TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

justsomething Archive

View 0 posts and 677 comments by justsomething on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

Well yeah, I'm deranged! What's your excuse?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 04:54 PM
–

Well then I wish I could hear the tone you heard in your head when you read my comment 😂 I mean reading this sentence and thinking it was serious: And don't you even think about denying it, because women who think about denying that women who criticize men who act like this hate men actually hate men. It's really that simple (?) At that point I think you guys must be projecting your own anger onto it. Because that sentence is obviously nonsense, it even has the (?) at the end... What did you thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 12:43 PM
–

Her very first response to my joke was that I was fuming and that I think I think I can tell her what to do because I'm a man. That's calm to you? That just sounds like getting aggressive because she didn't catch that I was joking 🤷
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 11:26 AM
2

Yes you are still responding in anger and defensiveness and I am calm.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 01:05 AM
2

You've been responding calmly? Lmao first thing you said was I was fuming. And now you're saying that I'm projecting. Oookay
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/26 12:26 AM
2

Imagine getting this pressed over a joke, damn. It's not a big deal, you can rest now.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 10:05 PM
2

Did you really think that women who think about denying that women who criticize men who act like this hate men actually hate men. was a serious sentence? I was making a joke, don't worry about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 09:10 PM
-1

I mean they're just immediately proving your point. They looked you in the eye and said "men who criticize women for being hypocrites are misogynists". That was your entire argument, that people act like criticizing women for hypocrisy is treated as sexism. You don't even have to argue, they handed it to you!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 06:55 PM
4

Women who criticize men who act like this hate men. It's really that simple. And don't you even think about denying it, because women who think about denying that women who criticize men who act like this hate men actually hate men. It's really that simple (?)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 06:53 PM
1

I'm going to keep my tits agitated, thank you!!! Don't you dare suggest that my queens are in any way shallow! Women are so much better than that. (6'4" btw)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/26 12:50 PM
3

If you are a parent who actually loves their kids, you want them to be able to spend time with both their parents. It's what's best for them (assuming nobody is abusive). He's on some evil shit. Sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:12 PM
2

I am agreeing with you. I am a complex human being, I hold multitudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 05:07 PM
1

Yeah, I'm describing a part of why women having preferences is a "problem" in the patriarchy. And why that might manifest as hostility toward women who express their preferences. It's not good!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:59 PM
1

Sounds rough.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:55 PM
–

Yes, men are generally taller than women, and women generally prefer men who are taller than them on top of that. So your couple is quite rare!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:54 PM
5

Idk what you're talking about, I've been desired by loads of women, and I'm a 5'2" disfigured janitor.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:51 PM
0

Yep, damned if you do, damned if you don't. Women having any materialistic preferences at all does not jive with the patriarchal idea of women not having any agency. They are an object to be won, and not a full person with desires of their own. At least that's part of the story.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:40 PM
1

I'm guessing he's the primary caregiver?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:06 PM
2

Oh so most of the responses are YES by that standard 🤷
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 04:03 PM
12

Are you serious? This is PPD, you already know the answer. Women don't care about penises, they don't care about height, they don't care about money, jawlines, machismo, six packs, or any of that stuff. They don't even care about men, really. They only care about a pure soul, which transcends gender altogether.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 03:42 PM
–

You aren't allowed to use half inches that's cheating. Like half birthdays.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 03:18 PM
–

Of couples where the woman is taller than the man
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 03:17 PM
–

I'm not demanding anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 03:17 PM
-3

No, they want status.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 12:09 PM
–

Damn! You're in the 4%.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 11:54 AM
–

How tall are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 11:50 AM
–

I don't give much advice on here. But if I gave advice based on my lived experience I would tell them: "Spend half an hour making an online dating profile and then just talk to women on there normally. It's super easy, you'll have a girlfriend in two weeks if you want one" Which is obviously fucking terrible advice lmao. But if I was incapable of looking outside myself I would think that "just be normal" was good advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 11:47 AM
–

How tall are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 11:41 AM
–

Well since you're on Reddit giving advice I'm NOT taking your advice and I'm going to take advice from people on Reddit instead! wait
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/26 11:35 AM
2

I agree. Even the victims of statutory rape have been forced to pay child support, including retroactive pay for the years before they turned 18. Then there's also rape by deception.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/26 08:44 AM
2

Thank you, same here.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 09:04 PM
4

This is an extremely rare edge case that is only applicable in less than 1% of unintended pregnancies. Why are you trying to apply it to the 99% that don't involve it? because then you can understand that men lack a right, once you separate it from sex. Do men who are raped have any more of a say over their reproduction, even though they didn't consent to sex? They do not.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 04:16 PM
2

I agree. And if you're that concerned about trust and safety don't have sex early on at all. All birth control can fail, it can all be lied about, it can all be used imperfectly and many can be tampered with. So if your only reason you would not have sex with a man who says he is on birth control is because you can't trust men, at that point it's got nothing to do with the birth control anyway, and you shouldn't be having sex early on at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:44 PM
6

Men and women have the same right to have sex. Consent to that is not consent to parenthood. Furthermore, men can also not consent to the sex part if they get raped, and still be held liable for the resulting child. So sometimes they didn't even have that choice. The choice on whether that results in a baby is solely up to the woman. That choice is not the man's.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:41 PM
2

because I can't imagine that calling the clinic with your ons is a real possibility to you I mean it's a real possibility, yes. But not super realistic. Which is why I said this: But I'll grant you, that's a long term relationship step, not a first few dates step. I don't think anyone should be having one night stands if they prioritize trust and certainty anyway. But if you did prioritize those things, then the paperwork would be more of a surefire thing than condoms. The whole context here is …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:39 PM
6

I'm just saying it's something you can do. Not a lot of people do it, but some do ask for STD tests. You're treating it as completely impossible, for some reason. You could do it, you don't want to. You would rather use a condom, that's fine. But why can you trust a man to have stored condoms properly or didn't tamper with them? You can't. If you really can't trust them, then the paperwork is actually more certain than the condom is. So I don't think this is entirely about trust. Condoms are mor…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:32 PM
3

Yeah, exactly, there's always a risk with everything. What risks you choose to tolerate and which you don't does say something, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:25 PM
2

You can just call them with him, obviously. If he's being honest he can verify it with you. If he doesn't want to do that then don't trust him. It's a more certain verification that the condoms were stored properly or not tampered with.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 03:24 PM
3

The guarantee is that you can call the clinic with him to verify the legitimacy. I'll grant you, it's onerous. But like you said, it would take years to get that trust with you, so you've got time to do it. Do you trust him to have stored condoms safely and not have tampered with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 02:00 PM
3

Call the clinic, if you really want to be sure. But I'll grant you, that's a long term relationship step, not a first few dates step. nothing wrong with sticking to condoms in the beginning. Though you are still trusting that they've stored them correctly or didn't tamper with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:59 PM
4

Nobody asks for std tests before having sex on a third date Some do. And that's no reason not to start. and it's extremely easy to fake It is? There's still a risk of stds, so we'd still have sex with a condom Just ask for the STD results too then lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:57 PM
5

You ask for it just like you could ask for proof of an STD test. Many people do that. And if he's capable of carrying condoms with him on a third date, surely he's equally capable of carrying a piece of paper.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:32 PM
4

The most basic formulation is: Do you believe that one individual should functionally have the legally protected right to unilaterally make major life decisions for another functional adult against their will? Probably not, since that's pretty basic autonomy. After that it's just finding the best way of making that happen. That's just legislation and/or tech, but if you believe in the principle then you should at least be open to potential solutions.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:26 PM
3

You could ask for an official lab report or a signed document from a doctor or clinic, like with STD tests. Which could solve one of those issues at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:20 PM
3

You could ask for an official lab report or a signed document from a doctor or clinic, like with STD tests.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:19 PM
12

As someone who does advocate for paper abortions in theory, I think reliable and safe birth control for men goes a long way, maybe the whole way, towards resolving the problem. My entire issue is that I believe in reproductive rights and autonomy. You should have the right to choose whether you reproduce or not, and if you are given no choice you should at least not be held responsible for a choice that wasn't yours. Consent to sex is not consent to parenthood, etc. I also don't believe that som…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:18 PM
1

I must not have understood your point, then. Looking back I think I was focusing too much on this: we'll have to dive deep into the cultural perception but the end game will be "women are below men" which tbf was only a part of what you said. I think I'm too used to people arguing that everything comes back to misogyny and misandry isn't real/doesn't matter, so I kneejerked some responses. If that's not what you're saying though, feel free to restate your point. Or have a nice day!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:09 PM
2

The end game will always be "women are below men" because that is the lens through which you have chosen to view the world. You already defined away the possibility of misandry, but not because of material reality. The sentencing disparity is caused by both misogyny AND misandry. Being seen as more immoral, less worthy of sympathy, and more disposable are the hostile misandry components of the phenomenon. Being seen as more strong and capable is the benevolent misandry side. There is also misogy…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 12:57 PM
2

And more immoral, less worthy of empathy, and disposable.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 11:44 AM
2

No, I understand, sometimes men have bad outcomes because of misogyny. But when men get worse prison sentences for the same crimes, is that because those men were acting too much like women?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 09:11 AM
0

What magically changes when it's dating? How does the underlying logic change so that it's no longer prejudice in this context?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/26 01:16 AM
1

you were the one who compared being bi to a fetish. Didn't do that, your insistence on pretending that I did tells me that you don't care about the truth. No it isn't. It is not biphobic to assume something that is TRUE for most bi people. It IS biphobic to assume that a bi man could be satisfied by being the exact same as a straight man. It IS biphobic to assume that something that may be true for most is true for all of them. True for most literally means that it is NOT TRUE for SOME. If you d…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 06:54 PM
1

I never said bi men should or shouldn't do anything. In fact, that's my entire point. The only thing I am saying bi men have in common is this: they are attracted to both men and women. That's it, because that's all bisexuality necessitates. You are the one implying that all bi men must do or feel a certain way. That because they are bi they must want to tell their wives. I have made no implication about how bi men should act, how all bi men want to act, or how bi men DO act. You have. Repeatedl…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 05:59 PM
1

No, me being smarter than you has nothing to do with me being a man. Once again, I didn't compare being bi to a fetish. Try reading that exchange again, maybe copy and paste it into Chatgpt if you need additional help understanding it. I never once said you should make assumptions based on an entire sexuality. Except that you did: Well, being bi impacts somebody's past, their family, their friends, it can even affect the way somebody thinks about gender. This assumes their attraction means that …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 05:15 PM
1

And? Bi people can be biphobic, clearly. I am the one arguing that you can't make assumptions based on an entire sexuality, and you are the one arguing that you can, in fact, be prejudiced against an entire sexuality. I know which one sounds more biphobic, that's for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 04:58 PM
0

I haven't lost the plot, I'm just not going to keep arguing if you can't actually directly engage with the arguments. Making distinctions is pretty fundamental to understanding something. So, do you acknowledge that behavior and attraction are different things? Or are you incapable of directly answering a direct question?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 04:52 PM
0

I'm not going to dive into anything else unless you actually start processing some information. You have to separate attraction from behavior. Behaviors are actions. It's what you DO. A thought, a feeling, or an attraction is not a behavior. They can lead to behavior, but that doesn't mean they're the same thing. Can you acknowledge that? That behavior requires action, and those aren't actions?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 03:52 PM
1

Yeah dating is discriminatory. What happens when you discriminate only on the basis of a sexuality, and not on any behaviors or looks? You're being biphobic is what happens. And for your vegan example I already answered and explained why, did you forget? Scroll up.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:42 PM
1

Never disclosing it and hiding it are different things. It can legit just never come up, and doesn't have to. Do I have to disclose every single thing I'm attracted to to my partner or I'm closeted in some way? No. That's an assumption you are making about bi people: that they either have to be super out about it and go to events and have LGBTQ friends and all of that... or else they're closeted. That's actually biphobic. And I didn't compare being bi to a fetish, I said a fetish fulfilled both …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:37 PM
0

Attraction is NOT behavior, it is an attraction. They are different words and they mean different things. A behavior is composed of actions. Things that can be observed from the outside. I guess that would make her pedophile-phobic or something. And since pedophilia on it's own is a bad thing, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with it, I'm pedophile-phobic too. But a pedophile who never acts on the attraction is still morally neutral, because behavior and attraction are different.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:30 PM
0

Attraction is not a behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:25 AM
1

Yeah, that's the point. The thing that's enough for you not to date them is not a behavior or a look, it is a sexuality. Because you discriminate based on the sexuality alone, meaning you're biphobic.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:25 AM
1

No, I'm not debating for fun. I'm debating because it's what I believe to be true. What kind of logic is that? I can't believe in what I'm saying because I'm not bi? Can I defend women's rights when I'm not a woman? Being bi does not need to affect their past at all. An attraction to something does not mean your life must revolve around it, or even be affected by it. It can absolutely just remain in your head, exactly like a kink. you do not need to ever date a man to be bi. You do not need to h…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:22 AM
1

But they don't always act on that interest. So the only intrinsic thing is the interest, which isn't a behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 12:14 AM
1

Yeah, that was the answer to your vegan question. You said my answer to your vegan question was the answer to my question. But that doesn't make sense as an answer to my question. So, I'll ask again since you were confused: What's the behavior intrinsic to bi men?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:35 PM
2

Are you suggesting they were force fed? Hit with the fattening ray-gun? Yeah, they probably did things to be fat in one way or another.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:33 PM
1

Oh sorry, I didn't see that you were a different person. My response was still about those qualifiers. What does being bi do that automatically impacts more than just your sex life? I am straight, yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:32 PM
4

Yes, this is it! Like come on, just admit it. It's not even all that bad. I think women have spent so long being the ones making the accusations of bigotry that now that they are on the receiving end for something legitimate they just don't know how to deal with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:24 PM
2

Oh yeah, no is a complete sentence. But it doesn't protect you from the accusation. It's like a store owner putting up a sign saying "no black people" and they swear it's not because they're racist. But when asked for the supposed non-racist reason they refuse to give one... Sorry bud that guy's racist lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:19 PM
1

The behavior intrinsic to bi men is "NO." according to you? Well that doesn't make much sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:16 PM
2

You aren't being harassed for your dating preferences. You are being criticized for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:15 PM
1

I didn't say they were exactly the same thing. I said your two qualifier you gave apply to both. So tell me why being bi needs to be disclosed but fetishes don't? That's the difference we're looking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:14 PM
0

Yeah, you aren't racist. But if you prejudiced ONLY based on the race then it would be, by definition. Bi men do not have any behavior in common, that's the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:11 PM
2

They are at the very least going to have behaviors that made them fat in common. They don't have to be poor behaviors by the way, just behaviors I don't want my partner to have. What behaviors made bi men into bi men?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:10 PM
1

I don't know who's question that was answering, you must have accidentally hit reply to the wrong person. I asked if it was still RACIST.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:08 PM
1

Oh you must have missed where I wrote: "NO." That was my answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 10:06 PM
1

Oh okay. What if I said I would never allow a black person to touch me? Is that not racist anymore?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:45 PM
-1

Stop saying anyone is trying to shame and coerce women into dating bi men. Literally nobody is saying that. It's just a lazy deflection at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:44 PM
0

So see how for you it's not about her being asian, it's about actual indicators that don't rely entirely on race? Like a traditional family? That's something that could indicate behavior. And once the visual aspect is gone for you, you're fine with dating a 1/4 asian. So it's not asian the race that you don't want to date (as much), it's the physical appearance and potential behaviors. If you broke up with her JUST because you found out she's asian but there was no appearance or behavioral aspec…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:44 PM
0

Oh yeah, I agree with you. Men should grow a spine and stop feeding into it. But not all men can afford to do that if they ever want to date, sometimes you gotta do something you don't like to have a chance. That's a societal issue, not an individual one. But anyway, you said men created this issue. That's what I'm pushing back on, men AND women created this issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:36 PM
1

Neither do I. It logically follows that discriminating against a demographic that has no intrinsic looks and behavior in common means that you are discriminating against the one element they have in common. Which is their sexuality. And that's biphobic, no assumptions necessary, the logic follows. But, if there was an answer for it that somehow wasn't biphobic, I would love to hear it. Nobody has been able to produce one. But people have provided PLENTY of reasons that are biphobic.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:27 PM
1

Not enough if you want to prove you aren't biphobic.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:23 PM
0

For being bigots.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:22 PM
1

The question I'm asking you is about race. It's not a cheap gotcha, it's a direct comparison to something that you will understand more intuitively. There's a reason you think it's a cheap gotcha: because you understand the bigotry very well when it applies to black people. What's the behavior intrinsic to bi men?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:21 PM
2

Yeah fat people are going to have some behaviors in common. The things that made them fat. What behaviors made bi men into bi men?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:18 PM
2

Thinking that women can't be criticized by men IS patriarchal. It reinforces the idea that women need to be treated with kid gloves and aren't equal to men in agency and accountability. You should educate yourself more on feminism. And I have heard all the reasons, I know them, and they are all homophobic or biphobic, often rooted in patriarchal ideas. If you have a different reason then present it (you won't, because it will be bigoted).
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:16 PM
1

The fetish applies directly to your two categories of things you shouldn't be able to hide. If there's a difference it's not in those two qualifiers you gave.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:11 PM
3

Well they are prejudices based entirely on their sexual orientation. I would say those probably qualify.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 09:09 PM
2

And women could stop going for it, they just don't want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 07:56 PM
3

Which repulsions towards bi men is not rooted in homophobia or biphobia, in your opinion?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:47 PM
3

And my brand of feminism makes it very clear that upholding patriarchal ideals is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:44 PM
3

Well, let's hear the reasons for it and we can decide!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:42 PM
1

NO. Vegan has intrinsic behaviors to it. I can not want to date someone with those behaviors without being "phobic". What intrinsic behaviors do black people have?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:08 PM
0

And straight women are giving them infinite ammo by avoiding accountability at all costs
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:05 PM
0

Okay, but you agree they're biphobic right?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:03 PM
3

There are plenty of actual non bigoted reasons to not want to date fat people. They look different. Their health is different. Their behaviour is different. Those are things that can be explained by behavior or looks. It's okay to discriminate based on behavior and looks, that's all of dating. What different behavior or looks do bi men all have in common?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:58 PM
1

Do I have to disclose every single weird fetish I have in detail to my girlfriend? Or can I maybe keep some fantasies to myself?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:47 PM
3

And that explanation is bigoted. Biphobia doesn't require hatred, wanting to ban them, or thinking their wrong. All it takes is prejudice. Treating them differently solely on the basis of their sexual orientation. That's all it takes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:44 PM
3

There's nothing magical about dating or sex where suddenly discrimination doesn't exist anymore. If I said I would never allow a black person in my home, that would be racist. I still don't think that people should be forced to let black people into theire homes if they don't want to, it's their home. But saying you would NEVER allow a black person into your home? That's racism.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:39 PM
4

But if you were dating a beautiful 10/10 girl, and then after a few years found out she was 1/4 Asian, would you lose attraction to her?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:34 PM
7

When some people say women can't take accountability this is the kind of thing they're talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:31 PM
4

The real entitlement in this whole situation is some women thinking they are entitled to never be criticized for their romantic choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:28 PM
1

I'm incredibly surprised. I've seen it over and over.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:23 PM
1

You've never seen it on this sub?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:14 PM
2

Why does money work for getting women? If money didn't work on women, you wouldn't have men trying to get women with it. But it does work, because women tend to like it. It's higher status. Both genders participate.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 05:13 PM
2

You have never heard women bringing up how men don't pull their weight in the household when the "paying for the first date" topic is brought up? Wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 02:33 PM
1

Yeah, I uh, didn't say she did. I don't disagree with anything she wrote. She said that he was so close to discovering patriarchy. I'm commenting about how I think many men are like that and could understand patriarchy theory, and would actually agree with feminists. But they won't because one of the most common understandings of patriarchy is one of unilateral oppression where only misogyny can exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 01:17 PM
2

Well how else am I supposed to fill my soul gems? You think my items just stay enchanted for free?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 12:52 PM
-2

Feminists could get SO many men on board with understanding the patriarchy and wanting to dismantle it if they could just give up on one thing. Which is that every bad outcome that ever happens to either gender in the patriarchy is exclusively because of misogyny. I swear this drives away so many men from even wanting to understand what so many feminists have been saying for ages. And they have a point tbh. There's only so many bad outcomes your gender can experience before you start thinking "w…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 12:50 PM
8

Much like almost every gender issue, men and women made it together.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 12:28 PM
0

Those aren't gendered traits, tons of men and women do both categories of those stereotypical behaviors.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 12:11 PM
1

Can you name a gendered trait?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 08:08 AM
8

Biphobia
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 06:20 AM
1

Yes but if one gender has to stick to their gender roles against their will and the other doesn't, then continuing with that dynamic after dating means you are not being treated as equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 05:37 PM
0

So if dating is an unequal power dynamic how will the relationships that come from it be perfectly equal?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 02:28 PM
2

They literally just did the thing you complained about lol "Well because you expect to get all these male entitlements, then I'm owed the female ones!" When you legit just said you don't expect them. Some people just see what they want to see I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 02:14 PM
2

A trans woman joining the military is a trans woman going to perform a traditionally male gender role. "Trans woman" isn't a feminine role, it's a gender. The role they will play is that of a soldier, which is traditionally male.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 02:10 PM
1

Well more importantly the military is a traditionally male institution and being a soldier is a "male" role. So whether a man, woman, non-binary, or whoever else joins, they are still doing a "male" role. If a woman joins she is going against women's roles, and yes it is also still an active thing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 02:06 PM
4

What also doesn't help that one of the arbitrary gendered expectations for men is that they are not victims and shouldn't complain because that's weakness. Building a social movement trying to complain about your victimization is going to be that much harder when that thing goes against your genders script. In that one very specific way, the patriarchy was more primed for accepting feminism than some sort of men's movement.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/26 01:48 PM
1

Yeah I think it's a sign something is important and it's good to keep track. I just don't think men typically consider it romantic for themselves. But tbh I'm not sure men are really socialized to consider what their needs even are or what romance means to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 07:28 PM
1

Oh I see! So because you say you aren't redpill that means your not redpill I got it now. Correction: you aren't a redpiller, you just have a lot in common with redpillers.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 02:01 PM
–

Yeah, we get a taste of her behavior here, but imagine what it must be like to be the husband! I feel bad for him. He valiantly puts up with someone that people with self worth could never tolerate. Really taking a big one for the team. He truly is as generous as she says he is.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 02:34 AM
–

Guess her husband didn't vet for maturity either
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 01:54 AM
–

What, I'm not upset that you keep responding! Its amusing that you can't seem to stop. Anyway, I'm going to go spend some time with my girlfriend. If you're too obsessed to let go, feel free to leave another response lol. But I'm done here. You should probably go spend some time with your husband. Bring up his self esteem a little!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 11:06 PM
–

Aw, you really can't stop responding 🤣 I DID hit too close to home!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 09:44 PM
–

Look, I had enough proof that you were low effort already. You don't need to provide more. Curious why you husband settled for it, but that's all 🤷
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 08:16 PM
–

Yeah, we all have our requirements! Your husband had low enough requirements that you cleared the bar. He could have tried to get a woman who was generous and thoughtful like him, but he didn't have enough self worth to strive for a higher quality woman, and I understand that. You gotta take what you can get. Couldn't be me, though. I didn't make any assumptions, I just noted the facts you told me. Your husband has low standards for generosity in a partner, or at the least didn't vet for it, sin…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 07:51 PM
1

Oh no, I have my own moral compass, thanks. I don't think sexism is acceptable anywhere, including in dating. I'm just curious as to where else you think sexism is acceptable, besides dating?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:48 PM
–

Woah, what's with the hostility? You're the one who told me about your relationship: You didn't demonstrate generosity on your first date, your husband's standards weren't high enough to disqualify you for it. Those are the facts. Like I said, I'm glad that worked for you. Sounds like y'all are a wonderful couple having a grand time. Happy for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:47 PM
1

Does that apply to anywhere else? The workplace maybe? With friends and family? Or is dating the only place where all bets are off and sexism doesn't exist anymore?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:35 PM
–

I was smart enough to vet for generosity when I first started dating my now girlfriend lmao Why did you marry someone who wasn't even smart enough to do that? Ah well, seems like you both have low standards. Guess you really are a good match!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:34 PM
–

Can't stop responding huh? Did something hit too close to home or what?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:46 PM
–

And there's the kind of low effort your husband settled for.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:39 PM
1

So he's not wrong to think that. It's not wrong to think that men are better than women. Personally I think that would be a pretty sexist thing to believe. But I guess in your mind you can be as sexist as you want. Just as long as it's in the context of dating, then right, wrong, and all sexism evaporates into thin air.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:36 PM
0

Yeah, so it's not reciprocal. It's just that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:33 PM
–

What, all I'm saying is that your husband didn't vet for generosity. If he used your standard for vetting generosity he would have never dated you, right? He had low standards and you were lucky that the bar was low enough for you to pass over it. He's lucky that he ended up with a generous partner after all. It all worked out for you guys, that's good! No problem here from me.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:31 PM
–

Sure, he got a girl. Whoop de doo. I'm just sayin' I would never lower my standards enough to go for a girl who didn't demonstrate generosity on a first date. I vet for higher quality. I'm not concerned about it, lots of men have less self respect than I do. Or they're more desperate. I understand if they have to take what they can get, it's no concern of mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:14 PM
–

So he didn't have enough self respect to try for a generous partner, that's all 🤷
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:03 PM
1

Oh sure he can think whatever he wants. But is he right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:02 PM
4

He's a good little conformist. Doing what you're told can be beneficial, you don't need to be smart for that. Dogs figured that one out.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:01 PM
–

Yeah, you're generous to him. But you weren't demonstrating that generosity on the first date. If he was vetting for generosity he would have rejected you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:58 PM
1

If a man thinks that women should always pay on dates because men are better than women, and therefore more deserving of keeping their money, is that man wrong for thinking that?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:52 PM
4

Sure, it makes me feel good when my partner thinks for themselves and has standards. It makes you feel good when your partner conforms to sexist stereotypes that benefit you. Whatever floats your boat!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:27 PM
4

You asked how else, I told you how else. Him paying for your meal only shows that he's willing to pay for your meal. Someone who isn't caring or generous could do it just as easily to get what they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:25 PM
2

Oh okay, so men shouldn't necessarily pay on the first date in your opinion. So then a woman who expects a man to pay no matter what is in the wrong? Btw, who do you think should initiate and approach? Men and women in equal amounts?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:20 PM
–

Yeah, he wasn't your husband on the first date, that's my point. You should be generous with you husband, wife, boyfriend, girlfriend, anyone you are actually dating. Not a stranger on the first date based on your gender. Make sure you've actually understood a comment before saying someone else needs to learn to read, glass houses and all that. The first date was a gamble, indeed. He went out with a woman who didn't pay, and apparently didn't think she ought to pay. So he went out with someone w…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:12 PM
2

So then women should be generous on first dates too. It would mean they enjoy doing nice things for others.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:03 PM
1

That's a no.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:03 PM
4

Generosity and care? You can't think of any other ways? How about remembering important things about you. Genuinely being interested in you. Being generous with their time, with their efforts. A thousand different things. You can do it with money too. But you can also not be generous or caring at all and just use money to get what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:02 PM
-2

By God, are you the only actually secure woman on PPD?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:51 PM
1

Did you have anything of substance to add?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:36 PM
1

Yeah, they love spoiling their WIVES. Not a stranger on a first date. And if they pay for those women on the first date, then those men chose women who did not demonstrate generosity. Those men should have had more self respect than to give them a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:35 PM
0

Will a woman who loves her man and values him try to provide in every sense possible too?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:33 PM
1

I said how is it reciprocal on the first date. I don't know if you'll cover the second date or not. Also, are you saying that a woman is obligated to go on a second date if the man pays for the first? I don't think that's how it works. So who knows if there will be a second date for the woman to return the favor. You can pay on the first date, and she still won't be down for the second. Saying "everything will be 50/50, trust me, but only if you pay first" means that on that first encounter you …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:19 PM
4

Yep, many women love to uphold the patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:02 PM
1

No, splitting meaning no more dates is the opposite of reciprocal. "If you don't pay for me there will be no more dates" isn't reciprocity.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 03:00 PM
2

Yeah that guy was definitely being inflammatory and sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 02:54 PM
1

Yeah, reciprocity is expected. So what's reciprocal about only one gender having to pay on the first date? If one person thinks it denotes generosity, then by their very own standard they are failing to demonstrate generosity. The things you denoted are things both genders should do, based on mutual benefit. And this also can't be about a dynamic you establish later in the relationship, because you might not get a relationship out of it anyway. So on the first date, if the man is expected to pay…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 02:41 PM
1

That all just sounds like you treat him the way you would like to be treated. Aka like a woman. That's because romance is woman coded, and performed by men. You never had to actually learn to romance a man, because everything was handed to you. Men only want one thing. And that's to sit alone in a damp cave and carve animal bones into interesting shapes. That's literally it. /s I'm just kidding sounds you have a lovely relationship and I'm sure he appreciates all that you do for him. I was only …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 02:37 PM
1

You're more red pill than they are lol
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 02:14 PM
1

Self respecting men won't want to date thise women. Quality men are also secure enough to let low quality men get low quality women. Those women weren't in his dating pool anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 02:12 PM
1

Is that how you romance a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:53 PM
3

Well if they describe romance as a performance that men carry out for the benefit of women, then no shit women are gonna want romance lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:52 PM
1

Who takes the first turn?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:48 PM
1

This guy thinks he's blue pill??
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:42 PM
2

Are you sure that YOU aren't red pill? I thought ascribing to sexist social conventions was a red pill thing, and that treating people like equals was a blue pill thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:40 PM
5

Those are not gendered social conventions, those are acts of care you do for loved ones. As a woman you ought also do those things. A man who thinks for himself will recognize the value of doing those things, because they are not just a sexist social convention that you do "just because". A man who pays "because that's what a man does" is just as easily a man who will never do chores at home because that's also "what a man does". Or do you only like social conventions when they benefit you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:37 PM
4

It shows a level of conformity and a lack of self respect, so if you're into that it's cool. It's not how I would define quality, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:31 PM
–

You're generous to your husband. Men should be generous to their wives. Why should you be generous to a complete stranger? Your husband should have been filtering for someone generous too. Instead he tolerated a stingy woman who expected him to pay. He got lucky in the end with a caring and generous wife, but he definitely wasn't vetting for one. So he simply got lucky, it happens. If he had more self esteem he would have vetted properly, but I guess he was desperate and took what he could get. …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:09 PM
3

They will never be able to resolve this contradiction. If paying for dinner means you are generous and caring, that means that women who refuse to pay aren't generous and caring. There's no other way for this to go.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:04 PM
2

And the only way to display that happens to be money, I guess. Lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:03 PM
2

I wanted that egalitarian gal. And I got that egalitarian gal.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:01 PM
0

Yep, some people are sexist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 01:00 PM
0

Yeah, it's not true. And by the same logic it's not true that a man will pay if he really likes the woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:57 PM
2

I'm the same as him. Going 50/50 in the beginning taught me that my soon-to-be girlfriend was fair minded and actually wanted to date me for my own sake, not because she could get something out of it. Now we've moved in together and are taking the next steps. Now that I have come to love and respect her, I definitely spoil her. But because she loves and respects me, she does the same. If she was a demanding, entitled stranger? Never would have gotten here.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:53 PM
-2

This has nothing to do with going 50/50 or not and everything to do with you not having enough backbone to break up with a guy you don't even like.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:49 PM
1

Wait, are you still in a relationship with this guy??
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:47 PM
-3

And a man of quality will also be looking for quality. A woman who expects men to pay for her isn't a woman of quality. How you're not understanding that is wild.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:45 PM
0

Should a man who is interested also be available when she texts or calls and check in on her and make sure she is good?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:43 PM
1

It's probably more of a symptom of bigger problems than a "problem" on it's own. And depends on how you define a problem, anyway. I would say it's either or both: 1. Going to result in less human well-being 2. Or is happening as a result of lower human well-being From my relative point of view, lower human well-being is a problem. I think people liking, trusting, and wanting to date each other is both a sign of greater well-being AND something that leads to greater well-being. And that makes for…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:40 PM
0

You saw some responses by men saying they will treat a girl they really like? Did you know that men are not a monolith? I don't think you want us to start judging women by the things some of them say online...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:33 PM
6

I don't need data to question an assertion. It's for the one making the claim to prove it. If I believed you without any proof that would be blind faith. If I dismissed you without proof that would be blind faith too. But I did neither, I asked what you are basing your opinion on, that's different. It's also not a dismissal. And you did make an assertion. Your assertion was that you have enough data to come to some conclusions about the "goodness" or lack thereof of men. I wanted to know if that…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 12:19 PM
7

I'm not the one making an assertion about men, you are. I'm asking if you are basing your assertion on only personal experience or if you are attempting any form of objectivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 10:30 AM
3

Data based on studies that control for bias? Or data based on your anecdotal experience?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 10:25 AM
9

But you don't have data. You have biased impressions formed from anecdotal experiences. If you dated women you could also end up thinking that there are no good women. Because "good" is subjective and relative, and if you think there are no good men and everything is their fault, you would probably end up feeling that way about anyone you dated. Do you think every man in a relationship is actually bad, and the women who are with them are just delusional about it? Or do you think they have a defi…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 10:10 AM
2

It's not hard. The irony is that "It's all men until it's no men" is a request for men to "take accountability" and stop tolerating bad behavior from their fellows towards women. this reads as a defense of that phrase. But if it's not then we're in agreement!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/26 11:25 PM
0

I don't understand, do you agree with "It's all X until it's no X" or not? Because for men you seem to think that it's a call for accountability, but for women "just you" should be enough to count for all women being accountable?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/26 10:04 PM
1

Show me the study the graph came from.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 05:04 PM
1

A graph isn't a study. State your argument and then give me a study that directly supports that argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 01:22 PM
1

Give me a single study that directly supports your point. You say women's increase in income caused birth rates to drop, more so than men, even: More for women as their incomes have risen substantially. But that this increase in income was not tied to them gaining the right to work? Prove it. How did women gaining the right to work have nothing to do with increasing their income? Give me a single study. You are so lost that you contradict yourself in your own comments. If you control for increas…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:56 PM
1

More for women as their incomes have risen substantially. So the effect is not symmetrical, whether it was "rights" or not. But it still was rights. What caused substantial increases in women's income over the years? Considering they used to not be allowed to have a job, and now they can due to an increase in their rights? Their income increased because they gained the right to have a fucking income. Holy shit. Also, you already said increase in education and income is the best proxy for rights.…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 08:36 PM
1

Increases in education and income are synonymous with women's rights, since women were barred from education and earning their own income. Increases in women's status are DIRECTLY due to the increase they had in rights. If you don't argue against that, then my point is made. So rights are a nebulous concept, so you will use increases in income and education to measure it... so why can't I use increases in education and income as a measurement for women's rights? I Mean: You clearly do not know m…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 06:43 PM
1

Ah, well as far as this thread that I have been involved with has gone, this is the first time you have actually made this argument. You have NOT been saying that they are symmetrical factors, you just said that it is not a unique factor, which has nothing to do with the weight of either factor. This is why you should communicate more explicitly. So what proof do you have that the intuitive answer is wrong? Show me the data that you so confidently base your opinion on. Besides intuition I have s…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 09:35 PM
1

Ah, well as far as this thread that I have been involved with has gone, this is the first time you have actually made this argument. You have NOT been saying that they are symmetrical factors, you just said that it is not a unique factor, which has nothing to do with the weight of either factor. This is why you should communicate more explicitly. So what proof do you have that the intuitive answer is wrong? Show me the data that you so confidently base your opinion on. Besides intuition I have s…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 09:19 PM
1

Oh, well like they already said birth control and abortions make it a larger factor than men's increase in rights would be. Also women have been the more historically oppressed gender, so an increase in their rights and ability to choose will have a disproportionate effect on birth rates compared to men, since they gained more rights over time proportionately. So since it's not symmetrical, it's valid to single them out as a disproportionate effect. They also explicitly said it's not a reason to…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 08:31 PM
1

And? They are right that it's a factor. In the same comment they said they don't agree with their prescriptions or think it justifies touching women's rights. If conservatives said the sky was blue I would say they are right about that too! like I said, if you think they are using this as a justification to attack women's rights, then make that argument. I think they're making a descriptive statement. You have disagreed with the descriptive statement seemingly in order to attack a prescriptive s…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 05:23 PM
1

And? They are right that it's a factor. In the same comment they said they don't agree with their prescriptions or think it justifies touching women's rights. If conservatives said the sky was blue I would say they are right about that too! like I said, if you think they are using this as a justification to attack women's rights, then make that argument. I think they're making a descriptive statement. You have disagreed with the descriptive statement seemingly in order to attack a prescriptive s…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 05:23 PM
3

Aight, glad we agree on all that then.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:31 PM
1

Go back and just read what was literally written in the thread. Just the actual words written without making any assumptions and guessing at what their secret motive is. Maybe they ARE doing an evil dogwhistle to attack women's rights, so make that argument instead, then. But based on what was literally written down you are just flat out wrong on both of the points you actually made.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:29 PM
1

That's fine, but in the comment I replied to you were just plainly wrong saying that it was not a factor at all. It is. This discussion led from that comment. You were also wrong when you said that the OP wrote that exclusively the expansion of women's rights led to lower birth rates. They never said it was exclusive, that was an assumption you made.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:15 PM
1

Gotta be honest, the last time I said I tried... I didn't actually try. Boy what a boondoggle this turned out to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:09 PM
6

Like the other commenter said, they want to be desired by women the way they themselves desire women. And I think women want to be desired the way women desire men. I think women often fear that men desire them only for their bodies and looks and not for their personality and competence. Conversely, I think men fear that women only want them for the utility they can offer women, and never desire them just for them. I think since men and women get lots of desire for their utility and looks respec…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 03:02 PM
1

Well, when you wrote that comment it didn't seem like you were aware of the argument, since you provided evidence for a frequency argument and not a magnitude argument. I don't disagree with your later comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 02:57 PM
1

You said I don't believe its a factor. Which would also be wrong. He said it's a factor and singled it out because abortions and birth control make it a bigger factor. But highlighting one factor doesn't mean they think it's the only factor. You, however, said you don't think it's a factor at all, because it happens with men too.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 02:56 PM
1

Also, I can recognize that a man is attractive or sexy even and that still doesn't mean I'd want to ever have sex with him. Well this is part of the disconnect. I won't speak for all men, but if I find a woman attractive or sexy, that means I would want to have sex with her. Sexy = I would have sex with them. It's the same thing. I could learn something about them that makes me not want to have sex with them. But then that's no longer a visual only thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:40 PM
2

Also, I can recognize that a man is attractive or sexy even and that still doesn't mean I'd want to ever have sex with him. Well this is part of the disconnect. I won't speak for all men, but if I find a woman attractive or sexy, that means I would want to have sex with her. Sexy = I would have sex with them. It's the same thing. I could learn something about them that makes me not want to have sex with them. But then that's no longer a visual only thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:39 PM
5

Also, I can recognize that a man is attractive or sexy even and that still doesn't mean I'd want to ever have sex with him. Well this is part of the disconnect. I won't speak for all men, but if I find a woman attractive or sexy, that means I would want to have sex with her. Sexy = I would have sex with them. It's the same thing. I could learn something about them that makes me not want to have sex with them. But then that's no longer a visual only thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:39 PM
2

Ok hang on Edit: I tried harder, still not working
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:33 PM
2

That's not the argument. Many women would struggle, but it's on a scale. All else being equal, the smaller the man, the better your chances. It's not like every single woman is so outmatched that they can never fight back against any man no matter how small or frail they are. So yes, it absolutely makes sense. That being said, it is a very small factor in totality and I wouldn't expect women to select based on that unless safety was the one and ONLY factor that they selected for. like someone el…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:31 PM
3

I don't think they're arguing that tall men are more dangerous in terms of frequency, but in terms of capacity. Would you rather have to fight a small guy or a big guy, all else being equal? The small guy, right? So if you prioritize safety above all else (which I know is not what is being said) you would tend to go for short guys. Because if one of them ends up assaulting you, the tall one will be more dangerous in that scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:23 PM
1

Not working
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:18 PM
4

But that's because they have experienced enough of the non-visual attractive aspects of the man to be very sexually attracted to them. But it's only 1-10% of men who are attractive enough to not need any of that, just their looks alone is enough for a woman to be sexually attracted enough to want to have sex with them. And that's what most men won't experience. They can experience desire in a relationship, but it will be as a result of a bunch of non-visual factors (plus enough visual ones) that…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:16 PM
1

Canada does not have weak social welfare though
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 11:27 AM
8

The comment you were responding to was asking if you wanted to move in together but not be common law married. So in Canada you don't have that option. If you want to live in Canada and move in together, you are forced to be common law married 🤷 Simple as. I don't know why you act like some things aren't forced on you when they are 🤷
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 01:40 AM
1

Yeah
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 01:36 AM
3

You are automatically common law married just because you live together in Canada.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 01:27 AM
2

Yeah, I know. They're the ones I date!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/26 01:06 AM
3

Lol okay. I do just fine with women, thanks. You must be thinking of someone else. And the women I have dated have wanted me, just as I have wanted them. We both put in effort, because we both liked each other, and I had something they wanted too. I didn't have to pay them. Also, I don't know where you got that I was blaming women. I think men should stop trying to date women who don't want them, if anything I'm blaming men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 09:48 PM
6

Sure, it's nice to pay for others. But I don't think one gender should always pay for the other. If I pay for something, it's because I want to be nice, not because I'm a man. But that also means that my partner should want to be nice too, and pay at roughly an equal rate.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 08:54 PM
9

Yeah I think men need to up their standards and not settle for just any woman. Don't settle for a woman who will only date you if you pay her. Grow a spine and date a woman who actually wants you!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 08:48 PM
1

Can you expand on that?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 08:43 PM
6

I'm talking about when you are dating, not necessarily the very first time you lay eyes on each other. By then you've talked enough to have a sense of each other, you've seen each other, you know a bit about each other. After that it's entirely reasonable for both people to want to meet each other equally enough that one doesn't need additional compensation to go through with it. Like if someone is so on the fence about going on dates with me that I have to sweeten the pot by paying for and plan…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 06:21 PM
9

I don't date women who are lukewarm about me.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 06:14 PM
6

Why is it unrealistic? I want a woman to want me as much as I want her. And I have gotten that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 06:13 PM
21

I want to do my half. I want to pay for my half, I want to plan my half, I want to initiate my half. Dating is supposed to be mutually beneficial, getting to know each other should be equally desired by both people. One person should not require additional compensation, they should want it just as much.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 05:53 PM
22

Not wanting to do everything for you isn't being lazy. It's called having standards and a lot of men are too desperate to have any.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 05:03 PM
1

So then men's rights expanding would also be a factor? That doesn't make expansion of women's rights not a factor anymore just because it also happens with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 01:36 PM
1

Well no. A marriage where one person does not contribute a proportionate amount would not be 50/50. So someone who expects the other to pay for all the dates, vacations, etc. but never pays for any themselves would not be 50/50.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 09:19 AM
1

I am not saying that one is "the" victim, and I'm not trying to say that one is worse than the other. Also, shared custody is not my solution, like I said, I don't have a solution. Shared custody doesn't make up for lost years, and custody should be decided on based on what is best for the child, not as a compensation to one parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 09:16 AM
1

Honestly, I don't have a solution. I have no idea how you compensate for lost time with your children. I just find it interesting that in the case of one parent staying home with the kids, that is the only parent who is considered to have sacrificed, and to the point that the law will step in to compensate them.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:06 AM
1

I mean, yeah, you can still have a good relationship. But you have to compensate there, just like how a stay at home parent can manage to come out of things with a successful side business if they work at it. But whether you missed out on career opportunities or your children's milestones, you're not getting that time back. If you can acknowledge that both make a sacrifice, and currently only one gets compensated (alimony), then that's really all I'm saying tbh. I don't have a prescription or so…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/26 01:03 AM
4

I don't think that should be the solution, kids do best with 50/50 when both parents are good. I don't have a solution at all, btw. It just seems to me that two people are making a sacrifice, but only one gets compensated for their sacrifice. Or even recognized as having sacrificed at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 06:12 PM
4

That doesn't make up for any lost time. You don't get any of that back, you don't get to have the strong foundation with your kids the way the other parent does. And now it's 50/50 custody, but financially one is paying the other to make them whole. I'm not saying there is a solution to this btw. I'm just wondering why a person who works to support their family is not seen as sacrificing something very important, whereas the person who stays home with the kids is seen as sacrificing their career…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 06:09 PM
4

No, I don't see it as punitive, I see it as restorative as well. I think each made sacrifices, and each deserve some kind of compensation for what they sacrificed. It's not malicious, it's wondering why only one sacrifice is seen as valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 06:05 PM
6

Yeah, it means proportionate contributions. If one person spends 50% of their income on housing and bills, the other person is also putting in 50% of their income. But those numbers can be different.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 01:43 PM
10

This kind of reminds me of alimony. If someone gives up their career opportunities to take care of the kids at home, they should be compensated for that, sure. But what about the person who gave up all of that time with their kids as they were growing up, to focus on supporting the family financially? How do you compensate one parent being a less active part of their kids lives, becoming the "other" parent? I don't ever hear anyone talk about how that should be compensated. And I think that's a …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/26 01:40 PM
–

They would rather just pretend like they never made the claims that keep getting proven wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 08:10 PM
–

Damn, no response to this huh. Makes sense since the last well thought out response they took their time to make ended up being absolute garbage too.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 08:09 PM
1

No. Everyone has to answer right away >:(
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:54 PM
1

Damn, no response to that huh.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 01:05 PM
1

Yeah, agreed!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 03:28 PM
6

Well dang, I thought you just said that this wasn't created by women and is a man issue. But I'm glad we agree that both participate lol. Also I was talking more about the context of the op, so dating stuff like approaching, and not sexual stuff. But it absolutely does still apply in the same way. Much magnified in severity though, so I see less of an excuse for men to push in sexual contexts than I do for "dating" ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 02:01 PM
4

I have to disagree with you there. Just like with every social issue, both genders have played a part in creating this phenomenon. Men aren't accepting "no" Except that women don't usually say "no". They usually say something way more ambiguous, and often something that a woman who is interested in you would also say. Like " I can't today" or "I'm not ready" or "I would but for X reason I can't". And some guys aren't able to read the room well enough to know if that's an excuse because she's not…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:41 PM
–

Men secure their orgasms nearly every time they have sex, men are great at sex! But women can't even manage to orgasm? Sounds like women really suck at sex if they can't even do the effort to secure their own orgasm and need men to do it for them. And then they blame men for their own deficiency? Women lack accountability. /S
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 12:52 PM
–

This entire post is all anecdotes all the way down. Not much to discuss so far, everyone is just retorting with their own anecdotes about how they feel it's one gender or another doing the bad stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:04 PM
-3

I mean, is that all just because "she does a better job"? Because the job would be done if you did it, but it would annoy her to not have it done the way she wants. Anyway, I'm not going to speak to your relationship, but I do find a lot of the time "better at it" just means "the way the woman wants it". Which has more to do with pickyness and control than simply doing a better job. I do think that comes from social pressures telling women that they are more responsible for the household, not ju…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 07:11 PM
1

But you might end up finding someone who would paraglide more interesting or even attractive. I mean, that's a cool and exciting person, they have traits that could lead you to doing things you could only fantasize about! They don't actually have to paraglide, you don't even have to cognitively recognize that they have the capacity to paraglide. But they would still probably seem cooler to you. Like, it probably says something somewhere is all I'm saying. It's not an excuse to push you into para…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 01:59 PM
–

Yeeeep. I've been beaten over the head with so much feminist stuff my entire life, that I internalized it and learned. Now when I use feminist theory to identify ways in which men are getting screwed or, heaven forbid, ways women could improve all I get is "no, not like that". Too late suckers, nobody gets to be sexist now!
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:58 PM
3

I imagine it's not any more interesting or dopamine inducing for girls. So do you think that the way boys are socialized is entirely responsible for this? Do you also think that schools are structured in such a way that boys might also have a natural disadvantage? Or that maybe some positive aspects of male socialization is not valorized in school, but that positive aspects of female socialization is valorized? I know I experienced that learned helplessness when I was a boy in school. One thing …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:07 PM
1

I find this topic really interesting, the whole domestic chore gender divide, I mean. Obviously loads of women have stories about men not pulling their weight, of needing her to manage them, of weaponized incompetence and learned helplessness. But then so many men have a similar story of doing chores their way and their partners always having a problem with it. Or of their partners insisting on the importance of something that the men didn't find important at all. I know for myself that I used t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:26 PM
3

Can you expand on that a bit? How do you see it get ingrained?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:12 PM
3

Theoretically, if women were damaging their relationships with an erotica addiction, how would we even tell? What would that look like? Because it's pretty easy to tell with men, at least in comparison. Maybe for women it could manifest in unrealistic expectations of their partners, which would be a lot harder to pinpoint but still very damaging. The thing with the romance novels is that it can give you unrealistic expectations of men being rich, tall, perfect romancers, always in control, etc. …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 11:59 AM
1

It's tough. Because on the one hand you're right that there are men who would use that info to justify pressuring women (but tbh, a person like that is probably going to do it whether they have an excuse or not). But on the other hand, by saying that all this romance and fantasy has nothing to do with things that women like (when it very clearly does) just makes it look like women are lying about it. And then the redpill guys will just use that as an excuse anyway. I think it's never a good poli…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 11:48 AM
6

Now this is something we can finally agree on lol
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 05:54 PM
8

She does it so often and so consistently that I don't think it's in bad faith. Only a true believer could keep this up for so long without getting bored and moving on eventually. But you know, I kind of like it. Lilith is like our PPD reverse mascot: instead of cheering she goes on unhinged rants, and you know not to take it too seriously.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 05:52 PM
2

No, that's personal hygiene, which doesn't typically get brought up during discussions of unequal house work, child care, and mental load.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/26 12:10 AM
2

We are talking about homemaking and childcare, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 10:46 PM
2

Yeah, I like the conversations where people actually try to explore a subject too! It almost never happens, and I like the fighting too, obviously. But sometimes it gets tiring talking to bad faith brick walls all day. I think the nuclear family and loss of third spaces is a huge contributor for sure. Also, grandparents used to have a central role in raising kids, and now it is considered shameful to live with your parents into adulthood. So we have: -Socialization pushing men and women to under…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:45 PM
2

Unfortunately yeah, probably. I would love it if that turned out not to be the case, because a purely sociological phenomenon is easier to solve. But we know how much hormones affect people, and men are pumped full of testosterone. Men are way stronger, so even if men and women engaged in violence exactly at the same frequency, men will be doing damage that will register more often.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:34 PM
1

Yeah, it has loads of factors that contribute to it. It's really complex, and I've heard some talk about estrogen causing diffuse awareness compared to testosterone that causes single focus, so maybe there's even a biological component to it. But right now the mainstream script seems to just be that men need to do more. And that's pretty much it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:23 PM
2

Yeah that was me who said paper abortions can be pre-conception. It's a topic I tend to fight about a lot on here, but in that thread you and the OP actually seemed to consider my take, which stood out! Usually people just call me evil for wanting men to abandon their children and all that. And as for the cleanliness thing, that's totally not the direction I thought you would go in, haha! I hadn't heard of that immune system thing before. I've been thinking about the whole domestic labor thing a…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 06:50 PM
4

I'm pretty sure I've seen you actually change your mind and actually contend with arguments before. Was it with you that we talked about paper abortions being filed pre-conception? Anyway I'm curious to hear how your mind has changed on these issues, particularly on how men and women deal with cleanliness. I have a few ideas of my own on that front!
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 06:19 PM
3

Dang, I would like this lady. Half my arguments on here are about how patriarchy shouldn't be interpreted as just a top down oppressor-oppressed dichotomy where any bad thing that happens to men is actually just misogyny. At least not anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 01:59 PM
6

It's really hard to strike that balance. I think men have seen a whole bunch of shitty stuff happen under the banner of feminism, and god knows women have seen lots of shitty stuff from the MRA crowd. So there's a knee jerk response to see an enemy when that label comes up.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 01:56 PM
3

He'll yeah, keep up the good fight! Every time I hear a woman criticize the man vs bear thing my blood pressure drops a point. I think that whole discourse was actually pretty damaging. I will join you in the trenches to fight under the centrist banner. Well... until we have a disagreement on a single issue and then we can become bitter enemies.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 01:53 PM
-1

I really don't know about that. I think it really depends on the specific thing being talked about, and dating is a broad category. I think both men and women intuitively feel like they take more blame, because that's what sticks with you. That's why I would rather look at actual metrics we have studies on. Men being seen as more agentic and more responsible for their actions is a societal fact, as far as we can tell. Obviously that's a trade off for being seen as more capable, and I think that …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 11:56 AM
2

Fair enough. But if one side is "held to account" less societally, then they regularly escape accountability. Is there a very big difference between escaping accountability and not taking accountability? Like, for example, when men reinforce patriarchal ideas in dating, they get called out for it, at least by progressives. When women reinforce patriarchal ideas I often see "that's just a preference" or that women were socialized that way so it's not really their fault. Anyway, I don't have a sup…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 11:50 AM
-2

On an individual basis? I agree. on a societal basis I think men are seen as having more agency and women as having less. While that means it's usually nicer to be a man, it also means that men tend to take more blame than their fair share and women tend to take less. Like with the sentencing disparity for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/26 09:12 AM
1

Ok well dang I feel like I do see that one in real life. That's a pretty mainstream one, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:26 AM
1

Only one of us is against giving people reproductive rights. I think men and women should both have reproductive rights, you don't. I don't think that says anything about your gender, just you. So far only one of is has been against equal rights and actively encourages comparing a gender to wild animals. And it wasn't me :)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:10 AM
1

Oh I agree that would be horrible. Good thing it would be done when there isn't a child yet! Just like any other abortion. Now what would really be horrible would be women trying to keep men away from their reproductive rights, and to instead continue to unilaterally make that decision for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 12:30 AM
1

Wait so you, a woman say men are sociopathic and cruel? I thought this whole comment chain was you talking about how men are the ones who say nasty things about women? But jeez between this and the bear thing, and now wanting to deny men reproductive rights on top of it, it's starting to seem like women say some really vile stuff about men too... I guess you changed my mind. I thought only men said bad stuff about women, but you're living proof that wasn't the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 11:23 PM
0

I didn't ignore it, I pointed out another horrible thing men did which was comparing women to bears. But then you corrected me, apparently it was women who said that stuff. And apparently the question had nothing to do with comparing men and bears, it was just "would you prefer a slow death or a fast death". Which I just completely misremembered I could have sworn the question was asking about whether you would prefer encountering a man or a bear in the woods. Which would have been a comparison,…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 06:58 PM
1

Oh, the question they asked women was "would you rather die quickly or slowly?". That's crazy I could have sworn the question was different.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 05:31 PM
1

Yeah, so we better get to work, lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 05:29 PM
1

Oh wait it was WOMEN comparing men to wild animals?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 04:49 PM
1

Good answer!
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:36 PM
3

And thank the gods for that. Can you imagine if everyone was like us? Wouldn't get anything done.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:34 PM
1

He is now my fiancé. Congratulations! But how big are his hands 🧐
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:33 PM
1

And?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:28 PM
1

While I agree with your first point, I think you can do both. Feminists managed to change the whole world after all! The problem is when someone says everything is hopeless until the world changes, or on the other hand when someone says that you bear all the personal responsibility for your entire situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:27 PM
4

Yeah, this is a gender wars debate sub where only the most deranged weirdos go to enter fights that would leave them friendless if done irl. Of course nobody agrees with eachother and say things nobody would say in real life 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 03:22 PM
1

That's not detracting from what I said either.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 02:59 PM
1

It also says MRA
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 01:51 PM
0

Yeah I remember when men compared women to bears, and said they would prefer encountering the bear. Men really believed that women were so awful that they were worse than wild animals, and likely to give them a more gruesome fate. Can't believe men would say such things, but here we are.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 01:51 PM
1

He'll nah, I take men's side all the time. In fact, I usually am fighting on the side of men, because the mainstream is already heavily tilted in support of women. But that doesn't mean I'm going to endorse everything men and redpillers say because they go way too far in the other direction very often.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 01:43 PM
2

I'm already in a committed relationship and never really struggled with dating. I think I come here mostly because I like arguing, but also to push back against some narratives I find harmful. The hope is that I can get some people to find a middle ground instead of diving 100% in to one toxic cesspool or the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 01:16 PM
4

And they have children with the first man who pays for a date?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 10:09 PM
1

Yep, women have always been some of the patriarchys strongest soldiers.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 04:22 PM
5

I wouldn't have settled for anything less. Nothing wrong with your husband being a little less ambitious though, some people prefer to play it safe and take what they can get!
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 04:12 PM
6

Oh well if it is such a basic kind gesture, then why wouldn't my dream girl also want to do that with me? Otherwise how can I know that she is interested? It's just a super basic not over-the-top gesture, right? So if everyone should do it to show kindness and interest, it's not impressive, nor is it gendered. I am also in my 30s and married. I already have my dream girl. She's not a shallow materialist, not is she a sexist. It took a lot more than free dinner to impress her, it took substance. …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 02:30 PM
7

Nope because that wouldn't be the way to impress my dream girl. Good chemistry, good conversation, common interests, talents... That's what a woman of quality will be impressed by.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 02:02 PM
9

Are you okay with all the norms in our culture where women are disadvantaged?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 02:00 PM
15

Nope, my dream girl would pay for her half and be an egalitarian who wants to undo gender norms. Why would an entitled sexist be my dream girl??
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 01:50 PM
4

So since women typically pay on dates much less often than men, I guess that means women are the most disagreeable of all.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 01:47 PM
1

Was that a question for me or the other person?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/26 11:29 AM
2

I don't know how much is biological and how much is socialization, but more often men seem to have a greater propensity for singular obsessive focus. Like just really throwing away their own health and relationships to achieve... Something. Sometimes it's something really innovative that helps society. But who knows if any of that is true I'm just spitballing.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 04:18 PM
7

How does this hypothetical prove what you're trying to prove? That hypothetical yesterday was ass for making their point and this hypothetical is ass for making yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 04:02 PM
2

It's not satisfying to me at all. I want gender equality, and I do want men and women alike to be able to challenge the patriarchy and change. I just don't need to use bigotry to do it, and I don't believe it helps move towards that goal. Quite the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:51 PM
2

Oh I accept that many self proclaimed feminists and progressives had absolutely no problem using bigoted and dehumanizing rhetoric. As a feminist, I refuse to endorse or defend that kind of rhetoric. I don't think bigotry is a valid tactic, regardless of the target.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:30 PM
-1

I don't agree. I don't think women feel disgust towards themselves when they accomplish things, I think they feel disgust towards men when men fail to accomplish things. Or at least, that's what the socialization pushes towards.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:46 PM
2

Yeah nah the man vs bear thing was indefensible. That's one thing that people just have to stop running defense for.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:35 PM
10

How does that respond to my comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 01:31 PM
51

Even in your hypothetical you described men respecting women's bodily autonomy. If they think that the women should not be forced, then they are respecting their bodily autonomy. Being upset that the women aren't pairing up is not infringing on the women's rights. Just like being upset at what someone is saying isn't infringing on their free speech. Trying to use social pressure to get someone to behave differently isn't infringing on a right, it is one of the most basic functions of society, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 12:33 PM
–

Yeah I think the loss of third spaces is a REALLY big factor. I think men are socialized (and perhaps biologically) less equipped to build communities in an atomized society where everyone can stay home. I also think that some of the skills and value that men were more able to bring to communities is now either unnecessary or contracted out. There is also the fact that people grow on you. Women typically need to warm up to someone a bit to build romantic interest, and third spaces forced that co…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 11:29 AM
6

The identity of the person in power doesn't matter much, what matters is whether they perpetuate a system. A man can refuse to promote women and a woman in the same position can refuse to promote women because they both hold patriarchal views. It would be systemic misogyny manifesting either way. Not disagreeing with you necessarily, just saying that whether it's a man ass or a woman ass sitting on the throne it doesn't change the system, nor does it define it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 08:28 PM
1

I'm about a month older than my girlfriend. I abuse that power dynamic by telling her "you'll understand when you're my age" during disagreements.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 05:45 PM
–

Oh yeah, I think the researchers did have a clear idea of what they meant. I do not think that the respondents necessarily knew what the researchers meant, since so many of these tactics are very open to interpretation. Presumably even more so in the questionnaire (which we cannot have a look at afaik). And when I say seduction I meant it very broadly. Like on a date you're trying to seduce each other ideally. I'm sure there's a better word.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 10:07 PM
–

Everyone has biases but not everyone works on confronting them, so good on you for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:18 PM
–

EVERY woman starts as a woman who doesn't want to have sex with you lol. That's the whole point of seducing someone, so even that wording seems like it could apply to pretty much every situation. None of my girlfriends wanted to have sex with me as a stranger right off the bat, that's for sure. So even that clearly stipulated thing isn't clear and can literally be interpreted as applying to almost all dating. And yeah studies that rely on questionnaires have loads of problems in the first place,…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 03:03 PM
–

Yeah the study is garbage. I haven't found how the original questionnaire was worded, but I would like to see that. Because even as it stands now I could apply like 10 of these "tactics" to how I met my ex, which was 100% consensual and above board. So if they were worded even more vaguely I could see how respondents could answer with totally normal dating scenarios and the researchers (who I definitely think are trying to push a narrative) could interpret those answers to fit their model.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:30 AM
–

I've read it, they do.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:24 AM
–

Because so many other parts of the study do not belong I have to wonder how the questionnaire was worded. Because “Gradually pushed verbally or physically until you got what you wanted,” can just be "I talked to her all night". I can see how so many of these could be interpreted to fit non nefarious scenarios. Hell, my friends introduced me to my ex (friends helped) I kept talking to her all night (gradually pushed verbally) made physical contact (and physically), I certainly didn't think she wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:20 AM
2

These unstated expectations due to upbringing are responsible for so much friction. So often you hear "I shouldn't have to tell you" or "it's common sense" in reference to some normative belief you have NEVER heard of before. And then they won't even tell you what those beliefs are because "he should just know". I know women aren't the only ones who do this, but for sex and housekeeping I think it's a lot more frequent.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 01:47 PM
1

It's what I've been complaining about
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 02:16 PM
5

"Sex is so much worse for women because I refuse to do any of the things that would make it better" lol
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 02:03 PM
8

Thaaank you! Like damn if I listened to Reddit I really would think that all women hate sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:58 PM
1

No, it's like giving one up for adoption or having an abortion. There is no child yet when you sign a paper abortion. You don't think women have been acting like sex offenders this whole time, do you?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:17 AM
1

Condoms can and do fail regularly. Men get raped. Conversations mean nothing when it comes to ones rights, the woman can change her mind. And besides that, consent to sex should not mean consent to parenthood. Currently that only applies to women. Women should not be the only ones who can engage in sex without tacit agreement to parenthood. This is a fundamental reproductive right that is lacking for men and condoms do not solve it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 09:11 AM
3

So to your first point, I think that is a false equivalence. not every gendered difference is the result of systemic bias, of course, but it doesn't mean that you can dismiss the ones that are bias because there are some that aren't. For example, if men have lower life expectancy mainly due to testosterone, that is a gender divide that would not be due to systemic misandry. You've pointed out some stats that point to biological and interpersonal divides in hetero relationships, not systemic bias…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 10:05 AM
0

Can't be perfectly equal, but we can make it more equal. The inequality of a our bodies explains why a man cannot force a woman to have or not have a child, that's bodily autonomy. It does not explain why a woman has unilateral say on whether the man is held responsible for her choice. That is a lack of reproductive right. Women would still have their unequal say with paper abortions, which is the unilateral decision on if the child comes into the world or not, and men will never have a say ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 05:29 PM
–

And I believe anyone should have a choice over their reproduction. Look at us, wanting people to have rights!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 03:03 PM
1

Yeah, lots of things are registered. Just like how nurses are registered like sex offenders are registered. Lawyers are registered like sex offenders too. Anyway, glad you're on board for paper abortions!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 03:02 PM
1

Yeah we need a registry just like how public servants are registered. Glad we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:58 PM
–

don't have a child Yeah that's a great idea. Currently only women have that choice so let's work on getting that for men too :) Maybe you're pro-life since you're using the same talking points. But I'm pro-choice so I believe that consent to sex is not consent to parenthood.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:57 PM
0

Financial abortion filed before conception is not abandoning an already existing child. It's absolving you of responsibility for an eventual child. Just like how a regular abortion absolves you of being responsible for a child. I didn't say birth certificates are public, I said who your parents are (which is registered on a birth certificate) is public. I don't know why you keep bringing up that we would need the public registry for men who want financial abortions with me. Yes, I agree, it's li…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:53 PM
–

That's right! And women shouldn't have the right to unilaterally decide whether men become parents. Good thing paper abortions wouldn't interfere with women's reproductive right or bodily autonomy whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:47 PM
2

Women already have regular abortion in this hypothetical, they already have their protected rights. Why in the world would they go on the registry? That makes no sense. The parents of a child as registered on a birth certificate is not a confidential document. You can literally look up who someone's parents are, it's not confidential. And if people don't want to have sex with people on the registry then that's their choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 01:59 PM
2

Or much like anyone registers for any number of things. Just like putting your name on a birth certificate is registering you as a parent. People can already look you up for all sorts of things, just like any public servant for example. If women don't have access to abortions then paper abortions shouldn't be an option either, obviously. So women should have no need to register. I guess they can if they want for fun, but I think registering should also come with a decent fee, so I don't see why …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 01:47 PM
3

Why is it delusional? And it won't be everyone, just the men who want the paper abortion. You file the paper abortion on your own, then whoever is dating you can look it up to see if you're registered. It's not like you would have to write up a two person contract every time you want to have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 01:23 PM
2

I don't know what the cost should be, it's difficult to quantify obviously. But that's for legislators to figure out. Bare minimum it covers whatever medical costs are associated with the abortion or pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 01:02 PM
8

Yeah I don't know if I'm down with it being the default. I think opting out should be costly, because pregnancy and abortion are costly. Women can't opt out of those no matter what. Ideally nobody would be able to get pregnant at all without a two party opt in, but I don't think there's an ethical way of doing that right now lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 12:27 PM
5

Hmm, good question. My knee jerk response is I don't think he would have a case, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 12:17 PM
7

Yeah I would 100% be down for better male contraception. I usually also bring that up with the paper abortion stuff, because ideally if men and women both had 100% effective contraceptives you would have no need for paper abortions at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:59 AM
3

I think it would last until you annul it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:56 AM
1

I have done my own research. Men are seen as a more valid targets for random assault, more disposable, less worthy of empathy. Men are the targets of random violence, that doesn't mean that they were randomly targeted. If a man is assaulted in a way a woman wouldn't have been, then it is gendered. It's a result of the patriarchy. If you want to say that a gender disparity is due to something other than gender, the burden of proof is on you, not me.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:54 AM
15

Oh yeah, we can't even begin to talk about paper abortions if regular abortions are not legal and fully accessible. I also think men can pay the full cost (and then some) of the abortion, as well as have to pay a registration fee for the paper abortion. The fee can go towards subsidizing abortion clinics and female contraception. This still doesn't fully compensate for the discomfort of pregnancy or abortion, but at least it closes the gap a bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:45 AM
–

No I pretty much just want both men and women to have reproductive rights, thanks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:29 AM
26

I think it would be more than fair to require a paper abortion to be filed before conception. Not only that but have it registered. That way a woman can decide if she wants to have sex with a man who has filed a paper abortion. And if you get a woman pregnant and never filed your paper abortion well I think it is fair that it is too late at that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:26 AM
12

I've argued over paper abortion a few times on here. I agree that it is definitely tricky to do totally fairly, if not impossible. But one thing is certain, it would be a lot more fair than how it is currently. I agree a lot of men would like to just be able to dip out of all responsibility. I'm not in favor of that. I don't think the system would automatically mean that men can take no responsibility. To make things a little more fair I think it would be perfectly reasonable to: Not only have t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:16 AM
2

Then systemic misandry is perpetrated by both men and women, not just men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:55 AM
1

Sure, but I'll be using the same standard of evidence that will be used to prove causation for women. If women experience different outcomes then we deem it to be gender based. Unless you can identify some other factor besides a gender based one for these differing outcomes. If men are seen as a more valid target for random violence and homicide, that is gender based. If women in relationships are seen as more valid targets for sexual violence and homicide, that is gender based.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:55 AM
1

I don't see why it is so hard for people to apply feminist theory to men. I don't know how so many people can acknowledge that the patriarchy hurts men too and that the patriarchy is upheld by both men and women, but then just get brain-broken at the final step. I guess because if you acknowledge that men face systemic oppression as well then a lot of narratives get harder to defend.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:45 AM
1

The gender of the perpetrator does not change whether someone was victimized based on their gender. It doesn't have to be committed by a woman for it to be a gender based crime. Men can be misandrists. Women can commit femicide.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:38 AM
8

Actually misandry generally results in higher rates of suicide, homelessness, addiction, harsher sentencing, and dropping out of higher education.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:31 AM
5

Generally I agree with your points, but surely if you argue that a woman being uncomfortable around men for her safety is misandry, then a father warning their daughter about men is also misandry. Both feel that they are just acknowledging the reality of the world, and both are discriminating against men in pretty much the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:28 AM
14

Oh, a lot of people deny that misandry exists.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:21 AM
2

I think mandatory paternity leave that is the same length as maternity leave would be a pretty easy fix for that imbalance. Also would help to even things out more in the home, giving men more time to gain experience with child care.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:19 AM
3

And both men and women uphold the patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:17 AM
6

I don't think comparing misandry to "reverse racism" or heterophobia is an apt comparison. I don't think you ever suffer systemically from being white or straight, or almost never. Whereas there is a whole slew of ways you are disadvantaged purely for being a man under the patriarchy. Also both men and women uphold these gender roles. It's not like lawmakers suddenly decided to give men harsher punishments from the top down, they are influenced by the social fabric. The dislike for men is a part…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 10:07 AM
1

I also gave you the US average. Feel free to look up your country too if it is different. 20 is high.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 08:53 PM
7

The average is the US is 7-11 lifetime sexual partners and around 9 globally. 20 is a lot, it's unusual that you don't know many women who have been with less than 20 men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 12:23 PM
3

Globally, the average number of lifetime sexual partners is around 9, but this number fluctuates drastically by region, culture, and demographics. In the United States, the lifetime average generally falls between 7 and 11 partners, with the median hovering slightly lower around 4 to 6. So it's always a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 12:21 PM
2

My wallpaper is my cat <3
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 04:58 AM
5

so this is a tic-for-tac situation Black Noir: "Is that what you think the phrase is?"
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 03:14 PM
6

Is this comment a psyop to try to make men look worse in a thread about misandry?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:40 AM
1

I'm not suggesting that my time is more valuable but there are more men vying for some of my time compared to the number of women who are looking for his time. So the suggestion that I should be willing to be generous with time when someone hasn't put any effort into planning the date is the problem. So you ARE saying your time is more valuable, by virtue of supply and demand. And you aren't being any more generous with your time than he would be. You're both spending the same amount of time to …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 01:23 AM
1

Oh well if just a phone convo and a few texts is enough then I don't think we're talking about different things. I just don't think you need to spend a bunch of time being friends or observing and evaluating someone over weeks or months to discover a bunch of compatibility before asking for a date. Which is something a lot of people here advocate for. But yeah what you're saying is also what I think, quick convo should do it. Also the coffee date was just an example of something quick, that a da…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 06:01 PM
1

I mean you said right here "spend some time talking to you". A date is just the most efficient and direct way of doing that without any ambiguity about interest. That's not reducing compatibility to an interview, it's determining compatibility directly. And that should be mutually beneficial, because meeting you shouldn't be a "errand" that can be mitigated with spending more money. That's the entire point. I think a date is where compatibility should be gauged and women DO go on dates with me. …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:46 PM
3

Nursing as a job, like in terms of pay and benefits
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:37 PM
1

Do you think that nurses are fairly compensated?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:27 PM
-3

So that's the problem, just the time investment? That's the problem with how men are going about dating? Just grab a coffee, if you're not compatible it's no big loss of time. Seems like it would actually save time, quickly get to the point of whether you could work together or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 09:04 PM
7

I always thought that was what a date was for. Like yeah I don't think about compatibility before a date because I don't know them. That's why I want to go on a date, to get to know them and figure out if we're compatible.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 08:10 PM
1

No to what? I thought I was agreeing with him lol
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 12:53 AM
6

I think men's rights movements do badly compared to feminism because of the patriarchy. It's hard to advocate for your rights when all our gender norms dictate you can never be a victim. When you view it through that lens a lot of the weird double standards of our fellow progressives start to make more sense, because they internalized that if you aren't being the big strong stoic man then you are pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 09:41 PM
1

The same TYPE of harm. Punching someone and stabbing someone have a different SEVERITY but they are both VIOLENCE. And they can be compared without being equated. And you didn't answer the tattoo question.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 08:44 AM
0

So do you think our western society would be cool with tattooing female genitals while they are babies for aesthetic reasons? No lasting damage. Would you still call that FGM or would you say it is incomparable to real FGM? Also you can compare two things on a single axis without comparing every aspect. We can compare if two things are the same type of action/harm without needing both to be of the same severity.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:20 PM
1

Damn, okay. Thanks for the explanation!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/26 12:32 PM
1

No, men very much are punished for being men. Many of these men who are suffering are suffering because they are acting like the men patriarchy prescribes. That "man" hides his emotions, strives for success, does not seek help, etc. Those men end up killing themselves, getting addicted, and having breakdowns too. Rigid societal expectations hurt you when you follow them AND when you don't. It works in every way the same way it works for women. Women who fulfill their traditional gender roles are…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 04:32 PM
1

It makes it systemic oppression/discrimination, which is what you said men do not face. Yes it is men being punished for not conforming to societal expectations, which is also what happens to women. It is systemic misogyny when it happens to women, and it is systemic misandry when it happens to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:19 PM
0

How do you prove you obtained a clear yes if they claim that you didn't? Doesn't that turn this into a he said she said but where guilt is assumed? Anyway I guess I should just look at the law.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:13 PM
2

Yes, intersectionality applies to men too. But if being a man weren't a factor we would see just as many disabled, non-white, and LGBTQ+ homeless women as we do homeless men, but we don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 01:40 PM
2

I disagree. If you believe the patriarchy hurts men then you believe that men are also systemically oppressed. Men make up most of the homeless, most of the suicides, most of the adicts, dropping out of higher education, etc, etc. you can't draw the same clean oppressor-oppressed dynamic with gender as you can with race, because the patriarchy oppresses both genders. That being said, women can still have it worse, but to claim misandry doesn't matter or isn't real because men don't face systemic…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 01:30 PM
1

Damn, I'm the opposite. I recoil at gendered shit, so whenever a woman I've been dating has expressed how there's certain things I'm expected to do as a man I've rebuffed them pretty solidly. Yes, even the ones I'm really interested in. But then again I'm attractive enough to get away with it, most guys can't stand up for themselves like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 06:24 PM
-2

That is collapsing bodily autonomy and reproductive rights into one thing. They are two separate rights that coexist in procreation. Men and women have different bodily autonomy rights when it comes to pregnancy because the woman carries the fetus. Yes. that it true. the man's bodily autonomy right ends when he cums, because that's where his body ends. His reproductive rights, however, should not end there. Women fought for reproductive rights as well when they fought for abortion. There is no b…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 01:04 AM
2

Absolutely, I think paper abortions needing to be signed before sex is the way to go for the moment. Men having better birth control would go a hell of a long way too.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:41 PM
-1

It has always also been about reproductive rights. Always. "Consent to sex is not consent to parenthood" is a pro choice saying because abortion is a reproductive right as well as a right to bodily autonomy. But whenever the conversation is about men people always conveniently forget that this has always also been a reproductive rights issue as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:34 PM
2

Well good, because the point of my comment was not to give you a definition of sexism. It was to say that action on their own often aren't going to be sexist if you strip them of context. Punching someone isn't sexist. If you only punch women it might be though.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 11:54 PM
0

No action ever is sexist unless it starts to be done disproportionately to one sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 07:16 PM
2

I think multiple things can be true: Everything you just wrote That women's psychology is also influenced by capitalism and the patriarchy, and is not their natural psychology. However, it is being held up as a better, healthier example for everyone, but natural male psychology differs from that example. So instead of figuring out the natural, ideal male psychology and getting men to be like that, we are trying to force them into the socialized female model. I also think female psychology (natur…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 11:23 AM
6

Yep, that's that darn patriarchy at work once again. I think my frustration with things surrounding this subject is that people always say "in theory" that the patriarchy hurts men too, and that everyone perpetuates the patriarchy. But then whenever you bring up a problem men experience due to the patriarchy and that is at least 50% enforced by women, all of a sudden all that theory goes out the window. And this is in progressive spaces that ought to know better. But I think there is a big resis…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 11:08 AM
2

I think they're trying to say that proportionate pushback is interpreted as bias when men do it. So they can say that yes, men will give you pushback, but no, it's not bias. I think that's their point.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/26 12:34 PM
0

Good, now keep counting. It's called combating confirmation bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 03:30 AM
0

You don't see any others in this whole thread saying lots of men don't think that way or agree with it? You can include me at least. If you don't see any others then that person isn't the only one putting their head in the sand.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 09:32 PM
0

And now you're seeing loads of people telling you they don't think like that. So factor those voices into your total calculation of "what men say".
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 01:04 PM
0

Lmao If you're going with the "I made it the fuck up" route why would you go with "I feel like you say foid"? That just seems like a lack of imagination.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 11:17 AM
0

I think it would be better if everyone could be direct, then we wouldn't have to play stupid games that get people confused and sometimes hurt. But women get judged for promiscuity so it's understandable to be more indirect, and men get judged for passivity so it's understandable that they would be the ones to push things forward. And both want to blame the other 100%, without ever thinking they ought to fix anything about their own approach lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 03:04 AM
-3

I mean if some people are so clueless that they can't understand the clear implication of inviting someone over for Netflix and chill then they shouldn't be casually dating. Don't go over to a person's house when you are dating unless you are open to intimacy, most people understand that. Otherwise what do you do, go over to someone's place and if they make moves on you you'll be too scared to say no and just go along with it?? So then you are someone who cannot establish boundaries, understand …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 12:30 AM
-2

And who are the ones doing the interviews and candidate rejections? HR. and who makes up HR? Women. Boom, got ya. No but seriously I agree, lots of people use indirect language in all sorts of scenarios, that's why I wasn't saying I agree with OOP. But in the case of Netflix and chill? That's absolutely because you can't directly ask a woman over for sex, not because men prefer using indirect language. So that's a poor example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 12:14 AM
-3

Do you think guys are using euphemisms in those situations because the guys themselves want to use euphemisms? I think they would rather be direct, but a woman can be dtf but if you explicitly ask if she would like to come over and do just that, she will get turned off on the idea. I'm not necessarily agreeing one way or the other about the OPs post, but this point in particular seems a lot more like women's preference for indirect language forcing men into using it, rather than men having their…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 07:13 PM
–

Hear me out, I know what sub we are on, but I actually want to share some knowledge I learned at uni and not necessarily fight about something lol. Also very understandable if you don't want to read a bunch of stuff about philosophy and sociology right now. Have you heard of integral theory? In case you haven't, put very simply, part of it is the idea that we have four quadrants of "truth". The interior individual (your opinions/feelings), the exterior individual (your brain, your body, objects,…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 11:37 AM
1

But that isn't what the guy said. The guy said I could just get endless supply of guys who'd pay for my dates but refuse to have any sex with him apparently forever. Which guy said that?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:10 PM
1

According to who's definition? Just yours? I'll use the dictionary definition, thanks. Power includes influence and is a measure of your ability to do something. It isn't only defined by your ability to "force" someone to do something. You can have more or less power. But even under your definition, if men want to maximize their success in dating, they literally are forced to do certain things.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 10:01 AM
1

Yeah and Saturn (Chronos) ended up being overthrown and imprisoned in Tartarus, so really the outcomes weren't good for him either!
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 09:56 AM
1

Op is totally wrong in saying that men do not have the same luxury as Saturn. I bet I could eat a woman, just not like... In one sitting. But I could do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 02:24 AM
1

Don't backtrack now, you've already said women hold power by being less desperate and indiscriminate. And said nothing in response to the difficulty or complexity of changing that dynamic. Do you consider previous comments in this chain when you reply, or do you just kind of give a kneejerk defensive response?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 01:33 AM
1

Yes, that's my point. So you agree women have the power, do you revoke your previous statements about dating not being partly about power? Otherwise it seems like we aren't actually pinning anything down here. But yes, women hold the power, so any man who wants to individually stand up for himself is going to pay a higher cost. To change that dynamic men would have to act as a single collective (not going to happen), and somehow change their higher biological drive, as well as change current dat…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 01:12 AM
0

It's voluntary, and within that voluntary system women hold most of the power. They are the pursued ones. You are right that men as a whole could change that dynamic by being less desperate and having more self respect. Which would require 4 billion men to suddenly have a shift in mentality all at once (not happening), so no, I don't think men have the power to change that dynamic anytime they want. A mix of socialization and biological factors put men in the pursuing (and therefore interviewee)…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:47 AM
1

Yeah I think in my view everything you just said is either tied up with or synonymous with power, but I think that's just getting into semantics. Power is something that’s projected onto the others and that’s dumb. Men should just be responsible for themselves and what their actions cost and that is all. Yeah, that cost is exactly what I'm talking about. If a man stands up for himself, a woman might get the ick and they lose that dating opportunity. That's the cost, a cost women don't have to pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:40 AM
1

More options give you more power. When I'm using power in this context I don't mean like, the power to force or coerce people into doing what you want. Dating is a bit of a negotiation, you have to sell yourself. If an employer has loads of applications, you are not the one in a place of power when you go to interview and it is therefore harder for you to make demands. It is a similar situation between men and women. Harder for the guy to stand up for himself if he feels he is the interviewee.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 12:35 AM
0

I'm talking about your critique being bad. If you want to offer better criticism you need to also have an alternative in mind. Otherwise you have no foundation for your critique. If you don't want to share your alternative that's fine, but you still aren't offering a good critique.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:41 PM
1

Because "power" is a part of it. It's easier to stand up for yourself when you feel like you have leverage. If you are the more desired person with more options, you don't feel like you are risking much by standing your ground.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:13 PM
0

No, all I'm doing is saying that you did not offer a good critique. I'm not the same person you were talking to before.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 05:10 PM
16

Yeah, men really have to start actually standing up to the shit we don't like just like women did and do. It's tough to do when you feel you aren't holding the power in dating, but we still have to do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 04:23 PM
0

A critique that refuses to specify an alternative rings hollow.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 04:19 PM
15

Maybe it's: Good relationship > Being single > Bad relationship > Involuntarily single forever
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 11:18 AM
1

Do you think you deserve what you want?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 09:06 PM
1

You reinforced my point that every time this subject comes up people try to only make it about bodily autonomy and conveniently forget the reproductive rights aspect.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 10:24 AM
–

Oh you were just pretending to be stupid, I understand. So you obviously do believe in misandry, my apologies.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 02:16 AM
–

Yeah it's almost like if a woman said something like Bc I actually feel like misandry isn’t real so i suppose dismissing it is fine too -Key_Marionberry5116
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 02:10 AM
1

Glad we agree, thanks for reinforcing my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 10:47 PM
3

Abortion has always been about reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. But as soon as you bring this topic up suddenly the only thing that matters is bodily autonomy and reproductive rights are completely dropped. Probably because it's easier to defend that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 02:41 AM
3

What an incredibly refreshing comment, love to see it
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 05:58 PM
1

Sorry, I'm coming at it from a civilized country where abortion is legal everywhere and has been for a long time. Women gaining additional rights about their own bodies still has nothing to do with it. You have to keep bringing it back to bodily autonomy because otherwise you would have to actually talk about reproductive rights and your arguments wouldn't work. MY REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS do not affect a woman's BODILY AUTONOMY or REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS in ANY way. It only takes away a woman's right to…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:17 PM
1

No, you just don't want to lose any of the privileges women have always enjoyed when the world becomes more equal. Also, we are talking about giving men the right NOT to reproduce. A sterile person has the right NOT to reproduce just fine. And furthermore, there is a difference between having a right to something, and having an obstacle in you getting it. A sterile person still has reproductive rights, they just can't access them. If we could give them access, we would! We already do what we can…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 07:10 PM
1

You keep mixing up bodily autonomy with reproductive rights. I tried explaining but if you can't get that I'll stop arguing now. It's pretty much the foundation of the whole argument. Bodily autonomy: we have equal rights Reproductive rights: Women have more That's just how it is right now no matter how you try to twist it, or pretend that reproductive rights are just an outcome-based thing that comes from bodily autonomy. It is a separate right. Abortion is about bodily autonomy AND reproductio…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:55 PM
1

Do you lack a right to abort a pregnancy in your body? No. Do you lack a right to make medical decisions about your body? No. Do you lack a right to evict unwanted persons from your body? No. Of course I have those rights, I was just showing you how silly it sounds to take one part of the equation and say "equal rights lol". Yeah, the contract would be to MAKE men equal, of course a similar contract won't be made for women, they don't need it. You keep making this only about bodily autonomy. Sto…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 06:00 PM
1

Women can abort and men can not. "Equal rights" lol In much of the world, women cannot access abortion care. Anywhere women cannot get an abortion men should not be able to get a paper abortion. I would never advocate for paper abortions if women do not already have accessible abortions. Where they can, they enjoy an equal right to men to bodily autonomy—to evict any unwanted persons from their bodies. Yes they do. But I'm not arguing about bodily autonomy rights, I'm arguing about reproductive …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 05:29 PM
1

Yes men can contract and women cannot. Women can abort and men can not. The method isn't the issue, the right is. Which is the right to end the reproductive process. And for your second point, you are begging the question. We are talking about the rights. If person C has a right, person A and B shouldn't be able to take it. The point is that right now person B has no reproductive right and person Cs current rights depend on person B not having that right, while person A has every right.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 04:22 PM
1

The withdrawal of consent on the woman's side is called abortion. Once a child is born and neither parent has withdrawn consent, they are both now consenting parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:52 PM
–

The right to consensual care sure can. Because you don't have the right to care that someone did not consent to giving you.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:48 PM
–

The male part of reproduction involves where you put your sperm and the viability thereof. The female part of reproduction involves hosting the egg and the embryo and delivering the baby. You get control over your part and she gets control over her part. That's already equality. No, it's not equality, because you left out the big part: the female part of reproduction also includes the ability to end the reproductive process completely for both people, which is the crux of the issue. I just want …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:45 PM
–

They should posses the right to consensual parental care.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:25 PM
2

Yeah, that's an issue. Feminism has an image problem, and a lot of guys think that feminists who aren't behaving according to feminist values are representative of the ideology. They don't represent the ideology, but they certainly do represent the movement. To help with that feminists need to call out our own within the movement, but I don't see a whole lot of other feminists doing that. Well, actually, many do call out their own when it comes to not being feminist enough for women, but you'll …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:11 PM
–

No, more like the "listen, I really don't want to have a kid, so you should know that before we have sex" approach. There could be a registry showing everyone who has filed for financial abortion, so that women can be fully informed when they consent to sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:01 PM
–

Financial abortions don't happen after birth. Some people, myself included, think financial abortions should come before even having sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:28 PM
–

Every single fucking day on this sub we have men arguing for the ability to completely abandon their children, and yet there seems to be this odd focus and emphasis on women not "taking accountability." You mean the guys who argue for men to gain some reproductive rights, right? Because if you are talking about the paper abortion topic, last time I saw your comments they certainly looked like you wanted to keep going with a system where men get held accountable and women get to make all reproduc…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:19 PM
2

Nah, disagree. Of course some people can just be pretending, but sometimes the pain of being around someone you are in love with is just too difficult. It would be great if you could just turn that part of your brain off once you get rejected, but it doesn't work that way. Sometimes you can work through it, sometimes you can't and have to just look out for your own emotional well-being. That doesn't mean they were just pretending to be your friend.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:44 PM
1

I didn't change the topic, I responded to you changing the topic. So you don't want to see examples, then? I can't say I'm surprised. Clearly you are not actually interested in exploring ideas or good faith discussion. Since you seem to be either unwilling or unable to actually follow a conversation and you've become increasingly defensive and dismissive, I'll stop responding now. But feel free to get the last word in, though. You seem to need it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 11:59 PM
1

Lol yeah, the focus of the argument keeps changing because I keep directly responding to every goal post move you do. If you are actually interested in good dialogue I could demonstrate to you exactly how I responded to your comments directly and how you shifted the goalpost nearly every time.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:29 PM
2

Are you aware that you move the goalposts on nearly every single comment? Do you do it on purpose or is it an accident? Anyway, I think men should get the same validation that women get. Women get validated by men AND women. But I guess that's going to be difficult because of the empathy gap, which has been so conveniently demonstrated in our conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 11:08 AM
1

You asked: Men have a hard time getting dates, full stop. What does that actually do for you? What is accomplished? And I told you it would validate men, which would help them to start working on their issues. Then you asked: Why would you need validation before self improvement that doesn't even make any sense. And I answered it with multiple studies and an article. Do you honestly think you are engaging in good faith? It's a therapist (and MANY other researchers) telling you why validation is …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 03:43 AM
9

Yeah, men will absolutely do that too. But the difference is loads of men will also just completely validate women's struggles without caveats. I don't see the same going in the other direction much at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 03:33 AM
1

Oh really? It's actually pretty well understood that you should validate someone before telling them to improve. It gives them a stronger emotional foundation for improvement, while also not making them increasingly bitter at the lack of acknowledgment. Once you don't need to try to prove your problems are real all the time, you might be able to start to work on yourself instead. But don't take my word for it: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40479-022-00185-x This article found that w…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 03:22 AM
2

Nobody hear said women have it worse, but i do fully believe most of them just don't have it anywhere as easy as men imagine they do. This is clearly a case of hearing what you want to hear. I never said anyone here said that. I was talking about the usual "admission" you see coming from women, and you using those as valid concessions. This was about what counts as "women admit it all the time" not about who has it worse in dating. Besides, it's definitely not me hearing what I want to hear, bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 02:25 AM
2

Admit, concede, acknowledge, all of these apply. But I imagine it would look something like this: "Yes, it is much harder for men to get dates." And then the comment would end there. There would be no "b-b-but women still have it worse though!" Or "But getting a lot of attention is a bad thing actually, so men not getting dates isn't even a problem!". Because when you add those at the end, you invalidate the acknowledgement. You didn't admit anything, because you truly don't see it as an issue. …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 01:55 AM
6

No, what is happening here is that you asserted a pattern of women giving recognition to one of men's struggles, and men refusing to accept it. So the opening already implies that men are the problem, the concession givers are women, the ungrateful recipients are men. When in reality, women don't give that empathy. They might say they "admit it" while also immediately negating it, reframing it, or making it about women again (you didn't disagree with this). Which isn't admitting anything. Theref…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 11:13 PM
4

No, it would just have to actually be admitting something. You said women admit all the time that men have a harder time getting dates. But it's looking like your version of that is: Yeah men have a harder time getting dates, but actually being able to get a lot of dates is really a bad thing, so that's still worse for women. Oh and also every other part of dating is worse for women too. And then you wonder why it doesn't "make men feel better". It's because it's not an admission or an acknowled…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:46 PM
13

Correct, they say that women always have everything harder. Except for maybe getting dates, but then they'll go on to explain how getting dates is actually a bad thing, and therefore women have that harder too. I don't consider that admitting anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:13 PM
3

Yeah. I got the feeling that other guy got empathy only because he shared personal stories. Now, if that's true, then saying that it's "an extremely ineffective way to get people to care" to talk about social issues is... kind of emblematic of the problem. Women get empathy for their social issues, "oppression olympics", "gender wars" stuff but then when men try the same it is considered unproductive and we should just share personal stories cause that's the only way to get empathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:11 PM
3

It sounds like you framed things as your own experiences. If that is the case then I'm sure it is much easier to garner empathy. Have you framed things in systemic terms? Problems that effect men as a class?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:07 PM
10

So if that's usually the context, then women don't admit men have it harder finding dates "all the time". The context you gave is just the justification you see for why women never do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:56 PM
15

I appreciate the rare moments it happens, I don't appreciate the "women acknowledge this all the time!" gaslighting. No the hell they don't lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:25 PM
22

Plenty of women admit all the time that finding dates is much harder for men. They do?? Do they do it without adding that it is overall worse for women because they get murdered in droves while dating and have to constantly be afraid? Or that they'll get SAd or raped at the drop of a hat? Or the desert vs swamp analogy (which implies that any water in the desert won't be swamp water)? Or that it is harder for men but it's their own fault for xyz reason? Or that the constant flood of attention ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:21 PM
1

Well, the patriarchy can kind of be nebulous, unfortunately. It infiltrates the way everyone is nurtured and gives people all sorts of unconscious biases. It can be defined as simply "a system where men hold power and women are largely excluded from it", or it can be defined as "the entire collection of gender expectations that we currently find ourselves in, which ends up being less favorable towards women". Many prominent feminist scholars have used either definition and plenty of other defini…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 06:21 PM
2

Yeah, it's okay for men to lose privilege as a consequence of women gaining equality. What isn't okay is trying to reach equality by removing a privilege from men that you do want women to have. You would want women to be protected from false accusations in an equal society, so trying to gain equality by taking away that protection from men doesn't make much sense. Although, feminism as a collection doesn't really have much power to oppress men, anyway. The majority of ways men are oppressed, it…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 05:43 PM
2

I've seen people try to justify it by saying it would bring more equity to women since the patriarchy and rape culture are already putting women so far behind in the legal system. But, obviously feminism aims to achieve equality by removing the oppression of women and not by increasing the oppression of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 04:59 PM
2

I completely agree with everything you laid out. But I have also seen feminists (or people who call themselves feminists, rather) say that we should automatically believe rape victims because some innocent men going to jail is a price they are willing to pay to protect rape victims and make sure rapists are punished. So yes, you are totally right that this gets overblown by some men because it is an opportunity to hate, 100%. But the unhinged stuff from the other side also totally exists. That b…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 04:47 PM
14

From my perspective, I would think that they are trash because they are a sexist. Their thought process seems to end with "because you are a man" and I don't think particularly enlightened people think that way. I also doubt she would appreciate the opposite treatment, but that's just a guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 04:32 PM
0

Yeah, but that could be video from the ring camera opening the door and going in, or it could be video of her staying outside and filming from there. There's video, but who knows if it's got her opening the door or not. Not trying to defend her or anything, just doesn't seem like we have any definitive proof yet that she opened the door.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 01:38 AM
2

The big problem there is that pretty much everyone thinks they are the media literate one and that other people are the easily propagandized ones. When in reality we are all probably at least a little susceptible to it (and some a lot). That's why quality of discourse is probably important. Because chances are there are men who come on here and think they are gaining insights about women based on these hyperbolic posts. And chances are some of the insights you have gained about men are also base…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 07:31 PM
2

Okay, that's good! Do you think that this sort of hyperbolic/ironic/venting posting is good for discourse, or for gender relations as a whole? I feel like both sides will do this type of thing, where they post something crazy with a grain of truth. Then people confront them and argue with them, but instead of saying the post is an exaggeration, they defend the grain of truth, while making it look like they support the whole post. So now both sides think the other side is insane and hates them. W…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 07:01 PM
1

Yeah all I've found is quotes from stuff like NYPost saying this: However, Ring camera footage appears to show Henderson let herself into the man’s house, and police have said there is no indication she was encouraged to go in, let alone film. Her own video “indicates that the male was incapacitated and unconscious on his couch due to alcohol consumption,” police said in a statement. A lot of "police have said" but no ring camera footage or actual statements from the police. The police did make …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 06:02 PM
2

That post is unhinged. Do you really agree with that? Not the "I'm going to agree with this unhinged post because it will get the unhinged men in this sub triggered" type of agree, but like, for real?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:40 PM
4

It's a good thing that we're leaving behind more and more gender norms like that. I don't like that buying women flowers is seen as a default "courtesy" that represent bare minimum effort or something. Courtesy should be the basic respect shown to a stranger. And if effort means "buying her stuff" then it's not the type of effort I'm interested in doing until we are in some kind of relationship. And if women want to get wooed then they gotta do some wooing too. Maybe some men are feeling bitter …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:30 PM
1

Oh boy, we could argue about separatism in our arguing about gender sub!!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 03:28 AM
1

I believe that paper abortions should be a thing. But I also think it would have to be implemented very carefully. I think things like: -Having to file the paper abortion before pregnancy for it to be valid. This way women could be informed of the mans intentions before consenting to sex. -Men having to pay for all medical expenses that arise from pregnancy, abortion or birth. Extra compensation on top of that for the distress that those things entail. -The ability to file a comprehensive restra…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 03:23 AM
1

I never insulted you. I only ever made arguments against your ideas and comments on your rhetoric, and this is a debate sub, where people argue with each other. You also keep responding to me over and over, so it's not like I'm "forcing" further interaction any more than you are. Also, while I didn't personally attack or insult you, you said: Now fuck off you little dweeb. Which is both uncivil as well as an actual personal attack. Now I'm going to stop engaging with you. Have a day.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 08:23 PM
1

I dunno, but there is definitely something wrong with my brain because I keep engaging with you when you obviously have no interest in actually engaging with the topic, making arguments, or arguing in good faith. You are adding some good anecdotal evidence for your "women are mean bullies" theory, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 04:43 PM
1

Do you reject all trends among the genders? Or do you believe men can have a higher tendency to behave in certain ways but women don't? Do you believe in the patriarchy? Systemic sexism? Because if you don't believe in any societal trends among the genders then get off this sub because there is nothing for you to talk about here.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 04:33 PM
1

Because this whole thread was about the normalization of body shaming men, and about how women tend to not see it as a problem. The context is that we are talking about a trend among women as a group, not individuals. So if you say bullies are gonna bully and you can't stop them, within that context, it points to women as a group tending to be bullies that won't stop body shaming men. And I'm saying women as a group are probably better than that, and asking them to stop should work eventually.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 04:05 PM
2

Okay, so that is a YES on having no arguments. Have a good one.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:49 AM
1

Well then I guess if I take your word for it women just tend to be mean bullies who cannot be reasoned with and will never stop body shaming men. Or did you have an actual argument to make? Because you seem to just be responding with knee jerk responses that move the goalposts instead of ever actually addressing anything or bringing up relevant points to the subject. Unless of course you are a mean bully who cannot be reasoned with... Hope not though.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/25 12:26 AM
2

Women are mean bullies?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:28 PM
3

Ask them, in various ways. You can ask through discourse, through spreading awareness, through protests if it comes to that. Confront people who do it. But in a liberal country that's all you can do, can't force someone to be nice. But I don't see why it should be difficult to get women to stop, since they understand the issue so we'll and fought against it so long. Or do you think women are so bad that they will just refuse to give up body shaming?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 07:47 PM
4

I have called it out in person and I have called it out online. If I see it I call it out. And there are plenty of misandrist men to call out too, make no mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:40 PM
3

Clearly they are doing something, since there are men here right now telling you that they don't like the normalization. Are women so attached to body shaming men that we have to start doing protests for them to stop? I think women are probably better than that tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:38 PM
2

Well that's why I said relatively painless. Relative to an abortion, pregnancy, or childbirth that is.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:10 PM
1

If you never see that you either have a very special algorithm or you are primed not to notice when it happens. I imagine you didn't see when Greta Thunberg said Andrew Tate had small dick energy? Or when AOC said that politician she hated had 5'4" energy? Maybe because men's body shaming is so casual and thrown out so easily, it doesn't register as much for you. Or how about when my girlfriend and her friends see a big truck and say "must be compensating for something 😏" and laughing about it. …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:09 PM
9

It still happens, but progressives denounce it. Look what progressives say when men want to talk about it: B-b-but women had it worse! And I shouldn't have to fight for men! And it still happens to women! And not all women! Which is all the same stuff defensive men say when a woman brings up women's problems. I dunno, it's just that if you live your life with a progressive set of values for your in group it's so bizarre that it just... Disappears completely when it's about your out group.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:04 PM
16

Do you only follow the golden rule when you don't get huge backlash? I think men are starting to fight against it, and that's good, so that backlash could start happening. But isn't it weird that women had this collective fight for centuries, only to forget the values and ethics they were fighting for as soon as it effects men? Presumably they were against body shaming for ethical reasons, not solely because it was happening against women.I don't need women to fight against men's body shaming, b…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:00 PM
11

You've got some men right here not accepting it. Also doesn't explain why women would accept something for men they don't find morally acceptable for themselves. That has nothing to do with the reaction from men. Do you follow the golden rule when there's backlash?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:56 PM
23

Yep, some people are assholes. I think the more interesting question in the post is why is bodyshaming men so accepted. You would think that the people who campaigned against bodyshaming women wouldn't turn that part of their brain off as soon as it comes to men, but it seems like it happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:41 AM
3

So if I understand you correctly, you're referring to something like a woman posting "Men, you should smile more!". Not because they actually think men should smile more, but because women hear it it all the time and want to shed light on it? Because if that's what you're talking about, then I agree that it is something that I see frequently and to get upset about that would be silly. But I also think it is extremely generous towards women to think that any body shaming women do is just them fli…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:36 AM
1

Oh yeah, I'm sure plenty of irresponsible men still wouldn't file for one. That's too bad for them, they can pay child support. But that wouldn't change the numbers, those same men would be paying the same child support in the paper abortion world as they are in our present one. So, while I think this is valid in principle, practically speaking, I can't imagine a significant impact on real-world outcomes. What outcomes are you thinking of here? Because the real world outcome I was thinking of wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 10:19 AM
2

Yes, I acknowledge that. It isn't fair that women have to carry the pregnancy, nor is it fair if they have to get an abortion. Abortions are no walk in the park either. I wouldn't be against men having to provide some form of financial support. Like if paper abortions cost a certain amount which is paid out to the woman, because they deserve some compensation for the discomfort they have to go through. And that's above the actual medical costs, which if a man wants a financial abortion, I think …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:48 AM
2

Yeah I've come to your mandatory abortions conclusion before too haha I do think it could be a possibility to make paper abortions only valid if they happen before pregnancy, so that women can be fully informed when they consent to sex. that's another thing that could reduce how many accidents happen. But yeah, more kids will need to be supported by the state in one way or another. I think it's just kind of insulting that we looked around as a society and figured that the reproductive rights of …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:28 AM
3

The point is just to make it so the man has any choice at all. As it stands now the woman gets to make the choice on if a man has a child, if a man doesn't have a child, AND if she will be a single mother or not. What hard reproductive choices do men get to make now that they wouldn't have to make with paper abortions? Because it seems to me men don't get choices, hard or otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:15 AM
1

No reason to, doesn't mean I wont lol
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:09 AM
4

You still didn't contend with the fact that nobody in the world except the mother would get to meet the child because none of them raised the kid either. Because your point is nonsense. "You're not reasonable and bad faith because I don't like your conditions" No you're unreasonable because by your logic nobody could meet the adult child and you're bad faith because you said you don't give a shit what I think and won't ever change your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 12:07 AM
1

Nope, he made factual claims about events that transpired. No creativity required.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:49 PM
1

Still not a personal attack. You too.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:47 PM
2

But you aren't getting a relationship with the "child", you are meeting an adult. Why would anyone get to meet the adult child? Nobody else helped raise them either. No different than the father. And what about the rights of the adult child? You would stop the adult from meeting someone too? Those who don't participate shouldn't get to reap the rewards. No. You are not and will never change my conditions. I couldn't give less of a shit what you think. Those are my terms and I'm not changing my m…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:46 PM
1

His arguments are based on what actual physical women actually physically responded. It's based on what the actual words used in the actual hypothetical were. This isn't the realm of subjectivity, these are facts.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:32 PM
5

Yep, I agree with pretty much everything you said. But also there are those rare few people who didn't have to have any negative experiences with the opposite gender to be sexists. Some people are just shits all on their own haha. But surely they are a small minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:30 PM
1

The literal wording of the question backs up his assertion, as well as how the respondents answered. Those are facts. Also that's not what proving a negative means. You absolutely can prove that something isn't there, like how I could prove that there is not an orange in my hand by having an empty hand. You are attempting to prove that his interpretation of the hypothetical has no basis, when it clearly does, since we can point to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:25 PM
1

Yes, as do many other women and even fathers of daughters would choose a bear over a man for their daughters. Plenty of men are sexists as well. The popularity of the choice doesn't prove it is right, just how popular misandry is, even among men. I've seen somewhere where an influencer asked a group of men whether they would rather be in the woods with a bear or P Diddy. The men all unanimously chose the bear over P Diddy. That's the point though. That is part of the point. P Diddy is a specific…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:16 PM
4

What does that have to do with my point? What is the benefit the man is getting from meeting an adult stranger he previously had no contact with? That would be the same benefit every person on earth gets to have, and none of them raised that person either. The father is banned from benefiting 100% until the child is the age of majority, I can agree with that. Then they get to meet the adult if they wish, just like everyone else on earth gets to meet the adult if they wish. Nothing unfair about t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 11:04 PM
1

Perhaps you weren't truly bothered, and it only looked like it. In that case I retract the word bothered and apologize. Children have a stronger claim to resources than men have to fuck anything that moves without responsibility. But that is both aggressive, and not what I argued. So yeah, you did aggressively strawman me. One is a possible misreading of your emotional state and one is a criticism of your rhetoric. Neither is a personal attack.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:59 PM
4

What if the paper abortion needs to be established before pregnancy? Then a woman will know where a man stands before having sex with him, and she can make her decisions fully informed. I also think a paper abortion should come with a monetary cost which is paid to the woman. Doesn't make it perfectly equal, but it makes things a lot more equal. It's not fair that the woman would still have to go through pregnancy or abortion, but it's also not fair that she can unilaterally choose to keep or ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:52 PM
0

I would only support paper abortions in a country where abortions are legal and accessible to everyone. So in such a country, a woman at a sperm bank is choosing to have a child as an only mother because she can afford it. If she could not afford it, she should not go to a sperm bank and have a baby. If a woman gets pregnant accidentally and her partner has a paper abortion, then she is faced with the same choice. If she can afford it as a single mother, then she should have the baby. If she can…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:42 PM
6

I would 100% accept those conditions and think they are quite fair... right up until the age of majority that is. At that point it is one adult meeting another and if two consenting adults want to hang out that's up to them. But at that age the man wouldn't be paying child support anymore either, so it seems fair. I would even put more stipulations than OP has, Like men having to have a paper abortion established before pregnancy as well as providing all the funding for the abortion itself and m…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:24 PM
6

You know I'm not sure. The motte is very easy to defend: Women have every right to be cautious and take steps to protect themselves and they have plenty of factual evidence to back that behavior. But do these types even realize they are in the bailey when they say bigoted things? Or is their sexism so inextricably entwined with their fear that they truly do not see the difference?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:15 PM
1

You don't know how to make it more obvious because you don't actually have anything factual to back up your point. You misunderstood the hypothetical and the response to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:07 PM
0

Oh I do have arguments, I'm not sure you are prepared to contend with them in good faith though. Calling a spade a spade and choosing something else isn’t a sexism even if you don’t like it and it offends you. Comparing people to animals and saying the people are worse, so you'll go with the animal, is not just a neutral choice. It is a statement, and the choice that drove it was based on bigoted ideas. Also sexism isn’t abuse, and not all abuse is sexism, you need to learn that before express y…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 10:05 PM
1

Okay, so then it is about the likelihood of harm, not the worst case scenario. Which means that you think that on average you are likely to have worse outcomes encountering men than bears.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:52 PM
5

Not the person you responded to, but I think hate and fear often go hand in hand. Actual hatred for men I think is quite rare among women, but if you define sexism as hate then I think that is quite common. A lot of sexism comes from fear, certainly. But I would never call a woman sexist for being cautious or feeling fear around men, though. I know a lot of men will do that. But are women teachers grading young boys worse because of fear? Is Kill All Men necessary to keep women safe? Is comparin…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:49 PM
2

Do you think men are the leading cause of death among women? They aren't and it isn't even close. But that is besides the point. Something doesn't stop being sexist because you are afraid. Even if the fear is justified. Being cautious is not sexist. Comparing people to animals and saying that they are in fact worse on average, is.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:25 PM
1

That's where I'm gonna have to disagree, bucko. I think there are some unhealthy social narratives going around that a lot of women are buying into for a variety of reasons. But that doesn't mean we should start throwing around hasty generalizations either. I don't think women hate us. I think that they have some sexist biases just like men do. But they haven't been constantly confronted for those biases for the past few decades like men have, so they feel a little too comfortable espousing thos…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:17 PM
0

The accusation comes two fold: From the respondents choosing bear. Admittedly this is not intrinsic to the question, but since you were discussing "mens’ reactions to a silly little meme", clearly we are talking about their reaction to respondents and the discourse surrounding it. That the question places men and bears on an appropriate axis of comparison. It's a dehumanizing question by nature. If the question was would you rather wake up next to a pile of shit or a woman, women would understan…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 09:08 PM
0

They 100% are not all saying the same thing you are saying. I think you are taking your minority interpretation and acting as though that was the obvious interpretation, when most respondents and the literal wording of the hypothetical do not align with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:48 PM
1

Was the question "would you rather a man or a bear do their absolute worst to you in the woods" Or was it "Would you rather be stuck in the woods with a man or a bear"? Because I could have sworn it was the latter, idk
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:44 PM
2

It's really interesting that the people who have spent so much time deeply analyzing every facet of society to find every trace of bigotry are completely unable to use those very same tools when it comes to their out-groups. I really can't wrap my head around it.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:38 PM
2

Bigotry, dehumanization, and sexism are abuse. If I said I would rather wake up next to a pile of shit than a woman, that would be misogyny, not simply "making a choice".
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:33 PM
2

They are very bothered when you bring up paper abortions. Men have no reproductive right that do not ultimately rely on the consent of a woman, which is to say no reproductive rights at all. Children have a stronger claim to resources than men have to fuck anything that moves without responsibility. Funny that you should say I'm making a strawman, you immediately got bothered when I suggested anything about men's reproductive rights and decided to aggressively strawman me. I don't know if you ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:30 PM
1

Keep up the good work man. I also saw that other guy in the thread arguing that this is about worst outcomes and not relative risk. When the literal wording is about relative risk, when every respondent sees the implication and responds based on relative risk, and the interviewer posts all these responses about relative risk voluntarily... It might just be about relative risk. But they have the gall to say that YOU are the one misunderstanding the hypothetical.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:23 PM
0

What was the wording of the original meme? I thought it was "Would you rather be stuck in a forest with a man or a bear" Maybe you saw a different wording as being the original meme? Because that's the wording I first saw and that everyone seems to be responding to. That makes it about relative risk of dangers between men and bears. I understand you're saying the bear could be replaced with any large dangerous animal, and therefore isn't specifically "about" bears. Sure, that's true. But you the…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 08:18 PM
5

I think a lot of men understand why women say bear. -Men harm women at disproportional rates -The legal system has many problems prosecuting those crimes -You can't tell who is going to harm you, so you must be cautious -All of this and more has contributed to women fearing men But you can say all of that stuff without making a sexist, dehumanizing, and bigoted statement. So when men say they have a problem with the hypothetical or the answers to it, it's often not because they don't understand …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 07:57 PM
1

I don't think the man vs bear thing will go away until people actually disavow it. But every time it is brought up people still defend it. The meme is old, but as long as the same thoughts and feelings that allowed it to exist in the first place are still around, it won't go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 07:46 PM
1

Yeah nah, that guy is misunderstanding lol. First of all the metaphor is about an encounter with a unspecified man and an unspecified bear. If women want to make that about fearing rape more than death then they are misunderstanding the literal wording of the hypothetical. At best that means YourMrFahrenheit is pointing out that he AND women misunderstood the hypothetical. Because if you take the actual wording of the hypothetical as it was posed, then of course it is a condemnation of men. But …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 07:40 PM
5

Yeah, it makes sense that women will gravitate towards progressivism when it offers them only benefits and validation. Men don't have a movement in the same way, so we don't see so much of it, but I'm sure they would behave similarly. Plenty of hypocrites in the redpill after all. I don't think women are uniquely unprincipled and self interested, just the normal amount. But yeah. If you want to see a progressive turn into a conservative in a matter of seconds just ask them about men's reproducti…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:23 PM
1

And therefore you don't think women should pick the bear?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:29 PM
6

One thing OP brought up that I absolutely agree with is: Too often toxicity from men will be gendered and treated as systemic, whereas toxicity from women will be treated as anecdotal and just a "people thing". At least I assume that's what his "Not All shield" point was about.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:25 PM
3

Men are killing women per capita more for sure. But you absolutely need to factor in encounter rate or that stat doesn't really mean anything. Polar bears, the deadliest land predator, kill less people per capita than vending machines. But you bet your ass I would rather encounter a vending machine lol. If we are using stats to demonize half of all people we better make damn well sure we are using the stats correctly.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:20 PM
5

I do think the radicalization of women is pretty serious. It will end up killing people and making society worse, it just won't do it in the directly violent ways that men end up doing it. This is not to downplay the danger of radicalized men, more to say that we shouldn't downplay the radicalization of women. Agree with the rest of your comment though.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:15 PM
4

When OP brought up men or women sharing bad experiences I think he meant: Often toxicity from men will be gendered and treated as systemic, whereas toxicity from women will be treated as anecdotal and just a "people thing". If that is what OP was talking about then I do think that is a real phenomenon and I personally see it all the time on this sub and just about everywhere else.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:02 PM
5

Yes, that's why I said I wasn't accusing you of hypocrisy. Your comment is also near the top in this thread. When it is men's toxicity being gendered, typically the comment saying "why are we gendering toxicity?" will be closer to the bottom. That's not about you having different standards for men or women, I'm sure you are consistent. It is about which sentiment is more popular. The argument I am trying to make is one of asymmetric gender essentialism. In each scenario, these will be the more p…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:54 PM
3

OP is pointing to a specific kind of toxicity. It's the tendency for a certain set of people to hold progressive values and analytic framework when it comes to their own group but not extend those same things to their out group. That is a behavior we seem to be seeing more often from women. There are certain kinds of toxicity that come from men more often, and we have no issues gendering those. Ironically, your comment kind of showcases one of OPs points. When men trend towards a toxic behavior …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:42 PM
12

I really don't know how much of a minority it really is. The man or bear thing made the rounds irl (at least where I live) and the men are pigs or kill all men I hear every now and again. Misandry isn't real is a sentiment I hear more and more, although not everyone expresses it that way, when you dig a bit it seems to be an intuitively held belief. BUT I hear that kind of stuff from plenty of men too, it isn't only women. I do live in a progressive city in a progressive country and I go to univ…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:31 PM
20

Bailey: Spreading dehumanizing sexist bigotry online. Motte: "We're just saying women feel unsafe!"
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 02:19 PM
–

Yeah, it does take some work. Also a community means that sometimes you will be around a few people you don't like. That's the cost! I think what we used to have was communities that formed organically, either by necessity or for entertainment, so those costs came naturally with the benefits. That doesn't really happen anymore, so you have to put in the work like you said. But that also means that it is way harder to get people consistently involved in your community, because it is completely vo…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:46 PM
–

The loss of third spaces is such a huge part of the problem imo! That one is really tough to fix though. Even if you make new third spaces that are affordable, most people tend to stay home way more, we're just way more insular. Also you used to be forced into third spaces and communities either for entertainment or support, you aren't really forced anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:09 PM
2

I did! Lots of people agreed it was abuse, but were just all "oh well, what are you gonna do about it?"
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 11:24 AM
4

Play fighting is definitely the wrong term. But I know women like that. My friend's girlfriend once broke a bottle over his head in a rage, but nothing ever came of it. He never called the cops, didn't break up with her (for some ungodly reason) and the friend group just shrugged and said "yeah she's kinda crazy".
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 11:42 AM
1

Kind of sounds like the bare minimum...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 09:45 PM
11

I legit just said it won't work to make a fat woman thin, but it will work to hide chub. And men don't wear them for the same reason they don't wear makeup: it's not socially acceptable. It won't make them more attractive, it will just make them weird or effeminate or whatever. I think you severely underestimate makeup. It won't give you a new face, but it's huge. I have a girlfriend, I've had girlfriends. I've seen the before and after of them getting dolled up. It's big. As far as the height t…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 04:31 PM
10

Height doesn't matter for women, it matters a lot for men, heels also make you look better. Makeup can do A LOT, "only goes so far" is a massive understatement. What plastic surgery would men be getting? Because Bigger boobs or ass only works for women to be more attractive. Only ones for men would maybe be jaw. And you do have clothes that can change your apparent weight, might not make someone very fat look slim, but it can hide some excess. So basically all of your suggestions are pretty much…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 04:16 PM
1

Lmao you think that just because a woman is crying you did something wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/25 10:29 PM
12

The argument isn't if hypocrisy is bad, it's if these are cases of hypocrisy at all. Maybe some inconsistent things are okay between the sexes. Maybe this phenomena doesn't actually happen at all in a way that can be attributed to different sexes. Or any number of arguments that actually had to do with the subject. These are all things that could be discussed. OPs personal views on each gender was issue isn't the topic, nor is it even interesting. This is a gender debate sub, not a "Mountain_Res…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 02:37 AM
12

No, he didn't ask to debate what you want to debate. If you debated the actual topic you might be able to expose vulnerabilities and oversights in his worldview, but you are unwilling to do that. Also, no matter whether he answered you with: A: I think all are bad B: I think all are good C: I'm inconsistent and also a hypocrite None of that would change or challenge the actual substance of the debate, which is whether women are generally inconsistent with these ideas. That's why what you're focu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 01:25 AM
14

He wasn't asking to be debated on the discourse topics, he was asking to be debated on perceiving a double standard. If someone says "stealing is wrong unless I'm the one who does it" I can call that inconsistent without sharing my views on theft. That is not the point of the debate, and is not some lazy tactic it's actually straight forward. Feel free to start a new debate where you ask him what his views on each thing are, but that isn't the point of this one. If anything it's quite ironic tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 12:51 AM
17

He did disclose his view: Women frame their own toxic behaviors as harmless while condemning men’s and gave examples of it happening. He doesn't have to tell you his view on the examples so that you can debate those, his view on the examples is not what he's wanting to debate. This isn't a whataboutism at all either.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 10:33 PM
1

I see. I should have been clearer that maternal gatekeeping was just one example among many of how this phenomenon manifests, not that maternal gatekeeping alone proved my entire thesis, or had anything to do with the dishes specifically. I brought up the dishes as a tiny little example in my life that existed alongside hundreds of other ones. Just a tiny example, not something to be treated as central to my whole argument. But it very much can be an example of a partner controlling how chores a…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 02:46 PM
7

If you think that this post is blaming an entire other gender you are not interpreting it in good faith. Take some personal responsibility for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 02:34 PM
1

If you told me that men tend to do less around the house and that it's a societal issue and I responded with: "Yeah some men do that, and I don't support those men. But being lazy is a human thing not a man thing, and women do it too" You wouldn't support that. So no, I wasn't dragging it out, you continuously denied that this was something women had a greater tendency of doing even though you agreed with it all along. I'm not the one guilty of dragging it out. "Who are you, or any man, to say w…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 02:15 PM
–

Ah, I see, so you were attacking the argument you thought I was making instead of the one I actually was. I never said i didn't believe it. In fact, I confirmed it is something some women do. You also argued that this isn't a woman tendency, it's just a human tendency. That's what I was arguing against. Because I agree this can be used as a cop out, but that's not a reason to deny its existence. As you said, two things can be true. If I had to just make a broad claim it would just be that due to…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 01:51 PM
–

That's interesting because as soon as I put maternal gatekeeping into google every definition and article says: The phenomenon of maternal gatekeeping refers to the extent to which mothers regulate and influence fathers' involvement in childcare and household tasks. And when you dive into the studies that very much is a component of it. But maternal gatekeeping is only one aspect of what I'm talking about. Because this goes beyond just parenthood. If we can agree that: -Women are doing most of t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 01:18 PM
2

Yeah maternal gatekeeping basically covers the regular chore stuff too, its not only when it concerns kids. I think women are territorial about the house stuff because society imposed the homemaker label on them and they internalized it. You know, patriarchy and all that. When they have kids it's majorly increased, of course, but I think that conditioning is there before kids too.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 08:40 PM
1

Just want to point out that you can look up maternal gatekeeping and see that while we all do it, it seems to be a greater tendency with women. There's actual evidence to back it up. But besides the whole analyzing gender roles and all that jazz, yeah. It's hard to cooperate in a household. Sometimes it can be hard to just let go and not let perfect be the enemy of good.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 08:23 PM
1

I mean look up maternal gatekeeping. It doesn't only refer to raising children, it pertains to all household management. We do have evidence that women do this more, I'm not just making it up. That's not to say they're the only ones to do it. But it's a real thing you can look up yourself. I would provide you with some links but I'm sitting in the sun with a rum and coke atm lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 08:18 PM
4

Honestly this is not a women thing. People do this lol. We're talking about tendencies, you can find an exception to all of them. Like I can acknowledge that men have a greater tendency to be slobs. That doesn't mean that ALL men are messier than ALL women. I could find woman slobs and man neat freaks. If we can't talk about gender tendencies because outliers exist there is absolutely no reason to talk about gender dynamics at all and we can delete this sub now. I can agree-only if the tasks are…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 02:10 PM
11

I agree with you, both these things happen. I'm gonna put aside the men who don't do enough, because I don't have any disagreement or anything to add. That's definitely a tendency that exists among men. But I think there is a tendency among most women and not just the super type A women. It's like they have a particular idea about exactly how and when things should be done and treat that as the universal standard for adulthood or whatever. Like here's a very minor example: My girlfriend hates do…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 01:44 PM
2

Multiple things can be true. Some men treat all women crying as manipulative. Some women use crying to manipulate. Some women don't use it to manipulate, but by virtue of them crying they still get to end an argument that is upsetting them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 05:50 PM
7

Okay, but there is a middle ground here. Some women absolutely use tears to control a disagreement. And when tears come involuntarily, that still gets you a win in an argument. Suddenly it's no longer about solving the dispute, but soothing the crying partner. That's fine if you then say "I may be crying, but that doesn't mean this argument is over, I don't mean to be crying right now, I still want to hear you out". But very conveniently, that part never comes in. It's just the crying part, the …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 03:35 AM
–

True, but doesn't address my point. If you aren't skewed you would have an even distribution. Roughly half of men would be below average, roughly half would be above. If when women rate men they put them mostly as below average, that would be skewed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 02:56 PM
–

I didn't post their pictures, did you mean to reply to the comment above mine?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 02:54 PM
–

Like, I hate to be mean, but the third pic for the women is like a 2, not a 5, for example. She's got some extremely bizarre features that don't put her in the realm of average imo.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 03:59 AM
–

If women put most men below average then it would be skewed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 03:07 AM
–

Way too generous with the women and way to harsh with the men imo. But then again I'm not attracted to men at all, so tough to say for them. But I can definitively say way too generous with the women for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 02:32 AM
1

No it actually happens MORE frequently than men claim it does and women are FAR nastier. It was revealed to me in a dream.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/25 05:28 PM
1

Maybe that's the real core of our disagreement. I think that something that is inherently unethical should absolutely be illegal, if it's at all practical to make it so. Well that and I think people with development disorders should be allowed to date whoever they want and it shouldn't be seen as immoral and unethical. That's kind of a slippery slope...
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 06:41 PM
1

All very reasonable. I'll address this part first maybe: We’ve settled that 18 is the cutoff. But do you think a 40yo stops being creepy for dating a 17yo the second she turns 18 (her birthday at 12:00am)? It’s a bit of a sorites paradox here, but still. Yeah I think it's hella creepy and I think the people who come up with reasons for why a 40 year old should aim to date 18 year olds are off their rockers. But that's kind of been my argument, it's gross. I understand why people think it's gross…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 04:27 PM
1

That could be applied to almost every relationship in existence. There is in inherent imbalance in a relationship where one partner is smarter. Or stronger. Or richer. Or more socially connected. All of these have a built in power differential. All can be used to undermine informed consent. All of those have inequality inherent within the attribute. But none are unethical.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/25 12:14 PM
1

No. There's something inherently unethical about murder, because you're doing undue harm to someone without their consent. Same goes for theft, same goes for rape, same goes for fraud, same goes for abuse. These are all inherently unethical. They do undue harm without consent. The potential to do something unethical is not the same as doing something unethical. Buying a knife makes murder easier, but it isn't unethical. An age gap makes abuse easier, but it isn't unethical. You are looking at th…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 08:12 PM
1

It literally doesn't lmao I didn't move the goalposts. You just refuse to actually read what I'm saying. You didn't "simplify", you changed what I said. Targeting one specific guy is different from criticizing a group that a guy is a part of. Anyway have fun with whatever strawman you come up with next lol
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 01:37 PM
1

What word did I say was very important in my last comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 10:35 AM
1

I'm sorry, you were about to prove how my social conditioning led me to that supposed belief? Specific is a very important word here btw. I may not believe that you were specifically targeting one guy, but still believe that he fell under the umbrella of your criticism. To pretend otherwise comes off as disingenuous, hence the "Oh Please". But I think you know that already.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 02:01 AM
1

Hahaha, I don't follow manosphere. I just disagree with you. You've been conditioned to think that anyone who disagrees with you is manosphere (even if in this post I 99% agreed with you lol) and it's super ironic for you to see it the other way around. I even just said I don't necessarily think you're targeting this specific dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 12:52 AM
1

Oh? Explain how I was socially conditioned into believing that you were specifically targeting him. Especially when that wasn't even my belief lmao Please, don't leave out any details. I just thought you were doing a massive, petulant "nuh-uh" not that you were specifically targeting that one guy. But do go on, explain the social conditioning that explains my comment lol. Provide sources while you're at it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 12:40 AM
1

That's incoherent.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 12:35 AM
2

Ooooh, I get it now. Sorry yeah, that's true.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/25 12:19 AM
1

It's a man thing to be horribly socially inept because they take things extremely literally to the point of idiocy. It's a woman thing to be incredibly neurotic and read into everything to the point of self sabotage and then assume that's just the natural way of things.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 11:59 PM
1

Sure, what does that have to do with my comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 11:49 PM
1

What, can you not understand that I'm agreeing with you? Why can't you understand that? Did I say: you expect the woman to question and second guess the message he is sending and try to convince him to change his mind or ask him repeatedly and harass him into saying yes Or did I say: He may not have literally rejected her, but it's not unreasonable for her to make that assumption. If you turn down a date, you should offer an alternative if you are truly interested. To think you can turn down 3-4…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 11:48 PM
0

He said no to dates. Not to a relationship. That is what you extrapolated.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 11:45 PM
2

This doesn't prove whatever you think it's proving.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 11:44 PM
7

Yeah, it's autistic as fuck to take things at face value all the time and not extrapolate social queues from it. You're extrapolating social queues. You aren't taking things at face value. You feel that your extrapolations are face value. When they are not. Its not what you are doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 04:27 PM
0

🙄
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 04:23 PM
1

It's not a rejection. You're just doing the woman thing of believing that your social conditioning is universal. But he's doing the man thing of believing that everything he says should be taken at face value and absolutely no signals can be extrapolated from them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 04:21 PM
1

He didn't say that he didn't want to date. He said he was busy those times. You're reading more into it. You aren't taking things at face value. He was, however, socially retarded and should have provided alternatives and I don't blame her at all for moving on.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 04:19 PM
5

Oh please.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:43 PM
4

You're doing the opposite of taking something at face value. If she took it at face value she would get "I'm busy" not "no". You extrapolate a no, you don't get one at face value. He wants to date her, he's just socially inept and an idiot. She wasn't wrong to move on, but stop saying "face value" when that's LITERALLY not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:42 PM
0

He can easily suggest a date and time when he isn’t busy. But he didn’t. Why? And this is the part where you read something into it. He wasn't rejecting her if he was upset that she moved on. He was, however, socially inept. I don't blame her at all for moving on.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:24 PM
0

No to a date, not No to a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:22 PM
9

No. He did not say no to continuing the relationship, he said no to a date at those particular times. He said he was busy. If anyone is muddying consent here it's you. Now, all that being said I ultimately agree with you. He may not have literally rejected her, but it's not unreasonable for her to make that assumption. If you turn down a date, you should offer an alternative if you are truly interested. To think you can turn down 3-4 dates in a row without consequences is ridiculous. You're broa…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 03:20 PM
1

There are good reasons to believe that it has higher chances of being abusive. Or that abuse could be done more easily. That does not make age gaps immoral or unethical on their own. It can explain ickyness though. So no, it doesn't fit within that framework. Unless you can find me something inherently unethical about age gaps.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 01:27 PM
1

I don't think it's fluid, more like contextual. It depends on your society or group. Assuming we're speaking from a western perspective (a safe assumption) then we do have rigid agreed upon rules for morality and ethics. You know, stuff like not doing harm to others and all that jazz. So no, icky is not "just as good" a reason as unethical or immoral. Icky can be a fine justification for why you personally don't like something. Immoral or unethical would be a justification to make something ille…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/25 01:06 PM
1

Ah, so now it's a little less about the actions of the movement and its members and more about which members are the real members and what they have to say. Kind of a retreat back to the ideals, no? No, one person acting up wouldn't discredit a movement. But a prominent member with popular support who isn't denounced within the movement and whose ideas are perpetuated and acted upon within the movement to enact actual social and legislative change does discredit a movement. Unfortunately some mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 07:21 PM
1

Yeah, I agree. Always a good idea to look at the things a movement has actually done (and what its members disavow or abide) than to listen to the claims of its members.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 06:53 PM
1

So when evaluating whether an organization is radical or not we must evaluate the actions they take and not their actual ideals.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 06:38 PM
0

I agree, it's not related. I thought getting rid of the patriarchy was more a mainstream liberal feminist type of ideal at this point.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 06:27 PM
-1

Would you say that by that definition a movement that wants to tear down the patriarchy would be a radical one?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 06:22 PM
2

I don't draw the line before 100 years
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 04:00 PM
-1

So there's no problem with someone older dating an 18 or 19 year old in your mind? Because you said teenagers, and those are teenagers. You want to raise the age to 21, so obviously you weren't talking about the 13 year olds. Those are already minors under the law.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:18 PM
1

I just laid it out for you. All in quotes.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:16 PM
1

So then 18 and 19 years olds are adults?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:14 PM
2

Yes we are No, we aren't. You seem to be struggling with following along in the thread, so let me help you. You: We shame men for dating much younger women cause it's icky. Me: There's nothing inherently immoral about it, it just feels icky to women (and many men). You: Men on this thread are openly saying they want young teenagers because they can't argue back. Or because they want to fuck a teenager. That's pretty immoral imo Me: That's not inherently due to an age gap. You could want to date …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:13 PM
1

No, all people in their 20s are adults. Why do you say that?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 01:02 PM
0

Most people in their 20s are not adults. We should increase it to 30.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:57 PM
4

We're discussing wanting the age gap for that reason. No we aren't. You're moving the goalposts. We are discussing what about age gaps is inherently immoral/unethical. You can scroll up in our exchange if you need proof of that. If someone wants to date someone younger specifically because they want to control them, of course that is unethical. If a strong person wants to date someone weaker just to control them, that's unethical too. Doesn't mean age gaps are immoral and it doesn't mean strengt…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:56 PM
4

You said this: It being easier to control them is unethical I said it's easier for a strong person to control someone weaker. Is it unethical for them to date? You said Yes all of those things are also unethical I think we agree that it's not being a strong person who is dating is the unethical part. The higher potential for abuse is not the unethical part. The ABUSE is the unethical part. An age gap is exactly the same. There is higher potential for abuse (once again, as we have determined, NOT…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:46 PM
5

So a man should only date a woman who is of equal physical strength to him, otherwise it's unethical? According to you almost every hetero relationship on earth is unethical?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:37 PM
2

It being easier to control them is unethical No it isn't. A physically powerful person can more easily physically control their partner. A rich person can more easily financially control their partner. Is it unethical for strong or rich people to date weaker or poorer people? No, only if they actually engage in the abuse. Higher potential for abuse does not equal abuse. Want to fuck a teenager is unethical Not if they're legal adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:33 PM
1

Well when it's a top comment it means more people agreed than disagreed and it's in the hundreds of upvotes. So that's indicative of something.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:27 PM
3

It's kind of arbitrary in a way. We have agreed on 18 as an age at which you are an adult and can make these decisions for yourself. If we had arbitrarily chosen 25 instead people like you could be repeating your exact words and saying they're still too young to not be manipulated.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:26 PM
6

Well you haven't offered me anything inherently unethical about age gaps yet, so for now that's all you got.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:18 PM
1

Yeah, because it's icky. Hence, my argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:15 PM
2

That's not inherently due to an age gap. You could want to date an elderly woman because she can't argue back. Wanting to subjugate your partner is the immoral part, not the age gap. Wanting to fuck a legal adult teenager is icky not immoral. A large age gap does increase the likelihood of abusive behavior, that's for sure. But you have to evaluate that on a case by case basis, not just condemn an age gap out of hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:13 PM
2

We shame men for dating much younger women cause it's icky. I think this is the crux of the argument. People just find it icky and then work backwards to try to justify that feeling. There's nothing inherently immoral about it, it just feels icky to women (and many men).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 12:05 PM
8

But if you have like some 25 year old dating a 35 year old, no one’s gonna notice or care. Excuuuuuse me?! Have you even been on Reddit? It's insane how puritanical this site has gotten about age gaps. Please trust me, there are HORDES of people who get upset about 25 & 35 year olds dating. I saw a top comment the other day shitting on a 23 and 28 year age gap.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 11:55 AM
1

I'm not dismissing everything else. I'm criticizing the language of the study as it can easily reinforce a narrative that I don't think is good for society. I don't have a problem with the conclusions of the report or that they chose to focus on this. I can criticize an aspect of the study without throwing the whole thing out. But I find it's already hard enough to address men's issues or have them be taken seriously, so I definitely have a problem with a study where all the language points to t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 02:17 PM
2

it’s just staying clear about the scope. No that's my whole problem. If this was called the "Women's Gender Gap Report" and the language in the study explicitly said that they are only measuring the places where women, specifically, are behind then I wouldn't have a problem with it. The problem isn't about what they are measuring, it's that they are presenting all of gender parity as being about one thing: where women are behind. That doesn’t mean men’s struggles aren’t real, it just means this …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 01:59 PM
2

You’re splitting hairs No, not really. If there was a report that said it was trying to achieve parity and only measured where men are behind I think you would have a problem with that framing. Men are consistently behind in certain metrics and are struggling more than ever in some new metrics. Only focusing on the places where men are behind and ignoring all the places where they are ahead would not be about tracking their progress towards parity. Furthermore, I would have to wonder what kind o…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 01:45 PM
1

A more specific title and more specific language in the introduction. Because in the report itself it only talks about the gap between sexes and achieving parity in the introduction.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/25 01:36 PM
6

Which it isn't. Its tracking the progress of women's empowerment.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/25 08:05 PM
11

Then that's still not accurate. If it was just measuring gender gaps then it would measure the ones going in the other direction. In the report it says it's measuring gender parity, full stop. You yourself are the one who said it was measuring parity. Call it the "women's empowerment report" or the "women's progress report" in that case. And in the study itself write about how you're only measuring women's advancement or the closing of negative gaps for women. They used purely neutral language w…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/25 11:58 AM
11

Well then it's not really measuring parity. IF it claimed to be only measuring parity for women, it would be dishonest. If women are doing better than men somewhere, that's not parity either. I just read the first page of the report, and all of the language is about neutral parity. It talks about gaps between genders. But the report isn't just measuring all gaps between genders, it's only measuring gaps where women are behind. So it does seem a little dishonest, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/25 11:39 AM
1

Alright, if we're pulling out the back country credentials, I've been going back country backpacking on multi day trips multiple times a year for over a decade. So we got that out of the way. There's a reason that bear cans have to be used by law where I go backpacking and that's in black bear country. It's because bears are dangerous and we don't want them associating humans with food. I've encountered a few black bears, one of them stalked me and my two friends for about 4 kilometers. That one…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 01:11 PM
–

Feminist writers have books about how men's issues affect women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/25 07:52 PM
–

Women's subs on Reddit are unhinged. Thank god women in real life don't act like the ones on this website.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/25 07:40 PM
0

But they ought to be treated worse than wild bears, at the very least.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/25 06:05 PM
2

Agreed on all points!
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/25 09:51 PM
-1

I have. I've seen bears. Rather see a man every time. Y'all are delusional and bigoted.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/25 09:45 PM
–

So size matters then.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/25 09:33 PM
1

But it isn't artful or insidious. It's not deceptive or underhanded. If you did it without being explicit, then it would be MORE manipulative. Per the definitions you provided. Maybe it can be manipulative, but it's always MORE manipulative when you aren't explicit. Definitionally. The definitions you provided in fact. L8r sk8r
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/25 02:28 AM
1

Sorry, but a direct request is going to be less manipulative simply by definition. Clearly stating your goals and desires is never going to be more manipulative than trying to obtain the same goals and desires covertly. That's just by definition. I'm not even sure your blowjob example would really be considered manipulation. Nothing covert or clever about that, it's just a shitty ultimatum. If I ask my wife if she could do the dishes and she does them, did I manipulate her into doing it? I guess…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/25 02:04 PM
1

Yes, obviously? Explicitly stating your goals, needs and intentions will always be less manipulative. Is clearly stating boundaries in a relationship manipulative because it will get you what you want? Success of the tactic is not a part of the definition of manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 10:45 PM
5

Perhaps TMI, but as a guy I can also empathize. I have parts of my parts that aren't supposed to be attached. So we have to start slow or there can be tearing there too.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 10:05 PM
–

Women don't have it beaten into them that their presence is unwanted. Women just want to "ask" without asking, the same way they go about dating. Just using hints that don't ever put you at risk of rejection. It isn't avoiding confrontation, it's avoiding rejection.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 09:59 PM
–

You're attempting to manipulate. Whether you succeed or not is another matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 09:46 PM
–

You need to stop making these assumptions when it comes to men. Not only do a lot of men respond best to direct communication, a lot of us also don't want to overstep or annoy, since that's what we've been so heavily cautioned against doing. Expecting someone to pick up on indirect signals will always be more manipulative than directly communicating your needs... Obviously. Is the potential for an extremely unlikely awkward scenario there? yes. But it won't be manipulative, everyone will know ex…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 09:42 PM
–

Is it that they get to feel like a hero, or that their advance will be welcomed instead of reviled? Maybe both.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 09:17 PM
–

This read as more of an explanation than a justification to me. But I do agree with you that a lot of the time the way women are socialized is used as a justification while the socialization of men must be completely dismantled.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 05:52 PM
0

You definitely sound mad
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 08:02 PM
2

Didn't realize having the same moral standards for everyone was a feminine ideal. Is hypocrisy a staple of male morality?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 09:07 PM
2

If you aren't better, then you are the exact same thing you are railing against. If you justify doing bad things because bad things have been done to you, you'll just keep perpetuating the same bullshit. I don't use women's morality. I use my morality. I will ruthlessly apply my standards of morality to man and woman alike, because that is what I think is right. And a lot of women hate that shit because they get called out for the same shit they complain about men doing. Them being hypocrites wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 08:59 PM
1

Good on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 07:59 PM
1

Damn I guess we gotta add "not typing like OP" to the list of attractive traits lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 07:28 PM
1

My girlfriend once told me that she couldn't hurt me. She wouldn't even know how to. I can't quite put it into words but that really bothered me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 07:08 PM
1

Appreciate your work, king
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 06:47 PM
2

I get what you're saying, but we have to be better. I've heard so many times from women "I'll start being better once men stop doing X". We should do the right thing because it's the right thing, or because it's more effective. Not because of some tit for tat system. Personally, I don't want to give them any more ammo. I've got my principles and I'm going to apply them to myself and to others in equal measure. Because that's what a man ought to do, imo. If you do that, they can never point the f…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 06:29 PM
1

Except then they are only waving through a certain type of guy. The kind of guy who is assertive and approaches. Assholes who don't give a damn about what you think have absolutely no problem approaching women. You'll automatically have a higher percent of that kind of man in your pool if you just sit back and wait. And women do a whole lot of complaining about that kind of man.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 01:33 PM
–

Do you mean you've formed an opinion of judges based on how they... statistically tend to rule more harshly before they've eaten?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 12:27 PM
1

Yeah, and you asked men to stop body shaming. They're asking you to stop body shaming. Seems pretty "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 12:23 AM
1

It would still be body shaming men to use it against a woman. Just like if you said a man had flabby vulva energy (or whatever lol) it would still be body shaming women.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 12:21 AM
2

As far as large figures go I could definitely see that. I was thinking more within their own community. Like situations where you get the kind of responses I listed. Admittedly I mostly see it when people ask why they keep defending blatant sexism towards men.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 10:15 PM
2

I think Immutable characteristics are a good place we can draw a line on what hatred is maybe tolerable and what hatred is completely unacceptable. Gender, race, disabilities, etc. Not cool.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 08:40 PM
3

Do they? Just from what I've seen on Askfeminists, whenever a thread comes up about something bad that feminists either have done or defend it's: -I don't believe that really happened/ you must have misunderstood -It's not a bad thing when women do it -That wasn't a REAL feminist -I don't care I've never seen anyone ever go: "You're right, that's a bad thing that we should work on fixing". To be fair though it's not like male spaces say that a whole lot either lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/25 08:36 PM
–

Well full disclosure, I'm a straight dude and these are just men I wished I looked like 😂😂
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 04:42 AM
–

Okay but what about Ian Bohen? 👀
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 03:56 AM
5

Or maybe because you get rejected so much you kind of cling on to whoever you manage to get. They don't have to be fairy-tale perfect, just good enough. Maybe, idk.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 03:00 AM
–

Regardless of how I feel about celebrity crushes... You have good taste lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 02:45 AM
–

I think a "crush" is more than just thinking someone is hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/25 02:39 AM
2

You can judge him for his preferences, when did I say you couldn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 11:55 PM
0

At different points in his life he had different preferences. I'm curious, what do you think "preference" means?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 11:51 PM
-1

pre·fer /prēˈfər/ verb 1. like (one thing or person) better than another or others; tend to choose. I don't know your personal definition of "prefer", but I do know what it means. Did he make any prescriptions for how society should be structured? No. He said that at some points in his life he would prefer the modern woman and that at others he would have preferred the 1950s woman. Some days I would prefer steak and on other I would prefer cake. I would especially prefer to have my cake and eat …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 11:46 PM
0

People prefer things that they prefer? How intriguing...
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/25 11:31 PM
3

I don't think you should be banned. You're just a salt and vinegar kind of guy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/25 05:06 PM
2

I think you may have been shadowbanned or something. I can see you replied but it's not showing up here.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/25 04:55 PM
3

Asking to do a sexual act, getting consent, and then doing it is normal behavior, yes. From men or women. There's obviously impulse control since when told no he didn't do anything else. You might just be a little unhinged. If a woman did the same this wouldn't make the news. Because, while unusual, it isn't bad.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/25 04:23 PM
5

Yeah it's weird an inappropriate, it's not assault. It's not malicious. It's not even immoral. But you are trying to color it that way. Are you okay?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/25 04:20 PM
3

So are you saying he victimized people, or not? Is the asking part what makes it ok? Yeah that's what consent is
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/02/25 03:55 PM
1

Yeah, I get you. I'm not saying we must always call everything out, I'm just saying we ought to try. Strive to be better, even if the ideal might not be possible. Of course we don't have the bandwidth to really do that and it's not a fair expectation that we always do that, I agree. But one place where I definitely disagree with you is letting venting and hyperbole slide. I don't let it slide when I see women compare us to wild animals or when they say they legitimately want all of us dead. I do…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 08:25 PM
3

Both are useless in their own way.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 06:36 PM
1

I don't devote a lot of energy to challenging them, but I do challenge them sometimes. I think we should make an effort to always challenge them. One of my biggest problems (perhaps the biggest?) is how they never call each other out. They either pretend they don't see it or pretend that those people aren't really a part of their movement, etc. We have to be better, not just a reflection of what we want to fight.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 06:25 PM
3

While we don't want to turn into menslib we also don't want to turn into mensrights. There's a careful balance!
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 06:19 PM
1

While I agree with the spirit of your post, this is the type of thought terminating cliche thinking that we shouldn't do either. They made a good point about how society might be shifting to favor one gender in certain areas. It's worth taking some time to think about it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 06:17 PM
35

Yeah, I definitely hear where you're coming from. We don't have a ton of studies that really define and compare loneliness between men and women and that come away with a clear cut disproportional result. I do believe there is something there, though. Suicide and homelessness (which do wildly disproportionately effect men) point to some sort of lack of support. Substance abuse and addiction among young men has risen to double the rate among young women recently, which points to some sort of desp…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates11/02/25 05:57 PM
0

I'm with you, I wish we wouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater when it comes to feminism. It really does get a lot of things right. Most of the things we complain about here are due to unfair gender expectations, whose cumulative effects feminists define as the patriarchy. Well, some feminists define the patriarchy that way...
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/25 05:45 PM
0

The interpretation that I see the most is that it is just the totality of all gender expectations and their consequences in our society. And that when looking at the totality of those consequences men tend to benefit more / suffer less from them than women do. I would generally agree with that definition, but it's a matter of to what degree. You'll have some who argue that men's suffering doesn't exist or is negligible. Or that men can't experience any negative consequences due to their gender (…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/02/25 02:12 PM
17

Not only that, but then you get to witness the same group do the exact behaviors that they claim is ruining everything (and is your fault), but somehow "It'S dIfFeReNt!!" when they do it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates02/02/25 06:21 PM
1

Why do you immediately jump to making it a comparison with women? Makes it a bit of a zero sum game, no? Like women can have some harmful tendencies even if men have "more", right?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 07:20 AM
2

"too bad" Yeah, fuck him. "I don't love you enough to endure a 6/10 experience." What does he deny you that he's done for previous partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:30 AM
2

Having an "experimental, uninhibited, stage" is a luxury most women have available to them. Only the top dudes get to experience that in their youth. Makes sense that guys will feel resentment when they're told "too bad so sad. You got to have good times too though!" When, no they really didn't. Things changed for her, he never had the privilege of experiencing a change.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:25 AM
1

As a man who has been on many dates and has had long term relationships with women (and is in one right now) do you honestly think discussing the bill beforehand tends to go well?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:18 AM
1

Do you think men generally have some harmful tendencies?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:16 AM
2

Holy shit. Every time a woman has a problem with society or the dating scene everyone and everything needs to change to accommodate them. If men have an issue? Well they just gotta man up and do better. It's so fucking classic. This shit never ends.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:14 AM
1

Your anecdotal conclusions: unfounded My anecdotal conclusions: factual source: It came to me in a dream
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 05:01 AM
1

You're missing the category of: Something they will do for someone they are REALLY attracted to, but otherwise wouldn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 04:56 AM
1

You reframed it as something they just changed for themselves. But a proper analogy would be about things they were willing to do for someone else that they won't do for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 04:53 AM
1

It's hard for people like you to recognize your own privilege, it's okay.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 04:31 AM
2

They probably do live in the US and are just being combative.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/25 04:12 AM
1

Montreal and Quebec? What's up with that haha
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates01/08/24 03:44 PM
1

I don't know what world you live in lol My gym membership is 25$ a month, my creatine, protein and supps might be 40$ a month. Seems like you just make insanely expensive (and unnecessary imo) choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/24 01:23 PM
1

Every woman will be young, not every man will be tall. Age might be the most mutable thing we have lol, it's constantly mutabling! Mine's mutableing right now!!!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/22 08:05 PM
2

I agree with you. It's easy for me to feel like she should be named and shamed because that's what happens to men when they are falsely accused. That would be just, to me, if she faced that same social stigma. But maybe it would not be right? Is it possible for something to be just and fair but not right? Well anyway that's what I feel about it. I also feel like we really should not be revealing anyone's names only from an accusation.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 02:48 AM
3

What a useful comment.
/r/MensRights12/10/15 02:42 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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