much reason to believe her as there is to believe Deen is innocent.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:18 AM
7

Always believe women. I don't agree with the sentiment that women can't be lying, or that nobody should ever say they might be - that's just stupid. However, women are innocent until proven guilty, too, so to assume they're lying when you've got no proof either way is just as stupid. Yeah, like all the female pornstars won't refuse to work with him over an allegation. It's not an allegation, more women have come forward with similar stories. As someone being a rapist would be extremely relevant …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/15 05:06 AM
1

Coon isn't a racial slur where I'm from, it's a cheese... we've got our own charming slurs for black people.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/15 03:05 AM
6

If they're not using "the N word" or displaying any racist behaviour any more, then of course it doesn't matter. Lots of people grow out of immature bullshit over time. She shouldn't have been fired just for having been stupid in the past, but that's not why she was fired. It was because of public outcry, and loss of revenue for the company she worked for.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/15 04:57 PM
2

Oh, stop!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 07:08 AM
3

No pills
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/15 06:31 AM
6

And no offence to you, either, but your opinion doesn't mean shit when it comes to whether/how I choose to label myself.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 07:23 PM
2

Because I don't read/participate in TBP sub, and I'm not here to make fun of RPers/their beliefs, just debate and stuff. Also, labels suck. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 06:37 PM
2

I didn't say its true I didn't say you think it's true, I just said I that don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 06:27 PM
1

No pills, female, INFP.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 06:13 PM
3

I feel like It would be hard for anyone to stick with me for my entire life unless i'm a rock, independent, successful, handsome, masculine etc. I think it would be much harder for the average male to maintain a LTR till death if he refused to conform to the masculine beliefs our society puts on men. If I acted in a feminine, timid, complacent or unambitious way I don't imagine my relationships having as much potential, which forces me the other way I don't think that's true at all, just based o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 05:48 PM
2

They looked exactly like you'd think they'd look like, minus the fedora and 80 kg's. So... just normal, then?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 03:50 PM
1

There's multiple reasons for people to be in an open relationship, and yeah, security is probably very important in that kind of relationship. That doesn't in any way mean that to be totally secure you need to have an open relationship, or that it's the only way to show you are, or be, totally secure. I think RPers are probably, in general, about as insecure as everyone else. When it comes to sexuality/masculinity, probably more insecure than average, considering the amount of focus they place o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 03:15 PM
2

So, have you seen anyone here arguing that to be totally secure you have to be in an open relationship? Because a lot of BPers here seem to value monogamy just as much as RPers. Being secure enough to not worry about who your partner has previously fucked does not have anything to do with letting your partner fuck other people while in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 03:01 PM
1

I wouldn't be scared to meet a RPer or purposely avoid a function I wanted to attend because I knew one would turn up, but I doubt we'd be particularly chummy.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 02:55 PM
5

If it was motivated by insecurity would it really matter or change anything? Why does it have to change anything? It's an observation, not an attempt to "fix" RPers. TRP likes to believe they see things the way they really are, and maybe TBP does, too. " become less insecure and you will be ok with any sexual history, become totally secure and you become ok with cuckolding" I haven't seen anyone here arguing that to be totally secure you have to put up with cheating. Have you?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 02:52 PM
6

If insecurity really is the reason, why don't they care about her dickcount for one-night-stands, heck that would surely be the most scary, she might have been fucked by guys with amazing bodies who were really good at it. Because they don't have to see the chick again - they get to have sex (whether she thinks it's good or bad) and then not deal with the fallout, or the implication that they're not as good/big as they think they are. Secondly, all this shaming does slightly imply you're unhappy…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/15 02:32 PM
9

I just can't believe anyone's actually denying or disagreeing with such a well known fact... it's absurd.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 05:23 PM
18

I know, that's why I brought it up. It's a physical reaction which has fuck all to do with whether you're enjoying yourself, is what I was basically trying to get across.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 05:16 PM
22

If you're scared you won't get an erection, trust me. I don't trust you at all, actually. What you're saying is an insult to men who have actually been raped, and completely ignores reflex erections, which can happen while asleep, or when you experience any strong emotion, like anger, stress, or fear.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 05:14 PM
31

If men are threatened or scared (because a woman is trying to rape them LOL) they won't get an erection. Problem solved! So the male body has ways to shut that whole thing down? I feel like you just went full Akin... that's not how shit works. Rape is rape, whether a woman gets physically aroused/orgasms, and whether a male gets an erection/orgasms.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 04:57 PM
2

I don't think it's shameful at all, but society seems to. It can be damaging to careers, friendships, relationships with family/men, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 03:37 PM
1

I don't have the stats but I'd be willing to bet the majority... Regret most of their hook ups/ONS. Were drunk at the time. Lie about their partner count/feel shame. Have low self-esteem/need validation Are hurting due to fathers being absent/going through a break-up. I'd be willing to bet that's entirely wrong for most women. I love sex, I enjoy sleeping with people I like and find attractive (whether in a relationship or not). The only hook ups I regret are the ones that weren't worth it... th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 03:25 PM
5

Are you kidding? Fencing, fighting, torture, revenge, giants, monsters, chases, escapes, true love, miracles...
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/15 02:01 PM
4

You're welcome to not use the word patriarchy if you like, nobody's going to force you to. But the word itself is not accusatory or incorrect in any way, and people who use it in the descriptive sense shouldn't be demonised just because other people don't like it or find it offensive. It's like if someone asked you not to use the word 'slavery' because they think it's blaming white people - that's not what the word means, and you'd be well within your rights to tell them they're wrong and that i…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/15 04:04 PM
5

I'm just talking about the definition. It can suck to be a woman living in a society where there's a significant power imbalance, and it's fair enough to discuss it and try to rectify it. Some dickheads take it too far and try to blame it on all men, or men alone, but the word itself is a valid way to describe the way things have been/still are to an extent, and it shouldn't be seen as some crazy feminazi concept to be ignored. At least in my opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/15 03:15 PM
7

It's nothing to do with a "cabal of elite men", it quite literally just describes the way society is/was structured. There are just as many women who have been compliant with or contributed to that structure. It's a descriptor, not a way to apportion blame.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/15 02:56 PM
9

I'd say people constantly complaining about anything can give off a bad vibe, which includes constantly complaining about women and feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/15 02:00 PM
12

I'd find someone whose views/personality matched mine more closely, since I'm not about to stifle or hide my opinions just for some dude. It doesn't matter how physically hot you are - your personality can make you ugly in about two seconds flat.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/15 01:44 PM
2

There are people who are less attracted to people than they are to feet, or animals, or cars, so it's not outside the realm of possibility. I think a lot of people self-identify as sapiosexuals for the attention rather than because intelligence actually gets them off, however. Intelligence is important to most people, but not necessarily the only or even most important thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/15 12:01 PM
1

TRP may have a bunch of surveys, but you haven't even been able to provide one that backs up what you're suggesting. You said when asked, all women will say these are the things they want, and that's objectively false based on what I've linked to. It seems like you refuse to take into account what women actually say when it doesn't gel with what you think they say, even if proof is offered, so I think I'm done here.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 08:00 PM
1

No, they did not. Your surveys proved only what women do want, or more precisely, what they say they want when surveyed. They did not show that women claim they do not want assertive or decisive men. They disproved your claim, that all women want this, and it is the first thing they look for, is what I'm saying. And proving what women say they want "when surveyed" is a lot better than your proof, which is a bunch of blogs saying what they think women want, and your opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 07:42 PM
1

Because they're asking for things which very much resemble that, as I continued on to state when it comes to shit-testing a guy if he lets her walk all over him. But they're not. Based on actual surveys, they're not doing what you claim they are. It's not most important, most important would be "confidence", which I consider just as baffling and a non-issue, as well as something that all women want, but quite a few men can do without. But I honestly can say, I've never heard a woman saying she d…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 07:22 PM
1

No, it did not. "I thought women reject the RP dynamic of "The Captain" or "The Alpha" as immature or stupid nonsense, yet apparently every man who enters into a relationship with a woman still has to be shit-tested every single second of his life to see if he lets her walk all over him or not or what strong powerful independent leader he is." Why does it matter if women reject the idea of "the captain" if that's not what you were getting at? I don't understand, are you saying women DON'T want a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 07:08 PM
3

DunDun right here said that those needs seem so fundamental to her, that every woman should want them. They also disagreed with your interpretation of those terms, which according to your OP boils down to "women want a captain". As for your survey, I don't know if they're open-ended or not, but there are plenty of polls about standards in which assertive and strong rank pretty high. Usually substituted with "confidence". In your OP you claimed that every single woman first and foremost wants tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 06:51 PM
4

I honestly have no idea where you got that from. None of those are things I've heard women say, and surveys don't seem to back you up, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/15 06:36 PM
3

I also said he was cute and inoffensively attractive... and specified that he's not my type. I can see the appeal this guy has, but that doesn't mean I think he's hot, and there are many levels between "I want him" and "oh, fuck no".
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 06:46 PM
4

Yep, but onesies aren't just for the ladies. My brother, who is 6 foot 4 and built like a brick shithouse got one from my mum for christmas, and wore it all day, including the drive home. Now that's confidence!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 06:41 PM
3

I know! I can understand not liking the guy in the onesie, but not liking the onesie itself? Madness.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 06:28 PM
3

Channing Tatum is horribly unattractive to me. I'd easily bang the pyjama guy before him. There are plenty of women who want a Channing type, but there are also plenty who want a Jared Leto, or who'd prefer something completely different. There's no "one look to rule them all", no matter what some people might think.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 06:25 PM
6

I don't think so at all, it just wouldn't work with that pretty little face, in my opinion. But I'd say we have very different ideas of what makes a guy attractive in the first place - I'm a fan of skinny over muscles in the vast majority of cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 04:43 PM
2

Haha, no I wasnt. But to be honest, even some women I respect find her hot. It always goes with them underestimating their own attractiveness which doesnt surprise me. I dunno, I honestly think women must be talking about her body/style rather than her head, because I agree with Peter Griffin - she looks like a foot. I'm not a huge fan of her style either, but I know a lot of women who loved Sex and the City, and they all wanted to dress like her character. Yeah I get that "cute pretty" works. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 04:33 PM
1

I wasn't having a go at you (unless you really were trying to lump me in with people who find SJP attractive, then I was, and you totally deserved it), but yeah, he's fine - that's as far as it goes for me. Lots of chicks probably find him super attractive, though. Pretty does it for shitloads of women - why else is Jared Leto so popular with the ladies, or that kid from One Direction that bangs everything that moves?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 03:44 PM
5

Funny. I am surprised to hear that as when I found out that women find Sarah Jessica Parker attractive. Phht, don't try and lump me in with those people! The guy is inoffensively attractive. He's bland. He's something 15 year old girls wouldn't be intimidated by. He's just kind of... there. But he's certainly not ugly or disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 03:31 PM
2

Pretty? Do you mean "good-looking pretty" or "unmanly pretty"? I mean "good-looking pretty". He's cute, but in a boring, fresh kind of way that doesn't appeal to me... his face is just too clean for my liking. He looks like he drinks green tea and eats organic avocados or something. I wouldn't wear them if I was freezing in the trenches at Stalingrad. (Well I would...but hyperbole). That's cool, but onesies are comfy and I have no issues with plaid, so I'd still wear them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 02:55 PM
2

Apart from being a bit too pretty for my tastes and a little smug-looking, I don't see what the big deal about this dude is. I like his pyjamas, though... I would wear the shit out of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/15 02:38 PM
1

I've heard that, too, but I like the ones I listed better. They make me giggle. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 09:21 PM
1

I dunno that jacking off is the correct term for what us ladies get up to (my favourites that I've heard are "seasoning the taco" and "curtain twitching"), but I don't see why porn is any more damaging than having sex with another person. Porn is just a visual form of stimulation, whereas sex is visual and physical. If anything, sex should be more "damaging" if it's meant to be some kind of sensory overload type issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 09:13 PM
3

I gave up porn because the Aussie government has decided to hoard our metadata... I don't want them knowing what I'm watching when it's business time. I don't think there's many reasons apart from that to give it up, though, as long as you're not using it obsessively. But I refuse to stop masturbating. It's healthy and stress-relieving and it feels good in my downstairs and that's one thing I won't let the government take away from me, goddamn it!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 08:59 PM
2

Probably because it's a different type of stereotyping they encounter? I'm honestly not sure, I don't have any studies about whether they're discouraged from pursuing those subjects. If you do, I'd be interested to see them. When I lived in Saudi they seemed more worried about women's ankles showing and making sure they weren't driving than their maths abilities, but as I went to an American school I'll admit I'm no expert on how or what they were taught.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 07:42 PM
2

I am and I have no problem with it. I don't think you are, I just think boys need more encouragement in those areas. Again, these are all learned skills, you're not born with language or maths abilities. If there's no stigma or stereotypes to contend with, people learn better and are more likely to want to continue study in those areas/work in those fields. It's really that simple. If you're (general you) so easily deterred from something you know you're good at, maybe it wasn't right for you in…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 07:38 PM
2

I could have gotten pissed and discouraged; my field is not one with a whole lot of women to begin with. Instead, I decided after that remark - which, let me stress again, I understand why he made it - that I would finish come hell or high water, and cram my raging success right down his throat. I didn't get discouraged, either - I wasn't planning on going into psych any further regardless of being able to - but I was pissed. This guy teaches girls every single year, and it's sad to think that t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 07:18 PM
1

And I heard all the time how guys couldn't hold a candle to girls when it came to languages and it never deterred me from picking up linguistics as a subject (though in hindsight, I should have studied something more useful instead). Right, and the reason guys probably aren't seen to be as good at language is because they're told they're not as good, so they lose interest/don't bother trying. I'm not shit at science and maths, but I'm not every chick. You studied linguistics and, I assume, were …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 06:39 PM
2

All that's really required is an interest in the subject matter. This link shows quite a large correlation between cultural attitudes/stereotypes and performance in science and mathematics. Essentially, women are less likely to perform well or pursue further study/careers in subjects they're assumed to be less capable of. It's likely similar for men in female-dominated roles. "About 70% of more than half a million Implicit Association Tests completed by citizens of 34 countries revealed expected…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 05:01 PM
3

I was sure as shit aware when I was very young (I'm talking primary/elementary school, here) that girls just aren't as good at maths or science, and I can tell you from experience, it's pretty off-putting. Just a quick anecdote: I studied psychology in my last two years at high school. My teacher (who was not my maths teacher) told me although my marks were excellent and I had great enthusiasm for the subject, I should think really hard about whether I wanted to study it further at uni, because …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 04:12 PM
3

And I believe you, too, but that doesn't necessarily mean women aren't interested or capable. Girls and women often aren't encouraged to learn or discuss these topics the same way boys and men are, or as accepted when they choose to. It's kind of hard to find your footing in more academic areas when society basically teaches you that you're not suited to them, or that it's more important for you to be pretty than smart.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 03:17 PM
5

Yes, my tiny woman brain can't handle real thoughts, like world affairs and history. It's all shoes, feelings, and cute boys up in here! I kid, I kid. It honestly seems like this dude has never spoken to a woman, let alone attempted to speak about anything beyond what he thinks their brains are "wired for". I work in finance (but I count bobby pins to keep track of the really big numbers, tee-hee!), I love having a chat about politics, I follow the news, I'm always reading books, I use online re…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 02:43 PM
4

But it is useful to know if they care, because any guy who cares about my number is most likely going to be incompatible with me in other ways as well. I agree 100%. I'd happily date a guy with whatever number, but not one who thought less of me for my number. Judging me or having double standards is far more of a deal-breaker for me than them having slept around a bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 01:53 PM
4

I've personally got no problem with sluts, man-whores, virgins, or anything in between. I'd be friends with a chick who was a virgin or one who's slept with 100 dudes, likewise I'd date a dude who as a virgin or one who's slept with 100 chicks. I'm not dating their dick (or every person who's ever touched it) so it just doesn't matter at all to me as long as they're clean and our values align. Personally, it does weird me out when a person, male or female, has had loads of different partners. No…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/15 01:31 PM
1

Because forcing someone to have sex is a bad thing regardless of anything else? I would sure as shit prefer to break up with or divorce someone who didn't want to have sex with me than threaten them into it, even if I earned more and was up for paying alimony. Duty sex is horrible, if you care at all for your partner or their wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/15 09:48 AM
1

I don't get what needs to be backed up. Having sex or not having sex should not be linked to finances. You should not be able to financially threaten someone into fucking you, whether you're in a relationship or at work.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/15 02:20 AM
2

Definitely. I'm not trying to get myself (or anyone else) killed or injured, I just really fucking hate bullies and don't like letting them get away with their bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 04:54 PM
1

That's okay, but are you sure that you are able to immediately spot a hidden psychopath? No, of course not. I doubt many people can. But I'm not about to change my life to try and avoid violent psychos, considering how few there are in the world. It seems silly to let people get away with bullying behaviour just in case they're going to stab you, especially if they've given no indication of it at all. Of course if somebody threatens you with a visible knife he might attack you at some point. But…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 04:36 PM
1

It's cool, you don't have to apologise! It's just really annoying that I'm being downvoted for saying I stand up for myself, and the majority of responses I've gotten are pretty much implying that unless I sit back and do absolutely nothing when someone tries to verbally abuse me or my friends, I'm inviting death upon myself or others. I understand being careful, and like I said in my initial comment, I absolutely don't get into fights or encourage other to do it. Violence is petty and stupid an…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 12:40 PM
1

You know, I really think people are misunderstanding everything I've said. If some guy comes at me with a knife, I'm not going to start saying shit to him. If he pulls out a knife at any stage of the conversation, I'm going to stop saying shit. If someone starts giving me shit for absolutely no reason, and he has no visible knife and has not given me reason to think he's going to turn into a psychopath all of a sudden, I will talk back to him. I'm not walking around thinking I'm going to get sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 11:54 AM
0

I'm not taking responsibility for stabby nutcases. I don't go above and beyond defending myself and general shit-slinging. Unless I say "go ahead, stab me!", it's not in any way my fault if someone escalates to the stabby place.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 10:27 AM
-1

I don't go out of my way to cause fights or encourage violence, but I'm not going to sit back and let it happen, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 10:02 AM
-2

Nope, never said that. I can't control whether knife-happy maniacs are going to be knife-happy maniacs, but I can control whether I allow myself to be bullied and verbally abused by random people for no good reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 09:36 AM
-1

And regardless of what was said, it doesn't take responsibility away from the dickhead with a knife.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 09:22 AM
-2

I don't care what you've seen, it's still not my fault if someone pulls a knife, it's the fault of the guy holding the knife and fucking stabbing people. I'm not about to let people bully me or anyone I'm with because they might be psychotic. If they come up and start giving someone grief, and as soon as someone responds they pull out a knife and get stabby, that was probably their intention all along.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 09:00 AM
-2

I'm not responsible for fuckwits with knives starting fights, no matter what I say to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 08:52 AM
1

this racist the chink Classy. And for women in the audience, what would you have wanted your man to do in this situation, and what would you yourself have done? I've had idiots try and talk shit to me/friends/partners before, and I just give it straight back. I'm not scared of mouthy pricks - I've never come across one that has actually taken it further. But I wouldn't fight them, and I wouldn't encourage anyone else to, either, as that's just stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 08:30 AM
2

They're not the same thing in the slightest. Edit: In fact, I'd say being threatened with losing your job if you don't comply sexually is far more similar to being threatened with being sued if you don't comply sexually.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/15 02:33 AM
1

No, I didn't..... I offered an opinion on that sentiment. I neither changed the words you used or tried to put words in your mouth. Okay, let's go back to what you actually said: The fact that you are now realising that you have to restrain yourselves from your usual excesses ? You offered the opinion that I had realised something about the excesses that I never said existed (whether you meant "you" as in me specifically, or "you" as in feminists in general). Really, try and paint it as you like…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 01:06 PM
-2

I know, I was characterizing it as a feminist excess. The kind of overreach that is neither helpful, nor useful... And that ultimately detracts from the movements goals. If you have a point to make, you're welcome to make it yourself, rather than attempting to use my comment to make it for you. You literally changed the meaning of every sentence I wrote to fit your narrative, rather than actually engage in this kind of discussion in the first place. I was just remarking on my surprise to see tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 12:08 PM
-2

I know what you were referring to. The fact that you are now realising that you have to restrain yourselves from your usual excesses? I never said it was usual or excessive, just that it's not helpful or useful. There's no backtracking, there's no turning my back on feminism, there's no realisation that everyone was right about the bad, bad feminists all along... the comment stands by itself, there's no deeper meaning behind it, no matter what you decide to try and read into it. It seems even fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 11:33 AM
-1

There you go, putting words in people's mouths again! I can't really say I'm surprised any longer.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 11:20 AM
4

I think that any sort of sex involves a connection, attraction and intimacy. Those things are simply dismissed by women who have unlimited access to them and want to feel sorry for themselves because they can't get commitment from a top level alpha male. No, it's not just women who dismiss that idea, and it's not just women who claim sex can be meaningless. But let's say I'm wrong and sex CAN be meaningless. Wouldn't that mean that a man inside an LTR or marriage is, by default, allowed to sleep…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 10:54 AM
3

Marrying and then willfully abandoning all obligation to tend to your partner emotionally, could be classed as neglect, alienation of affection and emotional distancing. Even cruel and inhuman treatment. But the ruling had nothing to do with emotional abandonment, it had to do with a guy who stopped having sex with his wife for health-related reasons. I'm not saying sex is not part of emotional fulfilment, but it's not the only part, or even the most important, to a lot of people. Basically, if …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 10:43 AM
3

This article is old. If it happened to a woman, the outcry would've been tangible for years. It would've been a global symbol for the male-dominated legal system oppressing women. Well, just doing a quick google search turned up articles on Jezebel and Gawker - two sites I don't read, but are often pointed to as being overtly feminist. No other article I can see (out of the 562,000-odd results) is anything but contemptuous of the ruling - not because of what it means for women, but because it's …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 09:31 AM
4

I don't think a judge should be able to effectively force people into sex by threatening their finances, how can that be a good idea? And according to the article this guy had health reasons for not being able to "perform adequately", so how on earth is it justifiable to charge him for that? It's beyond absurd. Women didnt react to it cause its only for men, and women dont care about equality. Where does it say that, or where did you get that information? I'm a woman, and I don't want to see thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 08:55 AM
6

I wouldn't do anything. My partner is a grown up and I can't force him to stay with me if he'd prefer to be with someone else. Why would I even want to be with someone who's looking elsewhere?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 08:49 AM
4

That's the stupidest fucking ruling I think I've ever seen. There's something mentally wrong with that judge.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 08:46 AM
1

Oh, I know, it's definitely somwhat accurate, it's just not particularly helpful. I see it as something that's meant to be more of an internal "dae hate anti-feminists?! lol" kind of thing, than anything that will make a difference or improve discussion. And to be fair, with the backlash against feminism that's become so popular these days, a bit of restraint with this kind of business wouldn't hurt the cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 05:59 AM
-1

I understand what they're trying to do, and I actually agree with a lot of what it says, but it's about as useful as any mocking cartoon the MRM has put out. Shit-slinging certainly has it's place, but it isn't the way to engage and change minds. All it will do is make people who are already anti-feminist angry and defensive rather than open to discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/15 05:20 AM
0

And men should shut the fuck up about not getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/15 02:34 AM
1

So? It's nobody's job to make someone else happy, obviously. If you don't want to get married, don't get married.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 04:52 PM
5

Apart from thinking he's a massive wanker? It's just a control fantasy written by a man-baby looking for attention by being oh so edgy.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 03:43 PM
1

There is no pill to swallow, because it's made up. It's twaddle.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 01:59 PM
2

Complete horseshit, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 01:53 PM
5

Haha, just no. First of all, the majority of men can and do get laid, this 80/20 shit is utter garbage. On top of that, making vague threats like "it will be women's problem if they don't fuck enough!" to try and scare women into sleeping with men they don't find attractive is really not going to work. But good luck with that, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 01:44 PM
1

Keep holding that frame up, it looks like it's starting to sag just a widdle tiny bit. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 11:33 AM
1

It's poetic, really... just like the cockspank who talks utter wank on the radio and gets his widdle fee fees hurt because he actually has to face consequences for his free speech, here you are doing the same thing! I can see why you felt the need to defend him with such artful and witty insults. :D
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 10:42 AM
5

I'd argue that slut-shaming has an extremely important purpose in preventing a completely free sexual market, which is something that's beneficial to the majority of men. ... who the fuck cares? Women don't - and shouldn't - have sex or not have sex to make men happy. It's not our job to sacrifice our own pleasure for yours. Would men be sad if women slept with whoever they wanted whenever they wanted to? Let them be sad, then, I don't see why that should be women's problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 05:30 AM
0

Personal attacks, eh? I might have to stifle your free speech by reporting you! I'm a literal nazi, and it feels goooooood! :D
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 05:19 AM
0

I'm not BP, and I do understand analogies that actually make sense, just not bullshit ones involving nazis. Thanks for your concern, though. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 04:12 AM
3

Yes, because people signing a petition are exactly like the Gestapo coming to get you! How did I not see it before now?!
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 03:19 AM
1

Community and Rick and Morty. The man has an amazing sense of humour, and that makes him pretty fucking hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 02:48 AM
1

TRP isn't any more biased to believe in its own ideas than any other school of thought. It's literally based on a bunch of opinions, and very little to nothing scientific. It is more biased than a lot of things, actually. Instead of dodging the point, ask yourself how the situation I outlined isn't manipulation. Your friend wanted to go somewhere else, you talked to them, and now they want to go where you want to go. How is that not manipulation? Oh, I wasn't dodging the point, I just ignored th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/15 02:41 AM
3

So if it was permitted or acceptable, why was he suspended? It's permitted and accepted by the government, and by society at large that he can say exactly whatever the fuck he wants. It was also permitted and allowed to be said and aired on the radio show he hosts - nobody pulled the plug. He has faced nothing more than his employer suspending him for 8 days based on public outcry, and people realising he's a huge dickhead. He's not been arrested, charged, fined, lynched, or flogged in the town …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 08:01 PM
2

TRP teaches you to recognize the way things are and to not fight what's near-impossible to change. It teaches you what it perceives to be reality, and disregards any evidence to the contrary. Everyone manipulates everyone. That's what manipulative people think, yes. In what percentage of situations is it beneficial to keep control of your emotions, and in what percentage of situations is it beneficial to lose control of them? Not only is that impossible to answer, but it's besides the point. Emo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 07:44 PM
2

He did say it, he wasn't "allowed" to, that's why he got fired. No, he was allowed to, which is why he did, and it was aired. He then has to wear the consequences, which was a public backlash resulting in being suspended. No you aren't. You work likely has rules against harassment or offensive speech. You are not allowed to do that. You will most likely get fired for doing something you're not allowed to do. Which is exactly what I said. I'm allowed to speak words, whatever words I choose. I'm n…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 07:37 PM
3

Oh, one can also go on a killing spree. Right, and there are consequences for that, too. The question is what is accepted and by whom - just hiding behind "duh, he violated the guidelines of BBC therefore everything is hunky-dorey" is as disingenuous as it gets considering that you could say far nastier stuff about men without risking anything. You're trying to make the issue about something else entirely - there may be hypocrisy in the world, but that's not what this thread is about. The issue …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 07:35 PM
5

You've not told me anything, I already know what free speech is. All you've done is simultaneously try to defend it for one person and argue against it for others. But you have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 06:29 PM
7

Then why did they kick him off the air? Obviously he wasn't "allowed" to do it. That's like saying a murderer was "allowed" to murder and the police were "allowed" to put him in jail. He was allowed to say it, and he is allowed to say it even if he's not on the radio, but his employer is also allowed to decide what they will and won't allow on their station. I'm allowed to walk into work and call my boss a raging cunt, but my employer is also allowed to fire me for inappropriate behaviour. Freed…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 06:26 PM
5

they have a right to say anything that they want That's what free speech means. The rest of your paragraph is unnecessary. He has the right to say what he wants, and he did. They have the right to say what they want, and they did. His employer has the right to take action if they feel what he says on their radio show should not be allowed, and they did. In answer to your second question, demanding that someone be taken off the air is a pretty strong indication that they're not willing to grant s…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 06:09 PM
2

I notice you didn't answer my questions: So should they not be allowed to say he should be taken off the air even if that's genuinely what they think? Do they not have as much right to say he shouldn't be on the air as he has to say women shouldn't be breastfeeding in public? Either the people signing the petition have a right to free speech, or they don't. A petition is not a legally binding document, it's literally something you can sign to make your opinion known. Surely you can see that peti…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 05:47 PM
5

Publicly sharing their opinion would be saying "I think you're wrong". Not saying "I think you're wrong and you should be taken off the air so you can never say anything again". So should they not be allowed to say he should be taken off the air even if that's genuinely what they think? Do they not have as much right to say he shouldn't be on the air as he has to say women shouldn't be breastfeeding in public? And you think you're arguing for free speech here? Jesus fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 05:35 PM
2

Right, so every time someone hears something that they are offended by, it is justified for them to petition to have that person taken off the air permanently? Yes, of course, because free speech isn't limited to public figures. Why shouldn't the people signing the petition be allowed to make their opinion known in the manner they so choose? Why does he get to use a public platform to make ridiculous statements (and get paid for it) while being free from consequence? You can't stifle everyone el…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 05:25 PM
3

They didn't express their opinion, they raised a petition with the intention of having him taken off the air; ie. silenced! They publicly shared their opinion, again, just like he did. He's not being silenced by being taken off the air, (for the 8 days he was gone), he's being chastised for not working within the guidelines set by his employer. He was in no way unable to communicate his opinion during those 8 days, and if what he said wasn't an issue for the BBC, he would've stayed on the air wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 05:17 PM
-1

True enough, although would the same thing work in reverse if the listeners of this program liked what he said and demanded that he be put back on the air? For sure, as long as his employers were happy to either keep him on the air in the first place, or put him back on the air via popular demand. The decision is ultimately theirs, but everyone else still gets to say what they like about the situation, and that includes starting petitions if they feel the need. But in this case, I would wonder w…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 04:57 PM
3

That shit does fly. He can say exactly what he likes. So can anyone else, even if they disagree with him. And everyone has to live by the consequences of their speech, especially if they're representing their company/using their company's resources at the time and it threatens the livelihood of their employer.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 04:33 PM
8

I'm not sure you can reasonably describe someone being hounded off the air for making one apparently offensive statement... as an example of free speech! Why the fuck not, exactly? People are free to express their opinions just like he did, and in whatever manner they feel like, just like he did. His free speech is not more free than anyone else's, even if he does have a radio show. making one apparently offensive statement As per the article you linked it was a full segment where he made many c…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 04:24 PM
12

He's allowed to say it, people are allowed to call him a fucking idiot, they're allowed to say they want him off the air, and the people he works for are allowed to suspend him if they want (which they did). Freedom all around! This is the sort of thing I find offensive about our society Well, boo-fucking-hoo to you, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 04:02 PM
5

I want to pump and dump, and for that you have to be much hotter than the woman you are talking to. No, you don't, you just have to be attractive to that woman. Being interesting, or funny, or charming, or smart, or any other number of qualities can help with that even if you're not her physical ideal. How hell would a man's personality make a man sexually attractive? It just fucking does. I'm not about to sleep with what I consider the hottest guy in the world if he's boring, annoying, or rude …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 12:13 PM
6

but dan harmon could be attractive if he lost some weight and shaved the hobo beard But Dan Harmon is not thin and does have the hobo beard, so what's your point? Also, I think he looks bizarre without the beard, so I'd like him less if he shaved. I have never seen this in real life.Attractive women fucking guys who aren't hot but doing it because of the guy's personality. I've seen it fucking everywhere and all the time. And it happens with less attractive women, too. Not everyone is obsessivel…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 11:59 AM
5

Hmm good points. Thanks, it's always nice to hear that on this sub. :) The common theme in his advice is: if you keep attracting shit, best look under your shoe. Now this statement I agree with, but the rest of your paragraph I take issue with. I certainly see TRP's advice being more openly and purposefully manipulative than "nice guys". They glamourise dark triad behaviours and encourage deception and manipulation be used to "correct" or "train" your partner to act how you want, regardless of t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 09:23 AM
11

There have been plenty of times I haven't been immediately attracted to a guy, but his personality has swayed me over time. There are guys I've found particularly unattractive at first but ended up fucking/dating/having huge crushes on. Looks are great, and they are certainly fairly important especially in the initial stages of attraction, but they're not the be all and end all. I wouldn't have a giant girly crush on Dan Harmon if he wasn't hilarious and hadn't created two of my favourite TV sho…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 07:58 AM
15

If you believe the nonsense that childish, borderline abusive behaviour from women is "female nature" or "shit tests" or that "all women are like that", you're setting yourself up to be accepting of it because it's just the way things are. You're not likely to take steps to effectively end the behaviour - or simply leave the idiot for someone who's doesn't do that shit in the first place - you learn to just end up playing the same game from the other side. Teaching people that manipulation and p…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/15 07:45 AM
2

I do find the gruff, manly man culture off-putting, but I also have no interest in either of the guys you've included as "beautiful" in your post. I'd much prefer a skinny dude to any of the above (my friends give me shit about liking "heroin chic" dudes). But different people like different things, and there are definitely some women who'd prefer a giant, bulky, muscle-bound guy to what I like, or your examples. Unsurprisingly, there have been surveys where women are asked to rate men's bodies,…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 04:13 PM
0

Does it have to be damaging to men to be a problem? But it is damaging to men, regardless. It teaches them to expect a certain type of behaviour from all women and try to change them through manipulation, rather than leave someone who's a shitty partner. If someone's selfish, emotionally manipulative, plays stupid mind games, etc, they're not worth the time and effort. When you believe it's "female nature" to act that way, there's little point in trying to find someone who's actually not an arse…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 04:33 AM
1

thx bb
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 03:58 AM
4

Now some of the issues with TRP's "locker room talk" i can understand. How men talk amongst themselves can be brutal, succinct and overly-objective. You should've heard my Father give me "The Talk". I've never heard the terms "cunt" and "cock" used so frequently, and he's a fairly astute man. One again this "locker room" malarkey is brought up as if it's the language, not the message, that people have an issue with. Say cock and cunt as much as you guys like, they're not scary words. We've all s…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/15 02:38 AM
2

Well, the decrease coincided with the campaign, in any case. Your link is correct, though, it's entirely fair to say that it may not have been related. I'd much rather see this kind of thing being tackled in schools than with advertising campaigns, anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:56 PM
0

I didn't say it was an insult, I said you tried to make it personal, which you did. I asked a fucking question and literally said I wasn't aware, so how exactly am I meant to be hurt by my own statement? If the truth is something you find hurtful, perhaps society isn't for you. Clearly any kind of discussion isn't for you, since you can't stop trying to make it about me, so you have fun doing that, and I'll leave you to it. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:37 PM
0

There's nothing rude about saying a company's hiring policies are shit when they clearly are - especially since, unless you know exactly where the other poster is from, you've no clue what laws are in place there, either. And there's a big difference between saying something about a company and you trying to make it personal. But sure, I'll try not to be rude to companies since it bothers you so much. Sorry if I hurt you by insinuating that his company should hire based on qualifications rather …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:27 PM
1

If you aren't aware of it, then you weren't paying attention. I already said I wasn't aware, dude. No need to be rude about it when someone asks a simple question.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:19 PM
1

What laws, specifically? I'm honestly not aware of any of these quotas, or feminist organisations that would stop a qualified man being hired, especially if no qualified woman can fill the position.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:01 PM
0

Lol, totally, that's how I got where I am in my career. You found me out!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:47 PM
0

I'm not going to try and have a discussion with someone who clearly just wants to rant about how awful women are at working, which is unsubstantiated bullshit. It's just not worth the effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:39 PM
-1

The job may be great, the company is shit and has terrible hiring policies.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:37 PM
2

Nature is the bastard that did this to me, I wouldn't expect it to care. Nature's just a big old meanie that can suck it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:24 PM
0

because women are an extreme pain in the ass to work with!! Uh huh.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:19 PM
0

The company you work for is shit, that doesn't change the facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 01:12 PM
1

One day I shall regale my children with the tale of "You're only here because periods suck: A tale of regret".
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:57 PM
3

Don't question me. You just lost like 5 points, buddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:55 PM
1

While I appreciate the optimistic approach, you cannot convince me that a period is a "feature". It's pure evil inside your body, that's the only explanation that works.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:53 PM
5

What would you tell women to help them avoid being raped? Nothing they haven't been told constantly since they were about 10, but also make it clear that it's much more likely to be perpetrated by a loved one than a stranger in a dark alley. What would you tell women to help prevent them from becoming rapists? Address rape and consent issues in sex education classes, the same as we should be doing for boys. What would you tell men to help them avoid being raped? The same things we tell girls. Wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 12:16 PM
5

Women don't carry note books to keep track of these "points", and they don't have the time or energy to spend mentally tallying this shit, either. There is no point system.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 11:55 AM
3

I've started to associate this song with TRP's obsession with "cucks", which is painful because I love listening to my old Tripod CD. :(
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 08:08 AM
1

stomps Quit it!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 07:42 AM
2

Nobody said it would be a rational decision, but come on... 9 months off! It almost seems worth it on the first day of your period when your uterus feels like it's trying to kill you via pain and embarrassment, believe me.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 07:41 AM
5

The one that is a study was not impartial and primed its subjects, gave a poor cover story, and was a response to the overwhelming data showing a preference for women in STEM. Is this the opinion of the scientific community, or just you? The study you're linking now (which you had not previously linked), is specifically relating to people already hired and established in their fields applying for assistant professor roles, not people trying to get their foot in the door. They also chose two fiel…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 06:02 AM
0

That study has been superseded by multiple impartial ones not done by a gender studies major, including the one quoted. Wanna see the amazing graph they use? I can show it to you. There was more than one study I linked, from more than one country. And this impartial study (because you can't study gender and be impartial, apparently) also shows that women are offered lower starting salaries when they are hired, as well as the other graph included which shows they're less likely to be viewed as co…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 05:27 AM
6

Wrong. That's funny, because the articles with linked studies below show that a resume with a male name is more likely to be viewed as impressive, more likely to end in obtaining an interview, and more likely to result in being hired. And that's by male and female HR/recruitment. http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-job-rather-jennifer http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/the-same-resume-with-different-names-nets-different-results/story-fnkgbb3b-1227077022686 http://blogs.s…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 04:59 AM
5

No kids, thankfully... I mean, it's tempting sometimes just to get 9 months off from the periods, but no. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 04:21 AM
6

I'm not a man so I can't answer on their behalf. But from experience, women are less likely to be taken seriously, listened to, employed (regardless of experience/qualifications), and judged on merit rather than looks. They're constantly encouraged to be as attractive as possible to men, yet told that if they're too attractive they're somehow inciting violence. Pregnancy (and the possibly of accidentally finding yourself in that situation) is a massive pain in the arse. Periods get their own par…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/15 03:05 AM
1

Some of them, probably. But do women blow every attractive man, or every guy who's comedy show they laugh at, even while in relationships? Because that seems like a ridiculous stretch of logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 06:01 PM
2

I don't do any of that business (especially "this that that this"). I'm still sexy as fuck. But, yes, the world is retarded if it thinks women need to do any of that shit to be passably attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 10:29 AM
2

And that's why I wanted celebrities, because who knows how some idealized-looking random dude/chick on the internet looks from different angles, while doing groceries or 5 years later. I getcha, it's hard to judge people from one photo. Hell, I practically look like a different person in every photo taken of me. (it's also interesting to see how a person can hover between "would tap that" and "meh") Yeah, I have an odd thing for guys who hover that line... my two favourite celebrity man-crushes …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 09:20 AM
4

From my experience, the best way to handle this type of situation is with complete honesty - I've never started a casual relationship with someone who didn't know that's what it was, and these are the rules I set out before getting involved in a that type of scenario: No publicising the "relationship" (I don't want family/friends to think we're dating). No drink nights, watching movies alone, going out for dinner by ourselves, etc. We can hang around in groups, but we're not dating so we're not …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 08:48 AM
1

Yep, a great sense of humour can make up for just about anything physically unattractive, so I get where you're coming from. He's still attractive in that movie for being funny, it's just not the same physically. But now I wanna watch it, too, so I guess it's time to hit the ol' DVD pile...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 04:58 AM
1

It is, and he was hilarious and still absolutely loveable in Robin Hood, but just based on looks alone? I can't say he's been properly hot anywhere but The Princess Bride.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 04:35 AM
9

In terms of celebrities, Cary Elwes had the shortest window of "hot" I've ever seen... it lasted exactly one movie, and he's been totally average ever since. When he was (briefly) hot as fuck, and then the rest of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/15 02:39 AM
14

None of that makes her unstable - punching people does.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/15 11:01 AM
7

She might've wanted to mention if there was any kind of acceptable reason she just up and punched a dude. As it stands, she sounds unstable as fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/15 10:26 AM
17

I'd go with "I'm a dickhead who punches people for talking to me", and walk the fuck away from her.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/15 09:40 AM
7

Nah, they're both as bitchy and ridiculous as each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/15 02:09 AM
1

I get the point, the analogy, and I understand your position, I just disagree with you. I've already explained why I think the analogy is ridiculous, and you just keep asking me the same question as if it in any way relates to what I've said when it clearly doesn't. So, I'm done here, enjoy.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 04:16 PM
3

Do you have any examples? I don't think I've ever seen that being encouraged - especially not to a large degree or by a significant number of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 04:04 PM
0

You're just not getting the point at all, but that's cool. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 03:45 PM
2

Where is that being promoted, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 03:41 PM
1

You just told me that you think vaginas are locks I told you nothing of the sort. The analogy does what every fucking analogy does by definition. The lock and key analogy does not exist, not was it ever intended, to explain "how society perceives the lock" - it compares sex to locks and keys, quite literally. That doesn't mean I think vaginas are locks, for fuck's sake. The analogy works or it doesn't, and in this case it absolutely doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 03:34 PM
-1

No, I definitely understand it. The analogy is pointless without it being accurate.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 02:55 PM
-1

No, I don't think you understand my objection to the analogy. My first comment lays it out fairly clearly: The point of a shitty lock is that it doesn't do it's job, where a vagina that gets fucked is pretty much doing exactly what it was built for. A vagina is exactly the same before and after safe sex - it's not different or devalued in any way. The only time trying to "procure the best genes for her offspring" is an issue is when she's trying to get pregnant. It's not that I don't understand …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 01:41 PM
2

Even if I knew the orgasm was guaranteed, I still wouldn't be having as much random casual sex as a man because not everyone turns me on. Not everyone turns me on, either, but there's a lot more than I'm currently banging, at least. It wouldn't necessarily be at the exact same level as men, or be something all women would partake in, but if all the barriers I mentioned were taken away somehow, it would be a fuckload closer than it is now, I'd say. After all, not all men are interested in sleepin…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 01:03 PM
4

Dude, you're ranting about feminism for no reason right now. It's not at all related to you saying: And rather than putting checks around this behaviour - society currently promotes it - hence all the "you go girl" stuff. Or even the topic at hand. Neither feminism nor society promotes or even condones this behaviour in women any more than it does men.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:49 AM
3

So nobody actually promotes the behaviour, it's just the vibe of the thing? Has there even been a noticeable increase in women cheating, or any kind of indication (by femnists or anyone else), that this behaviour in women is even more accepted now than in the past?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:38 AM
3

I'm not saying women are utterly thrilled to have sex with the same man (or few men) for all eternity, but overall they'd prefer a near guaranteed orgasm/pleasurable experience than a literal toss up that more often than not, doesn't end in their favor. Oh, absolutely. I really think the ability to orgasm being so low with random men is the main reason why more women don't have/desire casual sex in numbers similar to men. The stigma and risks would frankly be largely irrelevant/non-issues were o…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:35 AM
1

What's your point? Something existing doesn't make it correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:24 AM
5

Women can (and do) certainly have sex drives as "high" as men, but overall they care far less for variety and instead prefer consistency. I don't think that's necessarily true, but unless their chance of having an orgasm with a random hookup suddenly increases, the stigma disappears and it somehow becomes much safer, I doubt women are ever going to be on par with men when it comes to racking up high numbers just for variety's sake.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:06 AM
6

What does your opinion of feminism have to do with the topic at hand? Which feminists - or any group within society, for that matter - are promoting cheating?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 11:02 AM
3

What do you mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 10:39 AM
4

Many RP guys have been burned badly... been cheated on and worse. So what? They're not the only ones who have, they're just the only ones here who are ascribing that behaviour to all women because of their personal experiences - and in this case specifically, women who laugh at comedy. And rather than putting checks around this behaviour - society currently promotes it - hence all the "you go girl" stuff. Where's the "you go girl" stuff surrounding cheating on your boyfriend that society is prom…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 10:13 AM
5

So how does "lots of women think this dude is hot" translate to "would totally blow him while their boyfriend waits in the car"? It's fucking nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 09:50 AM
7

Any one of these women would be willing to blow this man back stage while their boyfriend was waiting for her in the car. How can anyone deny this? Because it's speculative bullshit? These are women at a comedy show - what are they supposed to do, cry?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 09:28 AM
22

Women have no motivation to enjoy casual sex as much as men - they're highly unlikely to orgasm with a ONS, they're probably going to be judged for it if others find out, and there are also safety concerns regarding meeting up with complete strangers. I don't believe the difference in sex drive is as vast as people make it out to be, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 09:23 AM
4

Because it makes no sense, and it's silly and childish. The point of a shitty lock is that it doesn't do it's job, where a vagina that gets fucked is pretty much doing exactly what it was built for. A vagina is exactly the same before and after safe sex - it's not different or devalued in any way. The only time trying to "procure the best genes for her offspring" is an issue is when she's trying to get pregnant. If you don't like women who fuck around, that's great, and nobody gives a fuck about…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/15 03:26 AM
3

If you're unhinged enough to "take it out on someone", that's on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/15 05:15 AM
2

So don't believe them, your opinion makes no difference to anyone. As long as accusations are taken seriously and investigated properly, you can think whatever the fuck you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/15 04:59 AM
4

Yes. Yes again. It's happened a couple of times. I've also turned down relationships with guys I've slept with, when they've been interested in more but I haven't. No, but a lot of women I know have been in that situation. I don't know just how frequent it is, but I'd say it's not exactly uncommon. I've always been open to the idea of it, and have had a few long term relationships. But I'm also happy and comfortable being single and not about to try and force something that doesn't feel right ju…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/15 12:36 PM
0

I noticed. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/15 09:46 PM
2

That's right, sweetie.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/15 09:18 AM
2

I'm not running away, dude, that would imply that I'm either scared of you or somehow intimidated by your arguments. Neither of those things are anywhere near close to true. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/15 08:11 AM
2

I don't believe being denied the use of two silly words can hurt a person, unless that person chooses to be hurt by it. And I don't believe being denied the sole right to use the same words should be pissing so many men off, and yet here we are. They don't get to because it's not a privilege. I never implied it was a privilege, you seem to be arsing around with semantics rather than actually answering the question, so I'm done right about now.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/15 05:27 AM
2

In a sub where such discussions are relevant. And it doesn't occur to you that women who consider themselves FA are also in that sub? By negating their experiences there, you're making them unwelcome. I get that you don't seem to think it's a problem, but if I went in there and started accusing FA/incel guys of lying, they'd probably think I was being dismissive and rude, too. No, that's what I do because I have questioned enough to be fairly convinced. I meant actually question. Doubt. You're n…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 07:00 AM
1

How so? You're literally denying their existence, and explaining why they don't deserve to either use the term or be allowed/accepted in the sub. Like I said, rude and dismissive. So, not questioning it. My experience gives me more than enough reason to question such claims every time I see them. By not question, you mean not not assume they're lying just because of their vagina? They certainly know better than I do what situation they're in. It's not like there's some big incentive to identify …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 06:31 AM
1

Nobody is doing that. r/foreveralone is no longer a safe space for FA males exactly because acceptance of pseudo-FA women's issues is now enforced. You sure seem to be. And considering the amount of women who have had issues at the sub, you're not the only one. So you do accept it and refuse to question it. No, it's not, it's just not making the assumption that they're lying or wrong about their own experiences. If they were proved to be lying, I'd accept that, but your opinion isn't proof. They…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 06:12 AM
2

It appears you don't understand how definitions work any more than you understand how severe social issues work. But yeah, enjoy. It also says nothing about "also, prostitutes don't count because you have to pay for it".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 05:10 AM
2

Where the fuck does it say anything about "when you want"? It literally means no sexual activity, not "I want to have sex right now, but I can't, therefore celibate".
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 05:03 AM
2

He's cannot voluntarily have sex when he wants. The definition of celibate does not include "when they want", no matter how you try to redefine it to fit your views. Ta ta. Buh bye.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 04:56 AM
2

There is no defined term for FA. Men see it one way, women another - because women can't know true FA. Involuntary celibacy is part of FA for men, but not for women. Oh, bullshit. Even men on the sub talk about their crippling self image and lack of ability to get to know people. FA means you're alone or lonely, which sex does not solve. If there's no defined term for FA, why do you get to decide what "true FA" is? Are you saying a man who can't find any kind of meaningful relationship isn't FA,…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 04:44 AM
2

incel/FA Stop conflating the two, they're not the same thing. So even if the socialization problem is there, they aren't involuntarily celibate - they are voluntarily celibate. Again, you're assuming women want to use that term, but they don't. They just don't want to be accused of not being FA when they say they are. Stop trying to make it purely about incel. Women can get sex, yes, but that's not the same thing and FA men don't just want sex, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 04:28 AM
2

So what? That's still on you. You're negating half the men on FA, too, in that case. If you don't think social issues/mental health issues are a real problem for women, then they're not for men, either. They complain about not having the type of sex they want. No, they complain about not having sex at all. Just saying it doesn't exist doesn't make it so. It's fuck all to do with standards, it's to do with not being able to do the things that result in sex, like socialising. There might be anothe…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 04:21 AM
3

Nope. Seriously go to Craiglist or R4R and make a fake female account. Be as unappealing as you consider "not having to do anything to get sex" would be. Then see all the propositions come up. And then try being crippled by self doubt to the point where you can't respond, or that you cancel/don't turn up to the meet up because you can't stand the thought of having to interact with a stranger no matter how horny you are. Being unappealing has nothing to do with it. Right. Because it isn't an issu…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/15 03:47 AM
4

Absolutely. I think it should be legal everywhere - it is where I'm from.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 06:41 PM
-1

But why should they be able to demand acceptance of that from FA men? Why should FA men go out of their way to be hostile and deny their existence? They can just leave them be, for fuck's sake, it's not taking anything away from them for someone else to use the same identifier as them. So you just choose to unquestioningly accept that interpretation from FA women. I never said that, in fact I quite literally said that I don't know what happens in their personal life any more than you do because …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 06:18 PM
0

Then why are you so insistent on using the same word to refer to them and on the men having to accept the women into their online communities and commiserate with them? I'm not, but they can use whatever term they like to describe themselves. You don't get to tell people who they are, especially when you know nothing about them other than "has vagina". Sure, those women's usual argument is that all men who express interest in them are only interested in NSA sex, but here's the kicker - how the f…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 05:49 PM
2

You avoided the main argument we have been having I haven't avoided anything. We're using different definitions of conditions, but maybe I should have used a different term. None of what you listed have the person give anything up (in terms of transfer) and aren't quantifiable or subject to decrease in a discrete amount. That doesn't matter at all, unless the other term you planned to use was "money". All people have to do things to get sex, even if it's as simple as having the social skills to …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 04:39 PM
0

Wow, thank you! That's definitely not something you hear often on this sub. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 04:14 PM
3

The point I'm trying to make is that there is a condition to getting the sex at all, it is not there if the money isn't there. There's always a condition to getting sex. Someone needs to either find you attractive, find you interesting, not care about looks at all, or be desperate enough to overlook how unattractive they find you. but a woman with no money can get sex. And I never said anything about female "incels", because I've honestly never heard a woman use the term. I have heard them use t…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 04:09 PM
3

I'm saying you aren't continually given sex. Wait, sorry, the term celibate means you have no sex. How does not being "continually given sex" make you celibate? I can't imagine too many rich men being incel. You can't imagine a rich man who is severely unattractive, deformed or entirely too socially awkward? I certainly can.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 03:44 PM
4

And why does that matter? If the focus is sex, you still get to have sex. If the focus isn't sex, but finding attraction or connection, why use the term "incel" in the first place?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 03:29 PM
5

It still doesn't make sense to me. FA I can understand, people who can't find meaningful relationships for whatever reason. Referring to yourself as "incel" is identifying yourself by a lack of sex specifically, making that the priority over love/interactions/whatever. It stands to reason that if not having sex is so central to your existence that you use that label for yourself, whether someone is actually into you or just pretending to be into you for money shouldn't matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 03:19 PM
5

No, I don't think the two are identical, but I don't agree with your assessment of the situation. Women may be able to get laid more, but since a lot of the FA/incel community aren't just looking for sex, and since women are less likely to be looking for purely sexual relationships in general, that's not exactly a bonus for them. There have been surveys on /r/foreveralone where people describe what type of FA they are, and they seem to agree that getting laid by itself doesn't discount you from …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 01:53 PM
5

Because a prostitute is not a willing partner. Why does that matter? I'm not being a smartarse, I'm genuinely curious - the term "incel" implies that there is nothing you can do to get sex, but there is, it's just not your ideal situation. a one night stand necessarily involves two mutually consenting people - the man who approaches the women because he is attracted to her, and the woman who accepts the man's approach because she is attracted to him. Not always. People accept one night stands ou…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 01:46 PM
11

In the vast, vast majority of cases, if either gender lowered their standards enough they'd get sex, at least. But on the other hand, when a lot of male incels are asked why they don't just go to a prostitute, it's because "they want to feel wanted and loved", not just fuck someone. So if sex isn't going to solve the problem for these men, I don't see why that discounts women from the title just because it's easier for them to get laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 12:46 PM
3

Shit, I should've read this before I commented... I pretty much just re-worded your first paragraph.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 12:29 PM
8

A lot of male FAs or "incels" don't accept that FA women even exist, because someone somewhere might be desperate enough to use their vagina for a couple of minutes, even if they're disgusted by the person surrounding it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/15 12:26 PM
2

Yes, women have control over what happens in their body. And men know that, too. I don't see what you're not getting... okay, so you know your restaurant analogy? If you ate there, and knew full well that there was a 1 in 100 chance that you would be financially responsible for it's future, would it be your fault if that did happen, or would you expect society to pick up the tab for you? I get the argument that women have all the options when it comes to the actual pregnancy, I really do, and I'…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 02:25 PM
2

Both people make the decision to fuck. Both people get to decide what happens to their own bodies. It just so happens that sex can lead to pregnancy and childbirth in women. Men fuck women while knowing this, and knowing they have no control over what happens if pregnancy does occur. They are as financially responsible for their child as a woman is. It's not equal, it's not fair, but it's the way nature works, and they don't get to opt out of reality because they think their pay cheque is more i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 01:51 PM
2

So men get to fuck and run? Sorry, but it just doesn't work that way. They make the decision to have sex, they know full well what the consequences could be, they need to be responsible for their decisions. If you don't think men should take ownership of something they helped to create, you're advocating treating them like a child - "Oh, but he couldn't help it, he didn't know better!".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 01:33 PM
1

And so are women who can't pay child support.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 01:31 PM
1

Making a man take responsibility for his actions does not inhibit his bodily autonomy. They lose nothing but money, which is not the case for a woman in the same situation. This has fuck all to do with equality because it's a naturally unequal situation. It's like me saying that men should have to cut off their dangly bits because I don't have them, so it's not equal! It's ridiculous. Things are equal in so far as a woman who does not have primary custody is also forced to pay child support. Tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 01:07 PM
3

That comparison makes absolutely no sense. There's one person with responsibilities in your little story - in real life, there's two. Two people decided to fuck, and one of them knew that he couldn't get pregnant, but the other party could. He also knew she had the right to bodily autonomy if she got pregnant. He's responsible for his decisions.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 12:47 PM
3

They decided to fuck someone - same as the woman. They made the choice to take the risk while already knowing that a woman has the right to make decisions for her own body.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 12:45 PM
6

It really is. If you're not willing or able to be financially responsible for your decisions, then you should be scared out of making those decisions. I'm all for men's rights, just not at the expense of their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 11:52 AM
2

Don't have sex if you don't want to get pregnant. And don't have sex if you don't want to get someone pregnant either. Men are taking the exact same risk, yet you want them to be free of consequences. Just no, dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 11:32 AM
1

The responsibility of a man in that case reaches no further than paying for the abortion at best. Horseshit. They have as much responsibility for children they created as the woman does. An abortion isn't a catchall solution - there are moral and medical reasons why women don't/can't get them, and forcing them to have one or living in poverty to raise a child that two people made is not only not going to happen, it's worse for society than asking a man to pay a portion of his wage to it's upkeep…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 11:13 AM
0

You either want it or you don't. It's literally binary. Not some abstract vague concept. It either is or isn't. I don't know why you've bothered with this part - I never said any different. So yeah don't fuck or don't get pregnant. If you do be ready to take responsibility for YOUR body. And don't fuck or get pregnant if you're not ready to take responsibility for YOUR child. But people will, and will end up in the exact same place as they are now, and people will still be having this same argum…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 10:40 AM
2

They don't have to be married for it to be a shared responsibility at all, otherwise single men would already be in the clear. The "biology is a bitch" argument is purely about the pregnancy, not the child. Once you're already pregnant, your options become: keep the baby, spend 9 months of your life in discomfort for a baby you won't keep, have an invasive medical procedure to end the pregnancy. It's all well and good to say "well, just don't get pregnant!", but that does not work. People like f…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 09:47 AM
1

You shouldn't have jumped in the "genetic sea" with said person if you have so much to lose. And men shouldn't "jump in the genetic sea" with women when they don't know what the outcome will be if she gets pregnant, right? Sometimes pregnancy happens despite all precautions and the best intentions - it's useless to talk about abstaining, or try and turn it into a blame game. It hasn't worked in all of recorded history. It is natural to take care of your own problems. Yep, and men need to take ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 08:05 AM
1

Mothers should not be entitled to reimbursements for looking after their child. And men should not be entitled to shirk their financial responsibilities, yet they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 06:20 AM
3

You weren't quoting me at all. You know who needs help from safe havens? The children who would be abandoned or neglected without them. But keep trying to make it all about women. I can handle having my views challenged, but you're not challenging my views, you're challenging views you think I have despite being told otherwise. So yeah, I'm done trying to discuss it with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 06:20 AM
1

It's not disputable, it's scientific fact. And potential to exist does not equal existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 06:06 AM
2

No, I don't think you do see. You refuse to listen to anything I actually say in favour of constructing a straw man every time you respond. I'm gonna leave you to it, dude, so have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 06:04 AM
2

What about all the fathers who were laid off and can't make their child support payments? They are locked up because their obligations can't be reduced due to the Bradley Amendment. Not in my country, and they shouldn't face consequences if they can't pay, only if they refuse to when they're able. Don't tell me I don't care about men, either. That's not debating, it's childish. When it happens to a woman (because of her own choices), its a great atrocity and the man should pay dearly. rofl Yes, …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 06:02 AM
4

No, let's keep helping people who need it and making men be responsible for their live children. Otherwise we end up with unwanted and neglected children who turn into non-contributing members of society, and it's still something everyone else has to deal with in the long run.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:54 AM
2

Is child support a vital lifeline for the child, or is it a reimbursement to the mother? It depends on when it's paid. It is either to assist in the child's upbringing, or to reimburse the person who paid for their child when they decided to cheat the system. Yes, I am aware. Why is that? I've already explained that, but I'll do so again below. The child is the only one who has suffered, and should receive all of the back pay. The child did not support itself in childhood, and money does not mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:47 AM
4

Abortions are not free or easy to obtain in most cases. Safe havens not only exist for men, too, but they aren't required due to "women's mistakes". I'm opposed to putting women into a situation where they are forced into an invasive medical procedure against their will, because otherwise they will be poverty stricken. I'm also against allowing women and children (once born) to suffer simply because men don't want to part with their money. The government does not want to force abortions, allow w…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:40 AM
2

Stopping a pregnancy kills the innocent child. In the early stages of pregnancy there is no child, only the potential to become one. You can't kill something that doesn't exist yet. Really? So doctors can just be like "I'm not gonna kill your baby", and they're not gonna get in trouble? Yes, like I said, doctors are not forced to perform abortions. They're not forced to work in abortion clinics, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:36 AM
2

So when the father skips town till the kid is an adult, why is back child support paid to the mother? Because she had the sole responsibility of raising their child, and that money is owed to her by law. The child has suffered by having a shitty, absent father, but the mother has suffered financially for having to pay to raise his offspring without his assistance.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:32 AM
3

Getting pregnant is not just a woman's mistake. If you oppose abortion and you oppose fathers paying child support for their own children, what does that leave? Should tax payers be forced to pay for men's mistakes?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:23 AM
2

There's no killing, there's only stopping a pregnancy. Doctors are not forced to perform abortions.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 05:22 AM
2

That's pretty much why we all want it at this point. No more "financial rape" bullshit to listen to.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/15 02:43 AM
1

Did you read the comment I was responding to? It said: If you've gotten pregnant by accident, make sure it's to a guy worth making those decisions with. Bottom line, don't have sex with deadbeat chumps. My response was not meant to be taken as actual advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 07:37 PM
3

Once the pregnancy is over, the decision is based on the needs of the child, not the parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:55 PM
0

So men have no choice in who they fuck, or they're somehow less responsible if they choose the wrong person to fuck?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:54 PM
2

That is painfully unfair to men, more so than having to pay a portion of their wage to care for a child they don't want. But if that's what you believe, that's what you believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:07 PM
2

It's support for the child, it's certainly not enough to "freeload" off of.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:04 PM
1

Well, half of your country is using incorrect terminology to appeal to emotions. Aborting a zygote, an embryo or a fetus is not killing a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:02 PM
2

I won't concede it because it's not true. Keep making accusations if it makes you feel better, I guess. I'm not going to be responding any further, though, as you keep trying to make this about me rather than the topic at hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:50 PM
1

Government is always right and just. And I said that where, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:48 PM
1

I'd rather a man have slightly less money than a child live in poverty - it's much less tragic that way. But you're certainly welcome to your own opinion on the matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:47 PM
2

I've never said it was fair, I've said there are valid reasons for it and it's better than the alternatives. Like I also said, you're welcome to think what you like, but you'll not get me to admit to bullshit claims like I'm against equality for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:46 PM
1

No, he shouldn't be allowed to just walk away with no responsibility for his child. His wallet is not as important as the child he doesn't want, not to the government and not to the tax payers.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:38 PM
1

Abortion isn't killing a child, it's stopping a pregnancy. And we're not about to force people into invasive medical procedures against their will, so it's the best we've got.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:36 PM
0

Yes, I've explained my argument countless times in this thread. Women get pregnant, they have bodily autonomy which gives them choice. Child needs money, either lives in poverty/starves, is supported by tax payers, or gets child support from absent parent. The lesser of those evils - making a parent pay for their own child - is currently the best solution we have. Is it fair that only women get pregnant and give birth? No. Is it fair to make men pay for something they may not want to be involved…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:34 PM
1

It's still HIS child whether he wants it or not, and the government is not going to let HIS child starve because HE doesn't want to pay for it. Needing financial support for something as costly as a child doesn't have anything to do with strength or independence.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:29 PM
0

So because women are better at not fucking, we should punish children that are born by taking away the financial support of one of their parents simply because they don't want to pay? That seems an odd line of reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:27 PM
-3

But I don't say it about Nazi Germany, and this isn't a comparable situation, so it's a moot point.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:23 PM
2

It's not a special privilege for women, it's financial support for their child.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:21 PM
2

No, I don't, but you're welcome to think that if you like.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:15 PM
0

Well, sorry, but that's how it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:14 PM
2

So unwed men should never have a say in what happens to their children? No visitation, no rights, nothing? That's an interesting view to take.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:09 PM
0

How do we already have that? If we did, there wouldn't even be a debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:08 PM
1

I'm not against equality for men, but pregnancy/childbirth is not an equal situation for men and women. What I am against is removing bodily autonomy for women, forcing women/children into poverty or forcing tax payers to take on the responsibility of other people's children just because they don't want to part with some cash.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:07 PM
-1

Not as far as the government is concerned, or the majority of society, for that matter. That's why things are the way they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:03 PM
0

Perhaps if we forced men to only fuck women they want to breed with, or only fuck women who they know would 100% have an abortion if pregnant, we would see a positive change, too. And yet, we don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:57 PM
9

Well, guys who don't want kids should only choose to fuck women who want abortions, then, shouldn't they? If were going to start apportioning blame for other people's actions, let's do it fairly.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:56 PM
0

You don't need consent from someone else to govern your own body. Simply choosing not to have it isn't always an option, and forcing people to have invasive medical procedures against their will is not an option.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:52 PM
-4

I never said it was only a male position, I meant that being the one who can be or is pregnant can change minds better than any amount of talking. There are a shitload of pro-life women who have had abortions when it's happened to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:51 PM
2

this is all very next level. Couldn't help myself. Regurgitator are top blokes, I couldn't someone besmirch their name like that. :) And yeah, they were such an awesome band, you should check out some of their other stuff if you like what you've heard!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:48 PM
2

Cute, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that there's not a source for your claim that "even if it is reported. Mothers are never called to account for how they spend CS money. Never."
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:35 PM
6

So why should men get to have it both ways? It's their child if they want it, but if they don't it's not? Sorry, but it's her choice what happens while it's in her body, but once she gives birth it's no longer about her, it's about the child. It might not be fair, but without forced abortions or forced poverty, this is it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:25 PM
5

Yes, it absolutely is "their child", otherwise it's only ever a woman's child and men should never get a say. If a woman gets pregnant, of course it's her choice what happens with her own body - the alternatives are monstrous and ridiculous. Once the child is born, it's not about either parent any longer.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:25 PM
-1

Her choice, her body while pregnant. Their child, their responsibility when born.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:11 PM
1

No, their child is their responsibility. It may not be fair, but it's better than the alternatives at this stage, and no government in their right mind is going to force abortions or let women and children live on the streets for not making the choice that someone else would prefer her to.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:10 PM
-1

There's numerous reasons. Not wanting to/not being medically fit to go through an invasive medical procedure, religious reasons, not having access to abortion (which is a problem in the US for a lot of people), abortion not even being legal (like in a few states in my country), not finding out about the pregnancy until it's too late, etc. And it's her choice simply because it's her body.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 04:01 PM
6

I'm sorry, but again, do you have anything other than your opinion to back that up? Because if there has been a report of child abuse/neglect, and there is evidence of that, I sincerely doubt CS just backs off without looking into the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:56 PM
4

Of course, whichever party has primary custody should be entitled to child support, and they already are under current laws. But since the topic raised is whether men should be able to opt out, that's what I was answering.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:54 PM
1

I think once male birth control comes out they'll have a lot more control over the situation, but at this stage it's not feasible. I'm not saying the current situation is ideal, but it's better than any of the alternatives.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:51 PM
1

It's not an appeal to anything, I'm just explaining the reasoning behind it. If the absent parent doesn't have to pay anything towards the upkeep of the child, the other options are worse either for the child or the government. They're not about to force women to get abortions or force them into poverty just because some men don't want to pay for their own children.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:48 PM
-1

It does if it's reported. If nothing is being spent on the child, there are obvious signs that these people are trained to look for.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:44 PM
2

the child only the woman has a right to determine if it can be born or not Yep, because it's in her body. She can choose what happens to her body and anything growing inside of it. It's a real shame that men don't get to go through pregnancies/abortions, because I'm sure if they did they'd feel very differently about both options, but that's nature for you. let her support it. shes a modern gal It's nothing to do with being a modern gal - in modern times it's hard enough to support yourself and …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:42 PM
1

Yes, it is usually used as a weapon and as windfall free money for mom (child support) is intended to be in part punitive to the individual who pays it. Is there anything other than your opinion to back this up? It is based on the father's income, as a percentage of his income, and that's the problem with it. It isn't based on what a person actually spends to support a child So, best case scenario, the child has a slightly better quality of life than it would have if he'd been forced to pay the …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:38 PM
6

And that's fine for you to think so, but the governments in most countries disagrees. When the options are force her to have an abortion, force her to live in poverty if she can't support her child, have her use taxpayer money to support the child, or make the father pay, they're going to make the father pay.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:35 PM
1

I've supported my beliefs just as much as you have, and without being uncivil or trying to insult you. Don't worry, I won't mistake you for someone to bother trying to have a discussion with in future. Enjoy your day/night.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:33 PM
-1

I don't think it's "the only way things can be done" because it's brand spanking new, I think it's the correct way to do things because it's for the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:26 PM
5

I don't think it's "usually" used for anything of the sort. It's set by the court and based on income, not something the mother gets to set.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:24 PM
2

Narcissism - 7th percentile Machiavellianism - 6th percentile Psychopathy - 6th percentile I'd be a shitty RPer, I reckon.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:18 PM
15

No "financial abortion" not a realistic solution. It's simply a fact of life that women carry all of the responsibilities and risks associated with pregnancy, and therefore get to make the choices associated with it. Sorry, biology is a bitch. Child support is not financial rape or free money. It's money for your child, not the chick you knocked up. Male birth control can't come soon enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:13 PM
1

If you can't be civil you shouldn't be here - the rules are over there on the right, and they apply to you as much as anyone else. Maybe you're not suited to a debate sub if you can't stop yourself getting so emotionally involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 02:51 PM
2

We don't do thanksgiving at all 'round these parts, but I'll have a bash... I do love this song (and FJM in general), but it's got a certain RP vibe. A 90s favourite of mine to be played while riding that sweet, sweet carousel. And since I actually spotted a Regurgitator song - Polyester girl - get called a RP song on TBP a few days ago (for shame, TBP!), I'll counter with ! - The Song Formerly Known As, a cute little ditty about being awkward and preferring to stay in with your partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 01:51 PM
-1

So when you said "women say 80% of men are BELOW average in the looks department", what you really meant was "women between the ages of 18 and 34 that use social media say 80% of men are BELOW average in the looks department"? Because not only is that a completely different fucking claim, but unless you can show that okcupid users significantly overlap with all other social media users, it still doesn't actually prove anything. Sorry, but the okcupid data is not in any way convincing, and it won…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 06:26 AM
-1

Nah, what's bullshit is pretending that people on okcupid are representative of any group other than okcupid users, and being willfully ignorant of the obvious reasons the "study" is exceptionally flawed. It's 3.5million people of a very specific demographic - people who are single, use online dating and participated during the time this information was acquired. And again, there are reasons beyond "women totally don't like men!" that the information may have been skewed the way it was.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:55 AM
1

I find it highly amusing that you've been arguing for days now that dominance and status are inextricably linked, and yet you're trying to school me on the difference between actively dominating someone and being dominant because they're "entirely different concepts". Really, this is why I'm not having the discussion any longer. Like I said, if you want to arse around with semantics, go ahead.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 05:19 AM
-1

They represent okcupid users, which is not relevant to the population at large. It's not a "study" in any kind of scientific terms, it has not been replicated and it does not take into account any other factors that may have influenced the outcome (for example, the fact that high ratings cause a message to be sent to the user being rated).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:54 AM
1

So you've really never met/heard of anyone who had status without being dominant? Or was dominant yet didn't have status? You may not be able to make sense of my position, but I'm having a hard time making sense of yours, too. They're not the same thing, and one does not give you the other. And like I said, I'm over having a circular conversation about this. Any examples I give will devolve into the same thing, so I'm gonna leave it here. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:40 AM
-1

Wow, people in an office think some guys are decent looking and then other people don't?! I must've missed that "proof" every single time this article has been posted here. Not only does okcupid represent all women and their taste, but that office anecdote just sealed the deal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 03:30 AM
3

Women on okcupid say 80% of men on okcupid are below average in the looks department.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 02:54 AM
1

No, it doesn't, and no, it doesn't. You don't need to have one to have the other - there are plenty of people who prove this if you bother to look. And I'm pretty done going around and around in circles here.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/15 01:56 AM
3

Considering his entire post is "straight women don't like men... they like women because porn!", I honestly doubt he means anything quite that reasonable.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 05:50 PM
1

And how does that change anything about what I've said? If you want to arse around with semantics, that's fine, but using the term being dominant doesn't make a difference - it doesn't equal status, and you can still have one without the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 05:00 PM
4

Well, your female friends are not representative of the entirety of straight women by any stretch of the imagination. Cock-watching is almost a sport for some of us - movies and TV shows that sport a good dick shot get passed around from straight woman to straight woman at the water cooler.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 02:06 PM
11

That's not the point. Do you think hentai watchers are watching for the tentacle monsters, the same way you think women are watching lesbian porn for the women? Straight women are not watching lesbian porn because women get them off (not in all cases, at least), it's likely because there is a focus on female sexual satisfaction that is lacking in porn made for dudes. Foreplay, shots of happy vaginas getting licked/played with in a way that makes them horny... it works for them more than an unatt…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 02:02 PM
10

Hahahaha, they're not. Where the fuck did you get that from?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 01:53 PM
12

Women only like men for their wealth, status and power Nah, straight women like men for their dicks, too. They prefer lesbian porn more than they do prefer gay porn & straight porn for that matter. Just like all the dudes who watch hentai are really into tentacle monsters, right? Because porn isn't just porn, it shows us hidden truths, or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 01:47 PM
1

They're two separate concepts for a reason. You do not need to dominate someone to have status, and you do not need to have status to dominate someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/15 05:28 AM
1

I got 50... a true fence sitter.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/15 10:48 AM
2

I, frankly, don't know what the "scientific definition" of "alpha" is. Well, there isn't a scientific definition, necessarily, but that's what this topic is asking. The entire point of this thread is to discuss whether TRP is an "objective science", and you certainly don't get that label by making up your own definitions with no scientific backing. They are inextricably linked, as far as I (and many others) are concerned. I would go so far as to say that they are nearly synonymous. Why should th…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/15 02:50 AM
2

No, I'm not shitting you. And I could not give less of a fuck about TRP's definition of alpha - any more than I could their definition of any other terms they've chosen to bastardise. The OP has specifically and consisently referred to the "scientific definition" of alpha. I'm discussing the topic at hand, not the made up one that makes everything TRP says automatically right. Humour has exactly nothing to do with dominance. It may have something to do with status, but dominance is a different b…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/15 05:40 PM
2

No, they're not "alpha" characteristics just because TRP has tried to claim them as such. The definition of alpha in regards to animals/humans would be in relation to dominance or power, not shit like sense of humour.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/15 04:23 PM
2

Against what, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/15 04:05 PM
3

And that's physicality, which has nothing to do with what's being discussed here.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/15 06:19 AM
6

A short, stocky ginger... or a fairly average looking dude, depending on who you ask. And really, even PUAs will admit it's a numbers game. What are the odds that they filmed every single encounter this guy had, and they were all positive? Saying something doesn't make it true. Right, but all you've done is said some stuff, too. Saying "TRP is science" or "TRP is true because evolution" doesn't make it so.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/15 01:44 PM
6

We're talking 99% upwards. No, we're not. Not even close. More often than not the dealbreaker. Any kind of qualities like being smart, funny, hardworking or genuine are nullified by confidence. Once again, no. All of the qualities you listed there are much more likely to be deal breakers over "does he lift?".
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/15 01:08 PM
5

Are they saying that women aren't sexually attracted to Alpha males? Not all women are, no, any more than all men are attracted to one type of woman. And that barely scrapes the surface of the issues people have with TRP, which I'm sure you realise.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/15 12:49 PM
2

I said semen is not "owned" by anyone once it's been ejaculated, yes. And I said I have no idea what you're on about, which is also true, because a fetus is not semen any longer so it's completely besides the point. Exactly none of that is "nuh-uh" or "this guy is crazy" no matter how you read it. Semen is not a part of your body, so it doesn't fall under bodily autonomy. Once it becomes a fetus, it is a part of a woman's bodily autonomy, because it's inside her body. Like I said, she should be …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 08:26 AM
1

I have engaged in the question - how have I not? Don't try and tell me I'm implying men can't be raped when I've very fucking clearly stated otherwise. It's a shitty tactic, and does nothing to bolster your point. You either aren't interested in reading/understanding what I've actually written or you're intentionally misinterpreting my words. So I guess I'll leave you to it, since there's little point having a "discussion" like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 07:58 AM
1

What? No, it doesn't belong to anyone, and this topic has exactly nothing to do with "ownership" of semen. I don't even know what you're on about at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 07:48 AM
4

I would argue it's not completely her body in this scenario. How is her body not her body? I understand that she raped someone, and that's a fucking disgusting thing to do, but that doesn't mean we should start forcing medical procedures on her, any more than we do male prisoners. Therefore, by denying the option to make her abort, you are destroying the victim's body autonomy. No, she "destroyed" his bodily autonomy by raping him, and she should be punished for that within the legal system, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 06:39 AM
2

But when reversed - a man rapes a woman - there's certainly the option to abort the baby. Yes, that's what bodily autonomy means - she gets to decide what happens to her own body. By your logic, we shouldn't allow the woman option to abort because that would be denying the rapist of his body autonomy. What? How does that even make sense? Its got nothing to do with his body at that point. His bodily autonomy doesn't exist outside of his actual body, and neither does a woman's.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 06:18 AM
1

No, it's pretty apt, really. An abortion isn't something to take lightly, considering it's an invasive medical procedure and can have severe complications/can end in death in some circumstances (like any other medical procedure). Castration and sterilisation are, likewise, invasive and dangerous. So even serial rapists shouldn't have that forced upon them out of some warped sense of revenge or it being "fair" or "right". I don't see it as denying the man's bodily autonomy - it's just not taking …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 06:03 AM
2

No. I don't support forced castration/sterilisation, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/15 05:54 AM
1

Really ? Every mentally ill person shoots up a school ? Where the everloving fuck did I say anything even remotely similar to that? It appears that you've got me confused with someone else, or are trying to debate someone who doesn't exist. I think you'll find "mentally ill" is necessary but not sufficient. Since when is being mentally ill not enough to cause someone to do something illegal/destructive/immoral/murdery? Not even when he is describing the reasons he did what he did.... So that we …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/15 03:08 PM
1

If you are reserving your position... Why are you arguing that people taking a position based on his actual word are wrong ? Like I said, it's my opinion. To my mind it's more than a fair assumption that this dude was mentally ill, and that's what caused him to do what he did. Someone with that kind of mental illness is not a reliable source of information, therefore I couldn't give shit number one what he said the reason for his disgusting actions was. You are essentially saying "there is evide…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/15 01:33 PM
1

Oh, I see. So you are disregarding what the perpetrator said was his motive whilst boasting of it before the act. Nope, I just consider people who shoot everyone in their vicinity before committing suicide to be less than trustworthy, and I tend not to believe everything I read. I'm not here to prove anything, I'm giving my opinion, which is all any of us can do without having known or treated the fucker for mental illness. He did specify otherwise. You brought up all the other shooters, and tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/15 12:53 PM
1

Well, you can say it with some certainty.... In so far as he was over on R9K saying he was going to do it because of the "Beta Uprising" and all that shit. That's the excuse he used, yes. That doesn't mean it's the actual reason. AND when you combine that with the fact that almost all of the school shooters report being extremely unhappy with their lives, and having no way out, it seems to be an extremely common theme. One that 90-95-99% seem to share. Being unhappy has fuck all to do with not g…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/15 12:14 PM
1

Yes, and if he was "menally unstable" but had a really nice pleasant life full of sex and joy he wouldn't have done it either. He's have just been a mentally unstable guy who never wanted to "murder a bunch of people". You can't say that with any certainty - I'm just guessing that you didn't know this dude. For all any of us know he would've done the same thing if his favourite brand of pasta was discontinued. No, you shoot a bunch of people as You're horny, and a bit loopy, and you see no way o…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/15 02:31 PM
1

Surely he can be both. They are not mutually exclusive terms. I'm not saying they are, I'm saying that in this case the "cowardly, murdering fuckwit" part is what caused the problem. There's no need to discuss anything beyond that, as it's mostly irrelevant. Doesn't matter what excuse he used (in this case "women won't fuck me, waaaah"), if he wasn't unstable and okay with murdering a bunch of people, he wouldn't have done what he did. TRP is very much the answer to the frustrations these people…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/15 01:46 PM
22

In Australia (well, on the East coast, anyway) prostitution has been legal since the 80s. It hasn't rid us of whining arseholes yet.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/15 02:59 AM
9

He's not a "beta" or a "social outcast", he's a cowardly, murdering fuckwit who likely had severe mental issues. As long as nobody follows his example I don't give a shit what else they decide to do, but I doubt TRP is the answer to the problems of people like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/15 12:05 AM
10

Yes, I know, I was using the same terminology as the other poster was so as not to confuse them further.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 12:55 PM
6

No, I'm denying it because it's false information according to reputable sources. Don't tell me how I feel or what I think, as you've no idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 09:13 AM
3

Voodoo, to be precise.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 09:09 AM
6

No, doctors don't lie about childbirth because of "political correctness", that's utter bullshit. Research is not incorrect or lies just because it doesn't agree with your views. I know it's common, but unless you've got something to back up that it's "extremely common" or will "nearly always" happen, I'm going to stick with the information available from medical sources and say that it's not.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 09:08 AM
2

I'm aware of the size of an infant's head, but again, no research I've done says that it's quite as common as you think it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 08:55 AM
4

I have done some research. It's common, but it's not "nearly always".
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 08:47 AM
3

Where are you getting that information from? I know that many women have issues after childbirth, but that doesn't translate to "nearly always", or that your vagina will "never be the same" if you don't do kegels.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 08:32 AM
5

It certainly can do damage to the muscles, but it's not always the case. And this dude was talking about ripping and tearing of the vagina, not over-stretching of the muscles surrounding it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 08:15 AM
6

I wasn't talking about baby arms, I was talking about adult human arms. A baby's arm is part of a baby, the entirety of which a vagina is fucking built to pass. The baby's head is more than capable of fitting without ripping or tearing, and in a lot of cases, it does. Again, just because something can happen, doesn't mean it's "normal" or the only way things can happen. Anyway, it's pretty clear you've absolutely no idea what you're on about, so I'm gonna stop wasting my time. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:44 AM
5

I appear to know far more about this than you do, dude. Women have sent men to the hospital by "breaking" their dicks - does that make their vagina too small or made of fucking steel or something? Those types of injuries are more about lubrication, angle and force than they are about size. If you shoved your entire arm up there, yeah, you might cause some damage, but if your dick isn't the size of your arm, you're not sending anyone to hospital. Ripping and tearing is a thing that happens during…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:38 AM
13

You'd learn how it feels, not how it works. There's a vast difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:24 AM
10

You don't learn about vaginas by fucking them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:14 AM
22

No, it's not. It just... jesus, it astounds me how many people have no fucking idea how vaginas work.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:09 AM
16

No, ripping and tearing isn't what makes a vagina "capable" of having a baby shoved through it, being a vagina is what makes it fucking capable. Ripping and tearing is something that can happen, not what makes babies able to get out of there. And a penis won't do shit to stretch a vagina any more than stretching the corners of your mouth with your fingers will widen it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 07:07 AM
20

No, vaginas just don't work that way. When aroused they don't expand to the same size as when giving birth, this is true, but it's still capable of expanding to that size because it is literally built to do so. Think of a balloon - if you fill the whole thing with as much air as it can take, you might stretch it out a bit (and a baby might stretch the muscles around your vagina in the same way). But if you blow enough air in to fill the "gap" you can actually see, the balloon isn't in danger of …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 06:52 AM
22

Nobody thinks a woman's vagina is constantly "dilated" to the point of birthing, but it's built to be able to do so. The point is that a dick, or 100 dicks, isn't going to change shit about the way a vagina works or feels.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 06:41 AM
26

It's not an "extreme scenario" when you're referring to the literal reason for it's existence. They're built to pass a baby, they're not about to get stretched by a cock, regardless of size.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/15 06:30 AM
12

Probably, though maybe not one he actually wants to have sex with. There's always someone desperate enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/15 05:46 AM
1

Nah, I've got no time for generalisations.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/15 02:14 AM
1

That's great, but it means nothing to anyone except you.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 05:57 PM
1

Your view of how everyone else thinks? Well, you can be confident all you like, but it's unlikely to match reality. I've seen enough surprising variance among the people I do know that it would be silly of me to think I know something that personal about most others.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 05:18 PM
2

I'm certain in my observations, but I neither know nor have I studied every man/woman on the planet, and I'm not foolish enough to think I can answer for either half of the planet. That said, my instinct would be no, just based on how differently beauty is perceived in many countries and cultures. I do think there's a difference in how each gender views attractiveness, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 04:46 PM
2

I am in no way talking about physical traits, but my point still stands. Not all women are petite, and some men are. I don't see why anything needs to be narrowed down to feminine or masculine just because more of one or the other possesses the trait in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 04:36 PM
4

If I don't claim to speak on behalf of all (or even most) women, I'm definitely not about to start trying to speak on behalf of all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 04:31 PM
5

And again, it changes nothing. Other people finding my partner attractive doesn't change my level of attraction. It doesn't make me worried that my partner will leave me unless I dedicate my life to making his easier, otherwise I wouldn't be with him in the first place. Yes, pretty much nobody does that, but it's the icing on the cake. The icing is already on the cake if I'm with him. It matters not at all what anyone else thinks.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 10:32 AM
8

Well, there is a direct correlation between so hot that you want him and being able to show off. Only if you believe that "hot" means the same thing to all women, which it does not. Even if I was dating some super-attractive-to-all-women-guy (who likely doesn't exist), it wouldn't be with the intention of showing him off. I don't need other people to validate my relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 10:22 AM
9

I could not give less of a shit if other people think my partner is hot, and I don't date people to "show them off".
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 10:10 AM
5

I don't agree, but if that's true, that doesn't make the advice in the post we're discussing any better.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 08:54 AM
6

But is there anything wrong with choosing the type of woman who is happy being the "prop"/"place to rest" in her man's life? No, of course not. The issue is with the implication that this is all women are for, that all women are like that, and then teaching that information as "truth" to others. Clearly you don't believe that, but the person who wrote the post sure does, and that's why I'd still be against TRP if all RPers were like him. I think he's only talking about pussy whipped boys and mea…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 06:18 AM
3

But is there really anything wrong with this? You yourself said it's "not your issue at all" if a woman finds happiness being the comforting support in a man's life. And I don't get involved in other people's relationships, so that still stands. I take issue with this kind of shit being bandied about as "truth" and "the way women are", because it's nonsense - it's bad advice. Women are just as likely to be conquering and creating, they don't exist as a prop for men. Be a self actualized man, bui…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 05:59 AM
9

So, this won't work on you, but you fear other women will "fall for it" and so you're against this quintessential RP man? No, I know it will work on some women, but that's not the issue. If they're happy working their arse off for some guy who thinks they're "just a place for you to rest when you get tired", rather than a partner, that's not my issue at all. Can you expand what makes you against an RP man like in the first post? I'm against the assumption that a woman exists to make your life ea…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 05:36 AM
10

Yep. AWALT refers to the fact that all women are biologically driven by the same impulses. Just like a normal healthy straight man sees an attractive woman on the street and would like to have sex with her, a normal healthy straight woman will be attracted to a man that she perceives as having strong alpha qualities and will want to tie him down (yes, in both ways). It doesn't mean that all women are guaranteed to cheat on you, but it does mean that if a guy who is more alpha than you shows inte…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/15 05:11 AM
5

I'm not a BPer, but I don't see a reason to define behaviours as feminine when they're not specific to women, or something all women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/15 04:18 PM
5

If femininity can be anything as you say, then it is a useless word. Exactly. If not all women possess the same qualities (and they don't) and the qualities are able to be possessed by men also (all of the generically "feminine" traits are), then what is femininity? It's a made up word to describe an outdated concept. Most feminists (barring radfems) don't reject any of those traits, they just don't want to be constrained by them. If you're the very definition of old-school femininity, good for …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/15 05:22 AM
7

Femininity is just behaviours or traits associated with being a woman. I find it an unnecessary term, mostly, as women pretty much run the gamut from one extreme to the other, so technically any behaviour can be considered feminine. What I assume you're referring to when you use the word is things like submission/deference, emotional sensitivity, nurturing, etc. Correct me if I'm wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/15 04:53 AM
3

Feminism has absolutely nothing to do with hating femininity or wanting to be "like a man". These chemicals coursing through my body "making me submissive" must be weak as fuck, by the way, because they're not working.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/15 04:32 AM
3

So show me the statistics. Since when does having a different opinion to you mean I'm lying? And that's cool, not only do I not give a shit how you feel about me, I get to keep reporting your comments for rule breaking. We all get to do what we like, yay!
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 06:21 AM
0

You don't get to decide why women don't leave their ailing husband. But do keep up the name calling, it shows how much you care. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 05:51 AM
3

I honestly don't give a shit what you love or what you think "funny girls" love. You've completely gone off topic now, so it's clear you've got nothing else to say. You have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 05:47 AM
3

Having sex is not having a relationship, no. You can call women whatever you like, nobody's stopping you. Just don't be surprised when they don't want to have anything to do with you. Nobody said women were special. They're no more or less special/simplistic than men. I don't need or want you to explain anything to me - what have you said that you think is particularly deep or complex?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 05:26 AM
0

No, it doesn't mean anything of the sort.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 03:55 AM
0

So it's okay to fuck off on your partner when they're sick and dying as long as you leave before you get access to their assets? Hmm.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 02:29 AM
2

It has to do with relationships. Relationships are not just orgasms. Hello. We weren't talking about relationships there, remember? Hi. The world will keep turning regardless if men degrade women and call them all sluts. And it will still turn when women tell guys they're fuckwits for calling them sluts. Turn, turn turn. I doubt you will be able to truly tune it out. Women are usually sensitive to this sort of thing. I was never tuned in - I don't give a fuck what people I don't like think of me…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/15 02:22 AM
5

Not true then why is there a trend of millionaires getting laid despite looks or personality? What does that have to do with orgasms? We're talking specifically about a woman who just wants to get fucked - do you really think she's going to choose the ugly, boring millionaire for a quickie if she's got a hot, interesting poor dude right next to him? Please. Then keep saying it's not. It makes no difference, as long as people still believe it is. I will. And you can keep saying it's a truth with …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 05:50 PM
3

Yeah, but you can orgasm and get treated to dinner most women think why the hell not? Women can buy themselves dinner. Hell, they can give themselves an orgasm, too, (better than most guys, I'd wager), but sex is sex, and it feels good, and people like it. Money has fuck-all to do with it. You are one person telling me it's not a truth. And you're one person telling me it is a truth. I'm not about to give your opinions any more weight than you are mine. You wanna call that shit truth, prove it. …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 05:31 PM
4

Oh true women get off too, but a millionaire who gets you off is better than a homeless isn't it? An orgasm is an orgasm. When you're just talking about getting off, whoever is better at getting you off is going to come out the winner in that scenario. Nope not a cop out. Mature relationships do exist. What does maturity have to do with anything? Women are not plating men, stop putting them in a position of power they do not have, lol. Yeah, they are. They're casually fucking and nexting dudes, …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 05:00 PM
4

So are teenage girls, so what? And what the fuck do posters of boy bands have to do with anything?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 04:31 PM
8

Women use sexuality and their sex as tools to get men's company, time, resources (although not so much now). Nah, women use their sexuality to get off, just like men do. Also, those two things are not alike. Terminally ill is a serious situation and in a situation the wife might even prefer the husband to leave to find his own happiness. That's a total cop out. You think being unemployed has the same impact on a marriage that putting on weight does? Money is one of the biggest factors in divorce…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 04:30 PM
4

And what is every teenage boy, a paragon of virtue? Come on, we're talking about men and women here, not hormone soaked kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 04:26 PM
6

Sexuality has nothing to do with liking. Liking means the behaviors of someone. Is that why OP was talking about lesbian porn and women finding other women hot? That doesn't sound like behaviours or personality to me. What you said is not too far from the truth when a see a wife leave a husband for losing his job. So it's just like when a husband leaves his terminally ill wife, then? Considering this sub is for debating RP, which includes charming information about how women are as mature as tee…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 04:01 PM
4

I nominated "Sisters Are Doin' It For Themselves" just to really rub it in. But you're right, I'll save it for the meeting (I'm bringing punch and pie!).
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 02:33 PM
8

Ah, crap... well, hopefully I'm still allowed in the parade.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 02:24 PM
10

It's only for us girls, though. ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 11:43 AM
13

Not as hilarious as this post, I fear.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 10:37 AM
40

Nah, straight chicks have been putting it on since the beginning of humanity. It's a long con - one day we'll all scream "GOTCHA!" and start high fiving and making out with each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/15 09:53 AM
2

Think back to people you criticized or told them they were shitty human beings or times you talked about bad stuff that a gender does and recall how much of it was direct at women versus men. And then let me discount that because there's no written proof, which I also requested in my OP. This is the format I'm expecting. Well, expect away, I guess. I'm done with this conversation, so have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 03:24 PM
2

False. I've asked in the OP how often BPers/women have criticized women compared to the number of times they were criticizing a male in similar fashion. Now you have answered that you have done both, apparently. Well, it's a different question in the OP than the one I answered, isn't it? It's not a fucking competition but it will sure be suspicious as hell if men always ended up being on the receiving side while women are always innocent. But that's not the case, as evidenced by just about any d…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 02:56 PM
3

So you have finally answered my question. What do you mean finally? You only just asked it. There's no need to be condescending, dude. I would be interested in hearing the particular details of some shitty woman that you accused of having a shitty personality or a bad behavior to men. I always see men getting told they don't treat women like human beings, that they don't know how to speak with women, that they are entitled to women, that they aren't acting appropriately towards women, and that t…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 02:27 PM
3

Actually it's pretty much everyone who is on the more "liberal progressivist" and "feminist-ish" side of things. Well, no. Women in general is a huge fucking group by itself, and BP can either be used to refer to the sub (and you've clarified that you're not using it that way), or anyone who isn't a RPer. So, you know, that narrows it down to exactly what I said - anyone who isn't a RPer. Such as? Things they do wrong. I really don't get what you want, here - there are plenty of specific example…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 01:44 PM
5

I'm not an RPer either I never said you were, but "people who are BP and women in general" is pretty much everyone who isn't a RPer. Well, maybe not failures of relationships, but attempts and way of going about getting a relationship, or how a person interacts with the other gender or socially in general, I often see men being blamed for doing things wrong and acting like shitheads way more. I often see women being blamed for doing things wrong, too. I don't get why you think it's a male only p…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 01:07 PM
4

I'm talking about people who are "BP" in general and women in general, not just what takes places on the BP sub, but everyone who shares the same values as you. So now everyone in the world who isn't a RPer thinks the same way? Damn, these categories get bigger every fucking day. We should start a political party or some shit. And, no, I see just as much blame for the failure of a relationship on women as men. Of course it's dependent on what the issue was and who acted in what way, but I've nev…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 12:43 PM
5

Are you suggesting women only ever get criticized for their appearance ( Which is something that apparently doesn't happen to men in your world, because shaming and ridicule of "fedoras" and "neckbeards" or slobs don't exist ), or get criticized for their sex count ( Because somehow men don't get shamed for virginity ), and so on? No, I'm pointing out that women aren't seen as "perfect angels" and all the other shit you said. Women are heavily criticised, which is contrary to how you painted it.…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 12:26 PM
6

I'm not the only man who is aware of the "Men bad, women good" trend in our society nor the fact that all women are treated as angels while men can never rest from all the vitriol flung against them and our culture's tendency to be rough with men. There appears to be just as much vitriol towards women in society, from where I'm sitting. When women complain they can't find relationship or that there's some trouble with approaching men, they only ever get support, sympathy and people agree that th…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 11:18 AM
9

How many subpar men have given you a reason to hate them, compared to how many subpar women? I don't know, I don't keep a list of people I hate? There's not that many people that have enough of an impact for me to actually waste time hating them, honestly. For anyone I do, though, it's because of what they've done/how they've treated me, not because they've got a dick or I don't find them sexually attractive. While they're quick to say "women can be at fault too, yeah", I've never actually seen …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 10:47 AM
8

Why would I title something I don't believe? Your post begs to differ. I think you hate subpar men, and are much more likely to be hostile towards them and find reasons to demonize them. First, I'm not BP. Second, I don't hate "subpar" men or women, unless they give me a reason to hate them. Then how come BP only ever talks about what certain groups of men are doing wrong and always tells men what they're doing wrong, while women can apparently only be wrong on principle, but no actually type of…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 07:19 AM
21

Well done on the neutral title and tone of your post. Maybe you should just go flat out and title it "Hands up who hates men? Actually, don't bother, I know you do anyway". Women do things wrong, men do things wrong. People are human, and their genitals don't make them smarter, nicer or more deserving of respect than anyone else. It's not a fucking competition.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/15 06:54 AM
1

I can't be arsed going through the comments either, but I absolutely believe there would be a few people saying that kind of shit. There's always some silly people calling for people they don't like to be banned. I think OP's title is just over-exaggerated.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/15 02:44 PM
2

I don't think it will be banned, either. I don't see them breaking any rules or brigading. But I've really not seen any kind of push for it, that's why I asked OP for some examples.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/15 02:19 PM
7

Where's the "desperate push" to have them banned? Are there any examples you can show?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/15 01:11 PM
3

I hate makeup and never wear it. I just never understood the urge - I think it looks weird on me and it makes me want to rub my face all day. I don't think it's necessary to look professional or "presentable" on a daily basis and I don't go to work to try and make guys want to bone me - it's also an extra 30mins/hour that I could be sleeping, so fuck that noise. It's never been an issue outside of work, either. I've never been with a guy who cares, and I don't mourn the loss of any guy who would…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/15 01:51 AM
1

Doing exercise naked. And no, I never said all women get wet, some women just have increased blood flow to the genital region (which expands the vagina). Clitoral arousal, which is far more indicative of being "turned on" by something, was not measured. The point is that physical responses in the vagina does not denote mental arousal, I really don't see why you have such a problem understanding that. And you didn't post anything, you referred to the study, which I was already aware of. And I res…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 04:59 AM
1

It's more than you've posted to back up your claims (mostly because your claims are unable to be backed up). So yeah, go me! Explain to me what you don't understand about "any sexual activity in the vicinity" first. It doesn't have to make a woman think she's about to be raped, nobody ever said that. It's a biological, physical reaction, not one that occurs when a woman's brain goes "oh no, rape time!"
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 04:21 AM
1

your made up theory. "Genital response to sexual stimuli may be an evolved self-protection mechanism. Female genital response is an automatic reflex that is elicited by sexual stimuli and produces vaginal lubrication, even if the woman does not subjectively feel sexually aroused...Female genital response entails increased genital vasocongestion, necessary for the production of vaginal lubrication, and can, in turn, reduce discomfort and the possibility of injury during vaginal penetration. Ances…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/15 03:48 AM
-1

Seems like part of his grievance with women online wasn't so much about what they think of him but rather that they can't be bothered with any kind of basic courtesy or human decency towards guys they aren't interested in. Would it be nicer of them to reply than ignore him? Yeah, but nobody owes every person who messages them a response just because. Besides that, I think it's also kind of a fallacy to just state that 0 out of a hundred just means all 100 of those women actually judged him fairl…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 07:47 PM
2

Dear <insert name>, Please answer the following questions: Do you think I'm attractive? Why not? ... please?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 06:22 PM
3

Thank you! Finally someone gets it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 06:13 PM
6

Women are getting turned on by monkeys because monkey sex is pretty kinky. It's kind of weird that you think so. Men cannot be raped either Right, well it's not worth continuing this discussion with you. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 06:11 PM
4

A protection measure as in getting physically aroused by any sexual activity in the vicinity stops their vagina from getting ripped to shit if they are raped, which stops them from getting infections or dying from blood loss. Or do you actually think women find monkey sex to be a turn on? Also, because you seem confused by the whole "men get boners when they're not turned on" thing, has a man ever had a dream about something mundane and woken up with a boner, do you reckon? Maybe dreamed about h…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 05:27 PM
4

Women weren't "turned on" by them, either (unless there's another study I'm unaware of). They showed signs only of physical arousal, and it's theorised to be a protection measure rather than proof that women secretly have some kind of monkey fetish.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 05:12 PM
7

That study refers to physical arousal, not mental. There is a difference. You know how men get boners without actually being turned on? Same thing, only not a penis.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 05:05 PM
7

I don't agree with you in the slightest. Straight women find men attractive - that's what they do. They don't find all men attractive, but then again, men don't find all women attractive, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 04:45 PM
14

ALL the men under this are unattractive. So they didn't find him attractive, then? I'm pretty sure that's what I just said.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 04:26 PM
16

but I have emailed over 100 women and to say that of those 100 women, zero, found me attractive is just unbelievable. Well, they obviously didn't find him attractive, or they would've messaged back. If he's batting 0 for 100, chances are he's either overestimating his own attractiveness (and therefore punching well above his weight) or somehow being off-putting in his messages/profile.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/15 03:36 PM
2

You can bet whatever you like - all I can tell you is that I neither do these things myself, nor put up with that shitty behaviour from others. It's not "normal" to act like a spoiled brat who treats people like dirt to make their own life easier.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/15 06:44 AM
2

I'm writing a post to explain why we actually are more frustrated with feminism and tried to connect the dots between terrible dating advice we were given and 'female sexual strategy' to explain why that is a straw man. I don't see how it's a straw man to accurately describe the attitude of RPers. They make their own decisions about how to act and treat others. Feminism has nothing to do with it. Also your advice is confusing I didn't give any advice, I just answered your question.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/15 02:32 AM
2

They're talking to people who have been told that this is the only way to make relationships work, and who have been convinced of concepts like "sexual strategy is amoral" and "all women will try and fuck you over". If you think it's the only way, there's nothing wrong with it, and women deserve it, I guess there's not much of a reason to not treat them like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/15 02:07 AM
2

Right.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 07:29 PM
3

Not the way you use the word "influence", I won't.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 07:23 PM
3

Cool, I'll let my current partner know that you feel that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 07:08 PM
2

No, they don't. There are people who do, but they're definitely not "everyone".
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 06:59 PM
2

You're confusing different topics here. I said I wouldn't manipulate (or "influence") someone to stay with me, and I also said I'd met plenty of good people. Whether they "stay with me" as a partner has nothing to do with either of those statements.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 06:58 PM
3

It's exactly the same thing. What it boils down to is: Am I a shitty person who will use someone else for my own gain? I'm not, and I wouldn't be with someone who was, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 05:51 PM
4

I didn't say anything about "should" or "shouldn't", either, I'm just answering for myself. I find the whole concept of knowingly using tricks and games on people you apparently like to be childish at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 05:38 PM
4

I know plenty of people like that, too, but that doesn't negate the fact that not everyone is a manipulative fuck. And even if I barely knew someone, I still wouldn't go out of my way to manipulate them, or let them pull any of that shit on me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 05:20 PM
6

You mentioned "the one good and true soul", and I said I've found (ie, met) plenty of them. I don't necessarily date everyone who happens to be good.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 04:33 PM
5

I've found plenty so far, I don't see why I wouldn't find at least one more.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 04:18 PM
8

If I need to "influence" someone to want to be or stay with me (especially through fear or jealousy), they're not worth the effort I'd be expending.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 04:10 PM
16

No. I don't treat partners like a dog to be trained or punished, try to scare them into wanting to be/stay with me, try to force them to have sex with me if they don't want to, make them feel bad about themselves for my own benefit, or confuse them into thinking everything is their fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/15 11:15 AM
3

So we're just going for obvious physical differences that are scientifically proven and not at all controversial? In that case, I would like to add to this list with some pertinent information.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/15 05:44 AM
2

Or I'm a completely different person than you who has a different opinion. One of the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/15 03:31 AM
1

Most relationship posts are from people who found trp afterwards. You're saying that, yet you get pissy when I repeat it to you. Okay then.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/15 03:19 AM
2

I'm far older than you think, and you're far too judgemental for someone telling other people to grow up.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/09/15 03:17 AM
5

I don't see why going through a rough patch with a more attractive partner would be any more awkward than usual. A relationship is not a competition - you don't score points for how many people apart from your partner want to bone you. If the "more attractive" partner is focusing on how many other options they have rather than what a good option they've already chosen, they probably shouldn't be in the relationship anyway. And the "less attractive" partner is better off without someone who would…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 04:51 PM
3

I don't give a shit about SMV, and I really don't see what the issue would be even if I did. If both people are happy and committed, where's the issue? So what if one person is slightly hotter than the other?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 03:41 PM
2

I do agree that men are more likely to punch above their weight when it comes to looks, but who wouldn't prefer to date their ideal rather than their equal? I'm attracted to guys who are smarter and funnier than me, and would probably make me look like a bridge troll if I was stood next to them for long enough (in my eyes, anyway). So, you know, let them try if they want. Good luck to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 02:10 PM
2

So anyone who gets into a relationship after finding TRP don't need "dread game", because they've nexted all the troublesome women? That doesn't seem likely. And shifting the problem from one person to the other doesn't seem like fixing a problem to me? How is it a nice relationship when you're viewing your partner (or their behaviour) as a problem to be fixed, and the fix is making them feel dread so they act how you want?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 01:37 PM
2

I thought the things I listed in my first comment make a woman incompatible with RPers, so how does it get to the point of being a nice relationship worth saving in the first place? Surely these low libido, manipulative women have been weeded out by all the nexting, so it should be easy street by that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 12:19 PM
3

So how come things like "dread game" are necessary? If you're nexting incompatible women, shouldn't you be ending up with compatible women you don't need to "train" or "fix"?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 10:32 AM
3

I can't really get my head around TRP's view on women or relationships. They find a (presumably, appropriately hot) woman who's manipulative, dismissive, only likes them for their money/status/whatever, doesn't want to have regular sex with them, and they think "AWALT" and "I can change her!" rather than "this is a shitty person who would be a pain in the arse to live with - perhaps I can do better".
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/15 10:29 AM
2

I know, I found it funny for a while being told why I like who I like, but only for a while. It gave my drunk friends and I a good giggle, though, so there's that I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/15 12:27 AM
2

You have bugger all idea of why I like who I like apart from what I tell you. And I've told you the dominance of the characters he plays has absolutely no bearing on it. It's a shame you refuse to listen to literally the only person with any authority on this subject. It's funny that you focused on only one of the people I mentioned, too, because that's the one that fits your narrative that you pulled right out of your arse. I'm about to get righteously drunk, so I'm pretty done being told (inco…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 09:34 AM
2

But Woody Allen is wicked smart and wicked funny too. So what? I've never particularly liked his stuff. Chris Morris makes my kind of funny, which is why I like him. Picking Chris Morris from a world of funny and smart comedians and saying "but I'm not attracted to dominance" is like picking Woody Allen and claiming neurotic Jewish guys in glasses don't do it for you. No, it's not like that at all. I don't watch Black Books and find Dylan Moran attractive because I think he's actually a shit of …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 08:41 AM
2

I don't really see what's so hard for you to understand. He is ridiculously smart and funny. His humour is what first attracted me to him, and it's what's kept me attracted. I don't like dominant men, I like men with brains and good senses of humour. I don't know him in real life, but I don't have to to know that he's not playing himself in TV shows. And if he was, guess what? I would no longer be attracted to him, because I don't like dominant men (but it's cool, because he's actually quite nic…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 07:49 AM
2

You seem to find it hard separating the person from the character, which isn't an issue for me. And Hugh Grant isn't an "odd" attraction, which might explain why you don't see him on anyone's list. He was a sex symbol for a number of years (until he hit the wall).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 07:25 AM
0

But the reason I ask if feminism is a disappointment is that, even if feminism taught women that they have the right to an equal level of power, did it really teach women and equip them with the skills needed to truly lead society? The goal of feminism is not to teach and pass on skills, it's to have the same opportunities. And considering how long women have had these opportunities, they're not doing so badly. But what I see here from the BPers is "Shame on these Red Pillers for deceiving these…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 05:39 AM
2

Well, you're the only one who called him dominant and can't seem to separate his characters from reality. All we said was that he was ridiculously smart and funny. I've got no love for dominant men, but then again I wouldn't expect him to be that way just because he plays that way on TV. See, I really am just like the other feeeemales around here! :)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/15 01:59 AM
2

And you guys say you aren't attracted to overly dominant men. Who's "you guys", exactly? the character he plays in all his shows is "Insanely Dominant Man To The Ridiculous Max". He sure does play a lot of characters...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 08:33 PM
2

Yep, exactly this. I barely find anyone who knows who Chris Morris is where I'm from, let alone gets why I'm so fascinated by him.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 05:06 PM
2

Chris Morris is just painfully smart and funny, I don't get how anyone could not be attracted to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 04:51 PM
1

yeah, I just quoted them doing that: "the difference between men and women is merely the propensity to train and gain muscle mass." You clearly missed the other differences they mentioned. I'm sure that if there were other possibilities that make sense, you would have suggested them. I'm glad you're sure. All I know is what the person said, which is: "Gender is very much a social construct." - the exact statement that you claimed nobody makes. Then you're not paying attention to what they're act…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 03:41 PM
-1

Yes it does. That's exactly what it means. That's how sarcasm works. Using the words someone else used is how quoting works. This person I linked says, "the difference between men and women is merely the propensity to train and gain muscle mass." - They think men and women are the same. Like I said, they pointed out differences between men and women, so I really don't think they do. No. There is no other possibility than that the deleted post mentioned gender being a social construct. And the po…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 03:07 PM
-1

That's very dishonest. The person I linked believes that gender is a social construct. Their sarcasm makes sense no other way. They're using a quote from someone else. The fact that they used the same term in their response doesn't mean they believe gender is a social construct. Again, this is someone who believes that men and women are intrinsically identical. They didn't say that at all. In fact, they point out differences between the sexes in their post (ie, how men and women lift things diff…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 02:50 PM
1

So I linked you to some people who do, in fact, argue exactly that. What you linked, in order: Someone quoting someone else who used the term "gender is a social construct" (in a mocking sense). Someone who is (weirdly) arguing that equipment and measurements of strength are sexist. Someone who (for some strange reason) seems to think that sex is socially constructed, not gender. A quote, and two comments about completely different things, is not really "proof". Then you might be in the wrong th…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 02:12 PM
1

You may not know them personally That's not the point at all. Anyway, how many examples do you want of people who believe that gender itself is a social construct? I can use reddit's search functionality so it's no trouble for me to find them. It's not my issue if people use the incorrect terminology. Gender itself existing is not in question, but the roles assigned to genders are.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 01:28 PM
0

I've met lots of them, and none of them think gender doesn't exist, they take issue with gender roles, which is entirely different.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 01:23 PM
-1

Gender itself is not a social construct, and I don't know anyone who argues that it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 10:27 AM
3

Comedians do it for me something fierce, and I grew up mostly with British comedies, so I always had a crush on The Mighty Boosh guys (including Richard Ayoade and Matt Berry), Rowan Atkinson, Hugh Laurie, Adrian Edmondson, Rik Mayall, Chris Morris, etc. I also love the slightly weird-looking guys, so Michael pitt and Rami Malek are my favourite Americans at the moment.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/15 05:35 AM
5

I've heard it said by both, but not very often - it's not something that's all that common, at least where I'm from.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 06:22 AM
15

"Better half" is a term used by men and women to describe their partners. "Happy wife, happy life" is a silly term, but one I don't think I've ever heard someone say in real life. I don't think either partner should be beholden to the other just for being with them - they both need to put effort into making their SO's life easier and being the best partner they can be.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/15 03:44 AM
2

Because different people have different taste?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/15 07:48 AM
2

You literally don't understand. I literally do, and I've explained multiple times exactly what I mean and why they're different things to what you're talking about. What I literally don't is talk to people who condescend to me.. So, yeah, I'm gonna leave it here.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 01:58 PM
3

Sure, a primitive attraction to traits which signal a genetically fit male who has the potential for good utility and provision. No, those things are secondary to personality. Women provide and bring utility to relationships just as much as men, and are just as likely to be the primary bread winner. They're just as likely to be ambitious, confident and have excellent social skills. And the stats bear this out - most people marry people similar to themselves, not punch above their weight. Do you …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 01:42 PM
2

And I did say those personality traits, which are coincidentally vital to obtaining status/influence/success. But they're not the same thing, and it's the personality traits, not the level of success or status that most women are after. Basically, there's plenty of traits which aren't "confident, ambitious, socially apt" trio. Do you think there are women who would be satisfied with some of those, without requiring the Holy Trinity? Yes, absolutely. Lots of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 01:20 PM
4

Unless you can conflate status with personality, which many women do. Social status inevitably following social skills and charisma, success following confidence and ambition and intelligent, attractiveness following dominance..and humor maybe. No, I don't. When I say personality, I mean the way you act, your beliefs and interests/hobbies, your outlook on things. It's nothing to do with status, and it's far more important than status, judging by the stats.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 12:46 PM
3

Where? Everywhere. And even if you're not talking about finances, the same goes for most other things. There is generally a similar level of intelligence and/or education, interests, religion/beliefs, political similarity, sense of humour... most people aren't willing to sacrifice personality for status. Of course some do, but I just don't really know anyone like that in real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 12:27 PM
2

They want a confident, successful man who has his shit together, happy about his life, proud, knows what he wants and can get it, ambitious, assertive, charismatic, socially affluent and accepted. No, not all of them do, and not all of them have it as a priority even if it's a preference. There is more than one type of woman. Some place importance on all of that stuff, and some don't give a shit about it. Probably even more would like it, but it's not a dealbreaker as long as everything else fit…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 12:07 PM
5

A lot of men taking your advice will just remain alone forever, since women are the gatekeepers and it's men who have to compromise if they want a woman interested in them. Everyone has to compromise if they have a partner - it's not a good sign if one person gets their way all the time. In fact this is what I have minimal standards about, while moral values, empathy and forthcomingness is what I prioritize. And women absolutely hate that, because status ( confidence, dominance ) and "success" (…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 11:38 AM
10

Exactly what he puts into it. Almost every piece of advice I can think of for a man is the same thing I'd say to a woman. Put effort into making yourself someone your partner enjoys spending time with, don't expect anything from them you're not willing to do yourself, make sure they know you care for and appreciate them, share responsibilities (cooking/cleaning/finances, etc.), have sex often and well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/15 10:31 AM
1

I never said anything about a man that actively seeks them, only that most men find it naturally attractive. While I'm sure you're the representative for all men, I've never had an issue finding men capable of and willing to look after their own shit/sharing housework rather than assuming it's my job (I already have an actual job). And people who are you incompatible with generally aren't considered "quality" partners. I never said anything about unpaid servant, just a woman that contributes her…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 04:53 AM
1

The studies are linked in the article?! LOL, might be worth a read.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 03:26 AM
1

And if he's not? How many women do you know who don't work?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 03:26 AM
1

He stays attractive, He doesn't gain weight, but more importantly he satisfies the woman: sexually, emotionally and intellectually. He becomes a great friend, a great partner and... HE IS HELPFUL. He brings more than dick to the woman's life, he brings some utility and some value to her. This is fucking great advice to men. Nothing to do with lesbians.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/15 03:25 AM
2

Source? Common sense? Why would a woman who actively dislikes traditional gender roles be after a man who actively seeks that kind of woman? It's like saying that RPers would actively seek relationships with "sluts", even though they thoroughly dislike "sluts". I never said traditional men, I just said quality men and indeed men in general like a woman that can cook/clean/support him domestically, these things are pretty desireable to most men. Yeah, well, we'd all like an unpaid servant, but th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 07:10 PM
2

I never said they were, I never said rpw are after traditional men either, they are after quality men What they think are quality men and what the people who give them shit for their views on relationships think are quality men are likely to differ significantly. Traditional men, men who want traditional women/gender roles, however you want to phrase it. These are not the men non-traditional women want. I'm talking about women who do zero housework, or below the minimum. Who wants a man who did …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:44 PM
2

It creates pressure on the lazier women to shape up. No, it doesn't. If they're not after a traditional man, why would they feel pressure to be a traditional woman? And not doing all the housework doesn't make you lazy, anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:29 PM
2

I think it's more of a backlash against the lengths they go to to be subservient and ultra-traditional. I doubt the people who shit on RPW are competing for the same men as them, somehow.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:24 PM
1

I notice how you latch on to my wording instead of discussing the actual reasons for my observations, you'd rather just say i'm wrong. If you don't mean what you said then that's fine, but you are the one who said it. I didn't pull it out of my arse to try and confuse the meaning of your comment. I've seen it, the concept of bettering yourself and using those skills to attract/keep a man has been shit on a good bit. I haven't. I'll admit that they do get shit on for being traditional, but I've n…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 06:01 PM
2

I never said all women, just the ones in my social circles/age. You said all the women you know, which is what I also said. Just look at the flak traditional women get, rpw get shit on constantly for example. RPW don't get shit on for having general life skills like cooking, cleaning and functioning as adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 05:48 PM
5

Do you have anything to back that up? It's very different than what I've read: Research shows that when men do their share of chores, their partners are happier and less depressed, conflicts are fewer, and divorce rates are lower. They live longer, too; studies demonstrate that there’s a longevity boost for men (and women) who provide care and emotional support to their partners later in life. If that isn’t exciting enough, try this: Couples who share chores equally have more sex. As the researc…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 05:36 PM
1

Yes, I'm sure all the women you know are worthless, selfish, lazy, and proud of it. That seems like a realistic anecdote.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 05:22 PM
1

Who said they weren't? Not me, I'm just saying it's not only women who need to do all of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 05:08 PM
3

I said nothing of the sort, so if that's what you got from it, that's not on me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:50 PM
4

I did address the specific points of the posts made, by stating that the advice is just as appropriate for men as for women. I'm under no obligation to answer in the manner you'd prefer. If you want to downvote comments simply because you disagree with their content, that's your right. Just don't be surprised when you're reported for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:37 PM
1

And I can respond any goddamn way I want, like I just did. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:26 PM
1

My point is it's not gender specific advice, so why present it that way? It's not irrelevant to point out that this is good advice for everyone, not just women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 03:23 PM
5

If a man doesn't bring anything else on the table than why would a woman even try to lock him down? I didn't say if he doesn't bring anything else, I said he needs to bring the exact same things as what the OP has suggested. It's not one-sided advice, and there's no reason to present it as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 02:55 PM
1

This isn't because women enjoy sex. We don't deny for one minute that women enjoy sex. What we fault women for, however, is using the sexual power they have and believing themselves entitled to commitment from the highest status man simply because they gave up sex. "Misusing their sexual power" how? Because it seems to me there are very few ways it's acceptable for a woman to use it at all in TRP's eyes (ie, don't happen to have had sex with other men, but have sex with me... if you give it up o…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 01:59 PM
1

I say that because TRPers say the exact same things about their lived experiences -- that they were fed disinformation, in many cases deliberately, in all cases negligently, and were told all sorts of lies about social dynamics and sex. And yet TRPers are called all sorts of names for it. Yes, I knew what you were getting at. I never called RPers names for being pissy about being lied to, though. And despite this issue that they apparently share with girls who were lied to, RPers continue to do …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 01:31 PM
2

I'm not going to play 20 questions on behalf of other people, but here's one I'll give you: Who was telling them these things? Religion, society, school, parents/family, friends, dudes they slept with, dudes they didn't sleep with, and everyone in between. It's really fucking common, right into adulthood, for people to try to (in words RPers are sure to recognise) demonise normal female sexuality by calling them sluts or broken or "used up" because they enjoy sex. If you really want to get the a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 01:13 PM
2

The sarcasm isn't directed at you. Well, the comment was, so I really don't see who else you were directing it at. Who told you you were dirty, cheap or broken for wanting sex? Did you believe that? (Evidently you did, since you said you had a "reason to repress it".) Did you act on that belief? Again, I was expressing something that a shitload of girls are told, not me personally. I never repressed my sexuality because there was no point - I was taught it was natural and healthy. I'm one of the…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 12:59 PM
17

The point I was making is, be a man worth wanting to keep. If he's not doing the same for her, why should she bother?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 12:51 PM
1

Sorry to disappoint, but I was referring to a general experience, not a specific one - my parents were rad and didn't treat sex like it was something to be ashamed of wanting, or a gross act to be avoided. Go mum and dad! :) But thank you for your sarcastic and condescending comment all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 12:49 PM
16

She stays attractive, she doesn't gain weight, but more importantly she satisfies the man: sexually, emotionally and intellectually. She becomes a great friend, a great partner and... SHE IS HELPFUL. She brings more than pussy to the man's life, she brings some utility and some value to him. If men aren't bringing all of this to the table as well, they can fuck off with their demands and point their dicks elsewhere. Women will just point their clits at someone who treats them like an actual part…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 10:24 AM
2

It's not a zero sum game, and it's ridiculous to pretend it is. Am I disadvantaged in some ways because I'm a woman? Of course. Am I disadvantaged in every way because I'm a woman? No, that's fucking stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/15 08:37 AM
11

It's probably a pretty close race. When you grow up constantly being told you're dirty or cheap or broken for wanting or having sex, it kinda gives you a reason to repress it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/15 04:00 AM
6

Because gross generalisations are not useful when you're talking about billions of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:58 PM
8

Just because they feel compelled to do something doesn't make them right.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:39 PM
2

That's not something I know how to pull off and it's frustrating. He probably doesn't either, but he has a shitload of stylists. Some people have all the luck. The downvote suggests to me that people generally dislike when others bring their insecurities into debate, even if it's minor derailment. I didn't downvote you, but I'd say it was probably because it seemed to come out of nowhere and be completely off topic. I had no idea why you brought it up until you just explained it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:33 PM
6

That's not how it works. TRP likes to use words like "attractive" and "masculine" as if they're set in stone and mean the same thing to all people. What makes a guy attractive or funny to me probably won't to someone else, because people have different senses of humour, and different preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:26 PM
2

Okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 06:20 PM
10

We also have hard data that women orgasm more frequently with funny men, which is probably one of the reasons that "sense of humour" is a highly desirable trait. Does this make you think every woman on the planet wants to fuck a comedian? Do all women like the same type of comedy in the first place? Is comedy now the only thing women will take into account when choosing a partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 05:48 PM
5

You get used to it. The amount of times I've been told I'm lying about my preferences, don't know my own preferences as well as some dude on the internet, or am an "outlier" because I don't want to fuck who they think I should want to fuck is kind of ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/15 05:48 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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