TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

lolatgenderwars Archive

View 1 posts and 249 comments by lolatgenderwars on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

I guess almost everyone suffers from juvenile insecurity. You're a sexual deviant.. a freak and you hardly realize it. Keep on with the glee.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/18 01:15 AM
1

Your feefees are too easily hurt
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/18 11:33 PM
1

I think your standards of "fat" are highly skewed by American fatness. Are you from the US? That and your arguably irrelevant female opinion of female attractiveness?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 06:30 AM
1

Hahahah... why would I do any of that? That could be true or could be fiction. It has NOTHING to do with the fact that: 1) my reddit posting history (which I alluded to) can be verified to some degree with my posting history and it shows I don't spend much time here... yet more importantly: 2) this is a general argument about how some hobbies/interests are more interesting/useful that others (esp. for attracting women) You're all offended, not me. Nice try, though. Let's reiterate the point: Aga…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 06:17 AM
1

Ok this is getting fucking dumb. yes I know ppl here who have been doxxed or the target of doxxing attempts. You "know" them... in real life? What happened to them? Fess up. And don't get your panties in a bunch, that's not my intention. There is ABSOLUTELY logic behind modding this sub more stringently than others. There is legitimate reason behind our rules. A debate sub would not really function without a lot of them. Plus you're talking about a lot of controversial topics. Red pillers in par…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 05:45 AM
0

People here have been targets of doxxing? You know this how? Did this individual just say this? Have by chance you seen a pic (a medium for them to be doxxed) of this individual (or more likely multiple individuals to have a strong case) on the forum and therefore or giving them a legitimate reason to be afraid? Or did these "doxx scares" come from people who have never shared photos? You just trust people on THIS forum of all places? There should be no reason to discourage sharing of photos. Pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 05:31 AM
-1

People post their pics on Reddit and all over the place without this weird scaremongering bullshit. What does that have to do with reddit vs. PPD or the Internet in general? Mask a part of your face then because the Mod comment makes no sense at all. Some random blonde or brunette or chubby fat american dude is going to get "doxxed" ... yeah right.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 05:12 AM
1

Speaking for yourself there, no doubt. None of that relates to me. I stated my use or Reddit quite clearly.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 05:11 AM
-1

What's your problem if it's not against reddit rules?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/18 04:26 AM
1

Someone posted a ton of old saved pics here during purge week and most of the women were quite overweight and generally not very attractive at all... to be polite.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 09:32 PM
2

He missed that part about her being quite physically attractive...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 07:01 PM
1

I don't think that kind of pointless semantics debating helps anyone, though. It doesn't touch on what kind of specific behaviors are actually good for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 05:47 PM
1

Ah yes, some lazy dude with a drug habit can't be bothered to do anything right. Shocking. http://www.natsal.ac.uk/media/2078/b1-capi-and-casi-questionnaire.pdf HetLife Altogether, in your life so far, how many (women/men) have you had sexual intercourse with (vaginal, oral or anal)? Please type in the number, '0' if none. UK question here. ^ This is just slightly more liberal than the US questions, which specifically spells out what these intercourses are (e.g. vaginal intercourse here by some …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 04:56 PM
1

For sure. Hence I spend no more than 2-3 hours per WEEK active on here. Ditto on video games/TV. That and regarding your "everything about women" comment - this is clearly important for PPD/Manosphere and the current discussion. Being interesting and appealing is something most men here are not. Ditto on dolts who's only hobby/interest is sport or fartpipe cars.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 03:39 PM
1

You're generally on point, except a few things where some nuance is needed... Confidence is key bro: I don't know if developing an OCD obsession with self improvement is the key to improving your confidence; because you'll keep finding new things to hate about yourself. Also explain the unconfident guys who do well with women. Confident > "not confident" without any debate, even if "not confident" guys can get women. The problem here is that authentic confidence can't be taught, it's built over …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 03:38 PM
1

Did you miss my question about methodology? How did UK study tell people to count a partner? Second time I m asking.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 03:01 PM
1

Aren't you comparing two nations??
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 02:24 PM
1

You know nothing of most multimillionaires. Most people become wealthy later in life, that much is a fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 02:24 PM
1

Oh please. Many hobbies/interests have more appeal on many levels. Cooking? Treat someone. Physical activities? Health. Playing an instrument? Play for someone and maybe earn side cash. Photography? Again, take photos for a friend or side cash.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 02:23 PM
1

Most got there via PUA-related links for sure. PUA Forums are now polluted with RP "ideas."
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 05:41 AM
2

I doubt more than 20% of single men are able to regularly obtain casual sex. The key here is defining "regularly"
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 05:38 AM
1

It just wouldn't be a local girl. (I did know a guy who did aroad trip from Bournemouth to Scotland, and had 15 hookups lined up all planned for the drive). He told you he had "15 girls lined up for hookups" I'm guessing? Which basically means that he was randomly texting like 6 girls and maybe he'd get one on a good day?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 05:19 AM
2

AHahahahah... Poster 1: Then you might have very liberal standards about what does and doesn't count as being a loser. Poster 2: yeah, i do, cus i'm an adult lmfao Poster 2 doesn't even get how hilariously right poster 1 was right from the get-go. I guess it escapes Poster 2 that standards become more stringent as people becomes actual adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 05:15 AM
1

In those cases, yes. Sports = mindless entertainment which becomes the prime hobby and topic of discussion and "knowledge" for those guys (hint: this shit is completely worthless when it comes to being interesting which is attractive to women.. especially for those who aren't total "basics") Cars = well... they are likely low-ish income earners and can't afford a new import (certainly not anything but leasing an entry level one)... so guess what?? these are the guys who are buying old shitboxes …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 04:43 AM
4

Those fantasies will never become a reality for pretty much all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 03:18 AM
1

Low class trash that doesn't realize it's low class trash.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 02:21 AM
1

I replied to a photo comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/18 02:01 AM
1

How did you start fixating on height of all things from what I said?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 10:30 PM
2

Yeah these dudes are not handsome or sexy to anyone except men with secret homoerotic fantasies.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 04:58 PM
1

Thanks for cherry picking some bullshit about a handful (well, 2 in your case) of dudes out of thousands of billionaires and even more millionaires. What happened to the rest of them? Where's their story? You're making shit up, dude. Anecdotally, the people in the high six-figure range (500K+) to low 7-figures which I know are mostly married men with families (I work in high finance and actually regularly interact with these people).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 04:54 PM
1

The average to the best of my recollection is 5 to 6. Either way, you now have apples to apples comparison data, so you can stop wondering why CDC/US numbers are 3-4 lower than UK numbers. So anyway, what are you even on about now? The the difference is not 3-4, it's 1-2, when comparing apples to apples. That could also reflect methodology differences in questioning, not even cultural/attitude differences (the CDC lists very specific sexual acts and conditions which make someone count as a partn…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 04:51 PM
7

You are indeed very well "done" here! You posted some garbage which completely ignored the other side of evidence? LOL. Brilliant! True PPD quality stuff here, sport. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_penis_size#Erect In a study of 80 healthy males published in the September 1996 Journal of Urology an average erect penis length of 12.9 cm (5.1 in) was measured.[3] The purpose of the study was to "provide guidelines of penile length and circumference to assist in counseling patients considering…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 06:18 AM
4

Are you going to start arguing that flaccid length doesn't correlate with erect length now? :) Yup. Because that relationship is weak to non-existent as well. For study 2: Weak positive correlation is still positive correlation, especially in context of the other studies finding the same or more dramatic positive correlation. Weak, positive, statistically significant correlation can mean nothing in practical terms, dude. Your Nature article: Half an inch is a lot when it's something like 10% of …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 06:05 AM
4

You don't even know what you're looking at, do you? Let's find out... Note my comment here about ERECT size vs. height to see that I am keeping my argument consistent. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/9utigf/height/e9751sw/ Study 1 questions: http://psycnet.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F1524-9220.7.3.129 Flaccid or erect? Study 2 question: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0133079 Similarly, weak positive correlations were found between penile…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 04:32 AM
3

Have you even seen the correlation metric for erect size vs height?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 01:27 AM
3

Height barely correlates. Not enough for most people to notice.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/18 01:22 AM
1

You're the one who claimed they were all partying it up (these unicorn 20 year old "business millionaires" apparently) and then provided nothing to back that up. I'm pointing that out, first and foremost. Ultimately you're making shit up about these "unicorns" of successful people as per your arbitrary definition of them who are supposedly (according to you) partying it up to drive some point home which no doubt is just a projection of something you do or want to do. A load of thinly disguised e…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/18 11:17 PM
1

By 1 to 2 over a lifetime? So what?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/18 11:11 PM
1

The median reported by women in your own link is 5 or so, jfc.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/18 12:45 AM
1

You have no better access to their private lives than anyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/18 12:28 AM
1

Most millionaires (however made, whether corporate or own business) are living it up and not raising families? Bullshit. Source?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/18 09:33 PM
1

They use medians and with good reason. That's not debatable. Summary: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/key_statistics/n.htm#numberlifetime
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/18 09:32 PM
1

Yeah, averages vs. medians is the cause in the divergence. Median is a better metric here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/18 07:00 PM
1

"Business owners making millions" (who in their 20s/30s are EXTREMELY rare) and corporate executives making the same amount aren't partying either. They are all mostly raising families. The only common exceptions are people in show business.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/18 06:59 PM
1

Body?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/18 06:51 PM
1

Post your pic?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/18 04:16 PM
1

I wonder how much of the marginal happiness limiter at 75K or so is just ignorance of what basic luxuries exist out there. Most people probably don't know much about 'finer' things like spa treatments, business/first class travel and ultra premium wine/liquor and food (such a wagyu beef or sea urchin), to name a few.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/18 07:43 PM
0

You really can't get top RMV without being high SMV. It's literally impossible. Looks (heavy in SMV) are still going to be a component of RMV.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/18 04:33 PM
8

Hate to break it to you but most wealthy people aren't partying into their middle ages or even 30s. They are raising families.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/18 04:01 PM
1

The CDC reports medians. The UK data I haven't even seen a source for (first issue) but is almost certainly a mean or "simple" average. The US simple average is also like 6+. The median is a far better number here due to the type of data being looked at.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/18 03:43 PM
1

Of course it renders you argument moot. Your level of imprecision is so big you essentially have no argument to begin with. You didn't even bother making up a number because you'd be pulling things out of your butthole at that point and your argument would be a very easy target to critique and dismiss for good. Right now you're just hoping to engage in some bullshit imprecise argument for the sake of spewing your bias all over someone LOL. I'm just calling you out on having no actual information…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 05:49 AM
5

I agree that they have no impact (RP-affiliated men, due to them being a tiny minority), but it's the same BP guys who are: the feminists, white knights, manginas, cucks, simps and even some tradcons. who then go to RP and: their thirst/desperation merely changes form and thinly disguises itself, it doesn't go away. At that point they may stop "enabling" those women online but they are "enabling" them IRL with their thirst/desperation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 05:32 AM
4

When these guys become affiliated with RP their thirst/desperation merely changes form and thinly disguises itself, it doesn't go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 04:40 AM
1

What is unclear here? You are good at making things up which merely sound plausible, but could easily be total bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 04:02 AM
1

Hah.. he ran away pretty quick.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 04:01 AM
1

Nope. I won't bore you with the entire story, but that's the bottom line. We knew each other as friends (actually, as me being a bartender and him being my regular) before our date Right, but that's totally different from what most people envision as "sex on the first date" if you ask me. I think they are usually assuming people have never met before or maybe chatted online or something (or at the most had a brief few conversations before). You basically had a shitton of dates with him "at the b…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 03:52 AM
1

Was the first date also the first time you ever met in person or first time you ever talked?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 03:26 AM
4

Nah, just loud desperate men. You don't have to believe me.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 02:55 AM
6

They are giving thirst driven compliments to some of those women.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 02:01 AM
8

Its mostly the fault of thirsty desperate men. Like many in the Manosphere.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 01:45 AM
1

Many is an undefined term here that leaves the rest of your argument moot.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/18 01:27 AM
1

Ol' "grass is always greener on another side (time)" argument. Boring.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 11:04 PM
1

You're definitely good at making things up which "sort of" make sense!
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 10:56 PM
0

How'd so many guys (that's basically everyone) without PUA or TRP figure it out one way or another?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 10:19 PM
1

How is walking around in a costume outside of your home different than reading something inside your home or thinking about something in your own head (e.g. believing in star signs)? Is that what you need clarification on?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 09:20 PM
3

He is wrong. Nice guys finish last, assholes get laid. All the hand wringing in the world won't change those basic facts. LOL - anyone can write anything on the Internet. I can make shit up, too. Good job with the vague buzzwords and made up facts, bud. And nice to see you off the Just World malarkey.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 05:24 PM
2

It has nothing to do with his agreement vs. not. It has to do with the actual qualities he's describing. He's also taken a side (of those qualities) and stated it is superior. His agreement or wishful thinking does not drive how people react to the traits he's for (or against). If 51% of people think assholes or aloof dudes are idiots, he is essentially right. That's all there is to it. Nothing to do with right/wrong or wishful thinking driving anything. You're just complaining about his style o…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 05:19 PM
2

Private vs. public activity. Not comparable.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 05:07 PM
2

Assuming your opinion is mirrored by others in practice.... women only dress up when it is "socially acceptable" (Halloween). If they did otherwise, they would be judged negatively or think that they would be judged negatively, and since they are seemingly more averse to that, they do not (vs. men and those conventions or whatever).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 04:58 PM
3

So it sounds like women are far more worried about judgment than men are.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 04:42 PM
2

Do you honestly see morality there? Where is the "right vs. wrong" aspect of it? Do you understand what morality is? It's good/right vs. bad/wrong in a GENERAL, MOST socially accepted sense (like murder/lying is almost always inherently "bad" or simply "wrong" .. for example). The just-world hypothesis or just-world fallacy is the cognitive bias (or assumption) that a person's actions are inherently inclined to bring morally fair and fitting consequences to that person, to the end of all noble a…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 04:34 PM
3

Way more adult women dress up for Halloween, on the other hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 04:31 PM
2

No, there is no morality (right vs. wrong) here at all (what I called good vs. bad initially, where I was using the latter terms in a general sense). Merely point of view on what is "attractive" vs. "not" .. or "good for attractiveness" (vs. not).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 04:14 PM
2

That has absolutely nothing to do with the "Just World" fallacy/hypothesis as there is absolutely no morality involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 03:24 PM
12

Calling out certain groups of people, whose choices have obvious, recurring, negative (to them and other involved parties) consequences isn't immature. It may be "mean" but it has nothing to do with the observer's maturity.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 05:51 AM
7

Not even remotely close, which isn't surprising given your lack of elaboration. OP's point is more closely aligned with "likes attract likes" and individual choices/consequences than anything to do with morality (good vs. bad).
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/18 05:49 AM
2

More like hanging out is how fucking OR dating starts nowadays.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/18 03:03 PM
2

You'd be of oddball minority opinion then, almost certainly. Any meetup with romantic intent, even if it doesn't involve physical contact on that meeting seems to count as a date for most people. It's the intent and possibility that matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/18 03:02 PM
4

big tittied chubby latinas from queens Always Fucking beautiful white girl with long barrel curls Baby Bakers
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/18 02:44 PM
1

So what..?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/18 05:46 PM
2

Nope. Hence I have insider information. PPD isn't going to show you what high value men do. The opposite, really.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/18 02:37 AM
2

Banter and being a clown or annoying is not the same thing. And then these idiots wonder why they can't seem to attract women who are mature. Idiots don't know they are idiots.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/18 11:43 PM
2

Some men. Low-value ones in particular.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/18 11:43 PM
1

Yes, I do feel high and mighty. Any other questions?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/18 11:42 PM
1

Being an immature, annoying idiot and bantering are not the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/18 11:42 PM
2

Have you ever considered that the guys who do that constantly are immature clowns?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 09:12 PM
1

Hardly. Wide framed men with thick bodies are far more so (esp. Wide upper body).
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 08:30 PM
0

Wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 01:30 PM
4

What makes you think your assessment of that is accurate?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 04:44 AM
0

causes a very real drop in attractiveness. Actually there's no evidence of this, because we're not sure what causes the reaction relative to the height surprise (loss of attraction or loss of preconceived cliches of actors being tall). You're just jumping to conclusions or projecting.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 03:58 AM
1

You're right, because you've set the bar that low. As for the rest of that what that means... it's clearly escaped you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 03:57 AM
1

Is there non-anecdotal evidence that says they are different in this case?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 03:56 AM
1

Of course... he's: short, chubby (face AND body) and balding. I mean.. what is there that's physically attractive about him? He's literally got nothing going for him. All personality and intelligence (status). That has nothing to do with tall vs. short Brad Pitt (famous in both cases). Brad has a good body AND face. Whether height means shit in this case, unless he's a super short Brad (5'4 or under)... (consider what might as well be the law of diminishing returns) is highly questionable.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 02:31 AM
1

It takes a special retard to think that height has more to do with "protection" perception versus frame size. A short "muscleman" (very wide build) looks far more dangerous/masculine than even a medium-framed beanpole.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 02:21 AM
1

clothing / hygiene / styling / grooming and perhaps diet/fitness
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 02:19 AM
1

Fame and its cliche expectations are not a physical trait.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/18 02:15 AM
1

Maybe it has to do with preconceived notions being broken and nothing to do with changes in attraction?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 09:42 PM
-1

Oh yeah that sounds totally legit!
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 09:12 PM
1

Analysis of Male and female stated vs revealed preferences showed that both genders do prefer what they say they do when judging attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 09:11 PM
1

As long as height is the only difference my answer is the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 09:09 PM
1

All else equal including fame? Probably not quite, but close. At 5'5 or 5'6 it would be the same. There's that data that showed only 5'4 or below men report fewer sexual partners, hence my choice of cutoff at 5'5. He also has more of a U not V body.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 07:30 PM
0

Yes true, a 5'8 or 5'9 woman would be used to seeing men shorter than her. Not so much for a 5'3 woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 06:47 PM
2

That's just some internet bullshit. Way more to sexual/physical attraction than that. Face and upper body build > all. Ditto on self care.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 06:24 PM
3

Come on dude height alone has nothing to do with protection, security or status.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 06:19 PM
1

That should mean that taller women should be more OK with dating men shorter than them. I saw someone here mention a study where shorter women were more likely to rate shorter men more favorably, though. Conflicting information it seems.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 06:14 PM
3

Why would he be deficient in other ways? Unless she's a height fetishist and hyper focuses on height, shes more likely to judge on face, body build (v shape) and even self care. Hence you see 5'4-7 (shorter than average men) with taller than average (5'6-8) women on occasion .. it's particularly rare because those short men and tall women are themselves rare, not because of height fetishism.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/18 06:11 PM
3

Nah. More attractive people certainly exist (a simple rating contest can determine who that is) and they have more options (often of other more attractive people). Preferences which are subjective don't negate objective/ universal preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/18 01:46 AM
1

Up to 9/10 people have or desire to have kids and even more would like to have had them, so most people are either looking for someone to start a family with or have already found that someone. https://news.gallup.com/poll/164618/desire-children-norm.aspx http://time.com/5107704/more-women-mothers/ Seems as though about 10% of never find that someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/18 05:02 PM
2

Some things you definitely want to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/18 11:40 PM
2

Nothing like not truly knowing who you share a bed with I guess. Yet another PPD thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 09:21 PM
4

Make her butter chicken you clown
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 05:36 PM
3

Don't forget to let your husband know that
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 01:25 PM
2

It's a nice myth. It almost certainly has to do with tolerance reduction due to less drinking, not aging. She got implied causality wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 12:26 PM
0

Yet another minority group, see the point? All of those things come as a package, too. Most people in the US still identify with a religion even if they aren't heavy church goers..
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 12:24 PM
2

Lewis might be a whiner in general, but he's got this on lock. There is really no reason (very few valid ones) why a woman should prefer casual sex to LTR sex or LTRs in general at any age. "Exploring sexuality" is a bullshit reason. No one had ever defined what that even means. Sexual pleasure? Sexual pleasure can be derived from self-stimulation. Intimacy can be had with same-sex platonic friends. Romance? Are casual sex partners really romantic? Would the casual sexers know what romance even …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 03:06 AM
1

That's great, no disappointment.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/18 02:05 AM
0

And you're totally open about your past with your boyfriends, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/18 06:03 PM
0

You think 3 years of extra age results in more hangovers? You've either lost tolerance due to less drinking or started drinking bad liquor.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/18 05:59 PM
-1

Forget coming out and fessing up.. how many even realize or can reflect on the fact that they were just low self esteem external validation seekers?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/18 05:54 PM
1

The divorce rate is essentially identical for people marrying between age 25 to 35. That means some of those people met late in college (people date about 4 years prior to getting married). The most risky marriages are those of very early 20 somethings (esp who didn't go to college) who also dated very briefly for obvious reasons OR people marrying after 40 (possibly re-marrying).
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/18 04:02 AM
1

Where is the line between non flashy and flashy wealth?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/18 03:57 AM
3

The Looksists see the ugly/fat/short men with wives/GFs but they do not consider those women sexually attractive to themselves. They are are largely shooting out of their league...
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/18 03:56 AM
1

So what is so gosh darned interesting about pointing out for years on end the hypocrisy or stupidity of low value men?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 07:42 PM
1

Beauty is important but those numbers you pulled out of your ass worthless
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 07:32 PM
1

Getting circlejerked or upvoted by your forum friends? I mean seriously, how or why does a non Manospherian person (esp a girl) even find PPD and then stick around?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 04:38 PM
1

That's better. Talking about yourself is so easy though, isn't it? Maybe even a little validating?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 04:23 PM
1

Yeah you definitely all like talking about yourselves. I noticed that much.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 04:16 PM
1

Why do you think anyone cares one bit about your vaguely defined preferences?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 04:10 PM
1

What are you on about? Do you even follow your own line of thinking? You said this: I think part of it is that I genuinely believe younger girls tend to be into younger looking guys and this I wasn’t trying to imply younger guys look like girls or something but yes I think as they get a little bit older they tend to look more masculine. I mean like generally past teenage years early 20s not starting like mid 30s or something. Do you understand what demographic you're talking about here? You're t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 04:05 PM
1

Right but why is that a point worth mentioning given how limited the teenage girl opinion is in importance to the dating world (given they the only tiny group that prefer those so called younger less "masculine" men)?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 03:46 PM
1

Ok the latter clarification makes your statement make sense within that context but it becomes a moot point: who cares what mid teen girls like? They are irrelevant for the most part.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 03:34 PM
1

I love how you think your 7.5 and 8.5 numbers (down to the freaking decimals!!) mean anything that has a tangible impact on how attraction and relationships work. Post your pic.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 02:49 PM
1

Bain Capital doesn't do investment banking, they are primarily private equity. Whole thing reeks bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 02:45 PM
1

younger looking guys and then at some point your preferences really are for more masculine if that makes sense. This says her preferences for men go from young to masculine, which makes no sense at all. That means she might like masculine young men when she gets older and age is basically irrelevant Young and masculine are not even on the same spectrum. Young to old makes sense Or feminine to masculine (in your example) You can be young and masculine. Young and feminine. Or old and feminine.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 02:33 PM
1

Younger and masculine are not on the same scale. Younger vs older Feminine vs masculine What you're saying only makes sense to you or people who are very liberal in their interpretation of words
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 02:25 PM
2

I cannot wrap my head around why people like you post here either
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/18 12:29 PM
1

What if this.. what if that? Instead of making up problems which may not even exist about some study which hurt your feelings by casting a doubt on your preconceived notions about how the world works, why not try finding the study and actually see how large the depth and breadth of their conclusion was? Additionally, that doesn't invalidate that conclusion, even if true. If that's the case, taken men on aggregate are still more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 10:26 PM
0

What's your point?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 03:46 PM
4

More like NONE of the answers reflect general opinion, so something is up.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 01:26 PM
10

Women of PPD: DUREEEEEE no he doesn't even register! Large group of non-PPD women in psychology research: find men who are taken more attractive. Hmmm...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 04:49 AM
1

That sounds like an attempt to point out an apex fallacy, yet there is none here whatsoever. Billionaires are <0.001% of the population. Mesomorphs are probably close to 1/3 or so (don't have exact numbers, so feel free to post some).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 04:00 AM
1

We could, but not in a situation where you claimed ectomorphs are most preferable. That's clearly false.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 01:21 AM
1

Here you go with the smoke and mirrors...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/18 01:13 AM
1

Women do NOT prefer tall AND lanky. They do NOT prefer ectomorphs like you said. There is literally ZERO evidence for your claim and I just showed you contrary evidence. Your incoherent mess of an argument is baseless.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 08:55 PM
1

Then bring it on. I feel bad for any mofo who actually hardcore diets through the weekend unless they are trying to make a career out of photos of their naked body. Gotta live a little bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 08:52 PM
1

You're introducing variables here which convoluted (purposefully, no doubt) a simple argument: which body type (somatotype) do women prefer? Your argument that height needs to be included is baseless, especially since height and somatotype correlation isn't clear (there are short/medium/tall men in every somatotype group). Women prefer mesomorphs (specific v-shaped builds). Period.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 08:32 PM
-1

I could just trim the fat off the ribeye when I eat it and avoid most of that cheese and potatoes ("all yours honey!"). And request vegetables, as per the usual. Slicing some tomatoes and seasoning them isn't isn't a big deal. Oh, or, maybe.. unless my wife is a fatty she would have skipped the cheese and potatoes altogether and most people don't drink during the week anyway. So really we're back to two healthy people chowing on ribeyes-ex-fat plus some vegetables to boot. I'd save the cheat foo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 08:32 PM
6

lean atheltes have the advantage nearly every time. Yup. Reasonably low level of bodyfat (like a soccer or tennis player) plus moderate amount of muscularity = win. Triple win if you have a naturally v-shaped upper body.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 07:56 PM
1

Men think that v-types look better, and women don't share that preference. You know you have no clue what you're talking about, right? I'll just leave this here as evidence for all interested parties. http://sci-hub.tw/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090513813001177
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 07:24 PM
3

Why not be a guy that hits the gym and then eats lean meats and vegetables, plus has a reasonable amount of various alcoholic beverages during the weekend?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 07:20 PM
1

What you should really ask is what those women looked like. Mid range SMV at best.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 05:38 PM
3

Nice fantasy buddy. Most medium sized males will be lucky to bench bodyweight for 1 rep (165-185 assuming they aren't fat as hell) even with a good 2 years of very regular training. https://exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/BenchStandards Just facts. A hulk sized guy would fit your bill, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 05:31 PM
1

I see that you've been handily brainwashed by the Internet. Sorry about that. I can't wait for you to show me an actual piece of "evidence" that women prefer tall U (more or less) shaped men or bulky dock workers to V-shaped classic masculine men. We're all waiting with bated breath.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 05:25 PM
2

No one gives a shit about Internet buzzwords IRL. I have never heard anyone utter that even once. On the other hand, I see shorter men (5'4 to 5'7) who have great builds and what seems to be "normal" faces with gorgeous girlfriends. Lanky tall dudes much less so. V-taper (mesomorph) = prime build.. That's it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 04:25 PM
1

No, women have a preference for mesomorphic men (v-shaped, "classical" male builds). Ectomorphs are lanky tall dudes. Again: moderate musculature optional.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 04:02 PM
1

What the hell are you on about? Nice convenient setup for you there which is totally worthless in practice as men almost never fit those extremes (esp. the bodybuilder with single digit bodyfat). Women will prefer the guy with a particular chest/waist or shoulder/waist ratio. That could mean a guy with no gym experience at all - just a good diet. That look even without gym experience will appear masculine and strong. Muscularity completely optional. Definitely not the blob dockman.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 03:25 PM
0

tl;dr : Women prefer the type of body your garbage man or dock worker has over the type of body sculpted in a gym on male magazines. Will choose a "strongest man" competitor type over a "sculpted body." Generally within reason (not extremes). They will prefer someone with a classically masculine shaped body (the V look - that has actual evidence behind it; which means lean waist and wider upper body). There is a relationship between that and people that are predisposed to bodybuilding (lifting w…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 03:17 PM
1

Not sure what that has to do with this problem... which you are not seeing: You're literally saying that a "yes man" (which sounds like an extreme form of agreeableness, most likely on the 'compliance' facet of it) implies all men who are higher in agreeableness on all facets (and empirically more likely to make their spouse happy) are the same thing. You can't be serious. And equally dumb argument from my end would be to tell you (to see how silly you sound): oh... so you prefer low agreeablene…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 02:01 PM
1

That is how one extreme version of "agreeableness" looks IRL. Nothing more. Convenient for your bullshit argument that "I'm a snowflake and science doesn't apply to me" regarding basic facts about that kind of people that form long-lasting or happy relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 01:43 PM
1

No that's just some caricature you conveniently made up for this argument. Plus yes men and boring men aren't the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 01:23 PM
1

Where did boring men conveniently come from?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/18 04:29 AM
6

Garbage sourceless data with no definition of what counts as a partner, unfortunately. Check out CDC data for 10 largest MSAs vs. the rest. Large scale, reliable, comparable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 09:45 PM
10

Just some facts to consider: Big city women report FEWER sexual partners than small cities or rural College educated women report FEWER sexual partners than non-college educated The former is particularly shocking to information-devoid people on here.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 09:06 PM
8

Have you seen actual data on this topic? Most women don't stay single till their late 20s. They pair off in their early to mid 20s. Most have 1-5 partners. Anything above that is becoming promiscuous.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 09:05 PM
1

Weak frame. Prime Alpha would have done her right there. Back to the sidebar, bud.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 08:59 PM
1

This is just some cheapshit trolling OP on an alt. You know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 08:38 PM
1

Actually people do have a set number in absolute terms for attractiveness vs. promiscuity. A UK study showed this, although there was also a slight relationship with that effect to personal promiscuity. Needless to say, most people viewed low single digits as "most attractive." Your system also completely misjudges your typical "LTR Chads" who might have a partner count of 1-4 yet all with very high RMV girls who most men will never touch with a 10 foot pole.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 08:09 PM
1

That depends. If she went from fuckboi Chads to keeper Chads her sexual attraction isn't changing. Her wishy washy attitude towards relationships and commitment are the problem - it injects uncertainty, which is a disaster for trust building.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 08:06 PM
1

I didn't ask you to tell me what the OP called the CC. Tell me more about why the OP here required the cock carousel while most women do not and how her "urges" blew her mind... I asked you this: why did she need it (why?) - as opposed to not (like most women).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 08:01 PM
1

Only a tiny fraction of women sleep around or did in any amount (no more than 10-20% depending on where you draw the line). This much is clear from self-reported data and relationship preferences from another study commonly posted here. Back to the question: Tell me more about why the OP here required the cock carousel while most women do not and how her "urges" blew her mind... You haven't addressed anything, or you would have copy/pasted it right now. Do you need help copy/pasting?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 07:54 PM
1

That data above (both hookup culture and general sexual partner data) proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that most women did not engage in any casual sex, and if they did, it was minimal (median 30 year old woman who is average-religious reports 3-4 partners). Most womens' partner counts stop going up in their early 20s as they get into LTRs. The OP is the opposite of this, as she kept racking them up. Where did you answer this question: Tell me more about why the OP here required the cock caro…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 07:42 PM
1

OK and what is a CC number for a girl? Are you even using US CDC data for this? Or something else / some other country?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 07:41 PM
1

That has nothing to do with your off topic quip about "entertaining a disagreeable woman" and I do not recall any evidence in research that being similar on Big 5 = more stable marriage (latter I'm happy to see evidence for - your word doesn't count). For one to admit they are inferior relationship material is too bitter of a pill to swallow.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:30 PM
1

Again, what is very low N? You keep making parts of this very vague. Impossible to get anything out of it. Dumpster divers are a perfectly valid criticism of that theory: the perhaps sizable group of average quality men who casually screwed lots of low quality women?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:22 PM
1

The data is not available that cut and dry, but the differences between religiousness, social status (income) and education is usually no more than 1 partner between the median of each group. 1 partner. Check the CDC data for that, but you'll have to download it and sort it yourself. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nsfg/nsfg_2013_2015_puf.htm Hookup data? This stuff has been linked before on PPD: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-016-0798-z https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC361…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:19 PM
1

No one saw that one coming.. oh wait
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:13 PM
1

You keep saying “most women.” Many women and men were having casual relations in some way. You need to look at some actual data on American hookup culture (I'm assuming you're US based). No, most people were not even fucking anyone in hookups. Forget regular rotation of partners. All else is fiction (your imagination running wild) and projection. Have at it... You sound religious or moralistic or unable. I just know how to separate weird from normal. Normal = reported behavior of thousands of US…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:05 PM
1

I had options that were more "stable" but they bored me, so I made them unstable so I'd be less bored. My most constant and stable relationship has been with someone who is just like me and brings the fun with them naturally. This is what you're missing - it's not so easy to impress and keep a highly disagreeable woman. Would one even want to bother? LOL. You're off topic, but I'll entertain it. Those "inherent" traits can change over time. Girls have lower neuroticism than women (probably due t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:02 PM
1

So this really comes to down normal people (range: 1-5 or 1-7 partners, F and M, respectively ) vs. the promiscuous 10+ crowd, really. No one will give a shit if their partner has had a few extra partners. More physically attractive men do report more partners, but that's a very specific data point that may be misleading. This big issue is also separating men who are dumpster divers vs. not in your "theory."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 04:00 PM
1

Nice job going pure ad hominem now. Out of ammo already? Try harder. If I'm feeling nice I'll tell you about my relationship history later. Tell me more about why the OP required here cock carousel while most women do not and how her "urges" blew her mind... Never gotten an actual answer. I wonder why.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:41 PM
1

So where did any of that address the fact that the OP and most other women are nothing alike in their experience? Nice try with the cliche BS about "adults" and "urges" most of which are met with masturbation for "normal" people... except the OP. Hmm... PS: more attractive women actually report less sexual partners. Your argument makes no sense at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:33 PM
1

That's what ends up happening (because outliers have no choice) - but their relationship stability would be better if they had a non-outlier in the relationship (best yet for stability: two non-outliers). This has nothing to do with your "wants" or what you "think" is good - this is straight up inherent traits that people possess and how they impact relationship stability which are beyond your ability to self-reflect upon. (For example, in GENERAL, people who are low agreeableness or low conscie…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:20 PM
2

No idea what this vague argument of yours is. Men who are in the 2-7 partner count rage (normal) are all going to view women who fucked 10+ dudes are hos. Try something more concrete like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:13 PM
1

Tell that to the fat schlubs who all have beauties waiting for them! That's seriously your play? A few (potential) exceptions break/make the rule? We can't even know if Atlas is a real person or not, but I digress. You're hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:08 PM
1

What people's idea of ideal is may have nothing to do with what is actually ideal for long-lasting relationships. That's the punch line.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:03 PM
1

What do YOU and your preferences have to do with anything here (optimal relationship setups)? LOL. Some people can't help themselves even if they want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:51 PM
1

Yeah, thats why I thought it was a small group and initially overlooked it. I don't understand your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:50 PM
1

How can you prove? You ask. The biggest trainwrecks of women have the most reason to lie. No one will admit to repeated failures in the LTR world past a few relationships (normal for normal women). This is why social circles are so good at finding SO, but that's a digression. And the point is this: why did the OP end up in a shitton of flings? What makes her so different from all the other women who are either in LTRs in their 20s (when most people pair off) or don't sleep around while waiting f…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:45 PM
1

I saw links posted here that, FYI, actually only linked neuroticism to promiscuity when extroversion was present. Otherwise, neuroticism was not a factor at all. The point is, a person with low conscientiousness, low agreeableness would still be better off in a relationship with a high conscientiousness, high agreeableness person when it comes to relationship stability. Low conscientiousness, low agreeableness + Low conscientiousness, low agreeableness is NOT a "stable" match. It's just what end…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:40 PM
1

How can you prove they were casual flings which she intended to end vs. LTR fuckups? Its impossible. For your own safety, you assume the worst about her. On top of that, her lack of desire for LTRs is always a red flag (once you're in your 20s and relatively settled, there is no real reason to avoid them AND go on "flings").
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:33 PM
0

Add low agreeableness to that. And yes, they are going to have to continue to date one another.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:31 PM
1

N-count is not the primary factor at all. It's the underlying personality traits which cause people to rack up the n-count which make certain people of both genders less stable relationship material. You have no idea what you're saying here. Unstable people always have higher odds of breaking up every year (or day, month, whatever) vs. less so so for more stable people. That doesn't mean that all unstable people will break up a relationship in their lifetime. It just means their odds are higher …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:28 PM
2

Why zero experience? You hire the girl who worked in corporate finance at a Fortune 500 company for many years. And for a tiny startup (like this example of a restaurant)? You hire a "CFO" from a good undergraduate business school with minimal experience (like internships).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:22 PM
1

Religious, in so far as biblical prescriptions against "sex before marriage" is an issue. These people hardly exist in the US, get serious. People who do weekly church have 2+ sexual partners reported per the CDC in the their early 20s. "Not slept around", in so far as didn't experience personally something we'd describe as "riding the CC" in women. Which is what? 3 men? 5? 7? 15? 25?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:20 PM
-1

"Solidly criticized" by some locals who can barely do math? Be serious. What do you think happens after the 5 year mark? The odds of marriage lasting is even less. That's what.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:19 PM
1

It has nothing to do with other men fucking her. It's too many men fucking her, but that's not really the big issue either... It has all to do with her having gone through way more men than normal (average, for example) and that likely means she's shit material for something stable ... guess who's the common denominator in all her past relationships? Jamie with 1-2 LTRs in a better bet for an LTR than Lauren with 3 "LTRs", 5 ONSs and 6 STRs. The former is normal for a girl, the latter is an outl…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:17 PM
1

You'll have to be way more specific in defining "religious" (vs not) and "slept around" (vs not) to have anything of value here. All totally wishy washy subjective BS otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:13 PM
0

I think promiscuous women do well with other promiscuous people or men who truly don't care. The interesting thing is the comparative relationship stability of promiscuous people vs. not.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:11 PM
1

The various reds and incels got to the OP to the point she's questioning the morality (right vs. wrong) of her decisions. Really thin skin.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:10 PM
2

Yeah... because certain REEEing incels and red pillers got to some women. Thin skin.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:08 PM
1

Not you, but the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:04 PM
2

And that's all we need to know!
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 02:03 PM
1

Unless a guy were to start interrogating me about my history (which would be a total dealbreaker for me imo) it's not like all my past partners would just casually come up in conversation. Why would that be a deal breaker? Do you not ask a guy about his history? Do you not want kids? Family? Something more serious built on a strong base? One where you know what kind of things your SO did in the past? You think people just magically change one day? If you're yet another loosey goosey no-kids-want…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 01:55 PM
3

She approached this from a morality perspective - which is hilarious and shows her insecurity (to which she is blind.. naturally).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 01:54 PM
3

Betting the OP didn't tell her "nice stable guy" anything about her cock carousel years and the poor fella didn't ask....
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 01:51 PM
1

They go through long dry spells in their 20s while low to mid-high S/RMV women are mostly dating high S/RMV men and then expect them to commit and betabux in their 30s when they realise they can't actually get the high S/RMV men to commit. Nice bullshit. There is no reason or evidence that high RMV women would go through long dry spells as they know they can't get any higher than high RMV men, and those who wait the longest get the last (possibly worst pick of those men). Only by their own flawe…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 06:12 AM
1

You don't get to be the judge of that LOL
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 03:48 AM
1

The point was showing the other side.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 01:40 AM
1

Funny thing about solipsism and self centering.. you win the crown on that by looking at this from your POV only. Only you care about that - so much for self reflection.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 01:28 AM
1

Blacking out a Benz is like dousing caviar with diarrhea.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/18 12:14 AM
1

Where in your wild fantasies did you come up with the idea that I'm an incel? No one gets disappointed over intimacy. They get disappointed over losing attractive prospects, which they cannot but help feel attracted to. Still besides the matter of the two points I made which are beyond you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 11:52 PM
1

Right. That's not the problem. The problem is how low to mid-high S/RMV men are isolated in the dating market because of the comparative options their counterpart women have. They are not isolated. What are you talking about? What you're saying makes no sense whatsoever. Mid RMV women are dating mid RMV men. Or they'd be perpetually single in disproportionately large amounts... yet they are not. That's my point. Mid S/RMV women thing their S/RMV is higher because of the non-committal attention t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 07:58 PM
1

High RMV women are looking to get high RMV men to commit. They're not interested in hook-ups (so much) because they know that's not what they need to get commitment and because they get that intimacy by being in a relationship. That's exactly what they are getting. High RMV men are committing to them. Hence they don't ever consider mid or low RMV men. Being sexually attractive get's your foot in the door but after that, you have to have other qualities besides being a good fuck. Of course. which…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 07:44 PM
1

High RMV men typically have to settle for average to low SMV women at some point for hook-ups or relationships to get experience so they can date high RMV women. Where the hell do you get this idiotic idea? How does this make any sense? What are the high RMV women doing? Practicing being cat ladies? High RMV men (who are then by default high SMV - you can't be high RMV without being sexually attractive) will go for mid SMV girls for easy casual sex. This part makes sense. We're talking about LTR…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 07:20 PM
1

Wow... So you can't figure out that "black flair" here could also mean "no pill." And then you post this bullshit about musculature and vocal projection... hahahahahaah! Lots of meathead bodybuilder type guys are socially and mentally retarded, plus extremely insecure. Not all of them (in fact, far from it) are aesthetically pleasing sexy Steve Reeves "lite" type guys who also have basic charisma.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 07:03 PM
1

It's just you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:57 PM
2

The thirst of men desparate for sex has nothing to do with the fact that high RMV men and women get first pick in the dating world (usually each other), then then the next groups pair off, etc. Your problem is your are overestimating your RMV and making up shit in the process about why the world is all wrong. LOL. Try dating the girls in those pics.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:52 PM
2

Yet you can't - wonder why? Oh, let's see... because you're just not that attractive to those women.. because they get attention from men in their league?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:41 PM
2

This entire conversation has nothing to do with my opinion of women or men and everything to do with your lack of success with women because of choices you make or really unfortunate genetics.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:36 PM
1

Nice deflection. You just aren't that attractive (holistically) and want a high RMV girl. Keep dreaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:28 PM
0

And hung like a horse, naturally.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:26 PM
2

Oh, now we got it. You just want someone out of your league.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:25 PM
3

The proof is in the final results. If you can't get a date from the girls I posted pics of (either of those 3) you are either rather ugly or mentally retarded. Nothing more, nothing less.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:22 PM
2

That's not for you to decide.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:19 PM
2

Your face could be quite unsavory.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:16 PM
3

https://i.imgur.com/k85uacz.png How about these 2?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:08 PM
1

Yeahmen!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:02 PM
2

Mmm yeah all those nice guys out there...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 06:00 PM
3

Would you date this chick? https://i.imgur.com/M61vE4n.png
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 05:54 PM
3

No, hypergamy requires a 911 Turbo S or S65 AMG Benz.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 04:42 PM
1

Instead of posting more heated/banned topics, it was just lame jokes all around. Garbage.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 03:08 PM
1

Do you realize that a man using his penis on you is a fundamentally different sensation from you using it on yourself, like the difference between massaging yourself and having someone else do it? No there isn't, because neither his penis nor the dildo is attached to your nervous system. Do you even think about this stuff before you post? I mean, maybe you'd understand the analogy better if i told you that there's a subset of men (large) and a subset of women (small) who are really into the phys…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 02:49 PM
1

By watching what happens? By listening to what men will say about their locked down sexthings (oops, I meant "girlfriends") which they would never say to those girls?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 02:44 PM
1

Overall attraction and attachment isn't negotiable and isn't limited to emotional intimacy, either, unless you specifically have some kind of limited ability to actually connect with someone. Still beside the point of how that mindset of viewing men as easily replaceable is a huge red flag to anyone paying attention. Neither is particularly attractive sounding.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 02:43 PM
1

Well that's a more refreshing and honest take on it...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/18 02:40 PM
1

As for what the difference is between a dildo and a penis attached to a warm living male... caresses, kisses, different positions and stimulation. Best analogy is still the difference between a flesh light and a living girl. The male choice is a whole separate argument altogether, the analogy doesn't explain what you think it does. Like I said, that's a separate conversation, so I won't address it further. We're talking about casual sex... So the caresses (are guys looking for casual sex even kn…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 10:54 PM
2

Are you a tikka masala?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 10:38 PM
1

Why do men find that a flesh light isn't the same as sleeping with a live cute girl? We could talk about this after we're done with the current topic: women. "Add up"? Lol, is there some truth that you think is being hidden by my description Exactly. There's definitely more to it than some easily replicated "sensation."
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 10:20 PM
1

Then why not get a dildo? Available on demand, STD free, rape-risk free, at whatever size or shape you want... you don't even need to brush your teeth before you get it out! The "friction of intercourse" part doesn't add up because of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 10:05 PM
2

Try some real data for the most relevant country for PPD: the US CDC. The Internet is full of garbage data. Ok, and what made them choose the bohemian lifestyle?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 10:02 PM
1

Ok so what made them that way?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 09:30 PM
1

Same report men had 5. Not double. Medians. The CDC explains that difference in their report. Also, what sets the top 5% apart?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 09:29 PM
2

There's a ton of them here (more than you'd expect by chance) which is also quite interesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 09:14 PM
1

I don't think you understand "privacy." The results aren't going to be seen by the interviewer. All reported info is anonymous. No one will know if you said you fucked 1 person or 100. Circumstances are probably going to be different for them so I don’t think that would be super relevant. Right, so what sets them apart from the other 90-95% of women?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 09:12 PM
3

What is "a lot" of omissions? I read their website and they said the survey is done in complete privacy. No risk private info leaking. These people are professionals. Is there anything that actually suggests there are "a lot" of omissions? And there is still going to be a top 5 or 10% slutty group. So the question remains. What actually drove them into that group?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 08:55 PM
1

You're talking as if attraction (of which emotional investment is a part of) can be negotiated, which isn't true as you have no control over your brain chemistry and how it responds to the actions of the man. This is as delusional as men thinking that they won't get attached to their "plates." Forcing that mentality is likely to come off as very off-putting to many men looking for something serious because it's identical to that of men who just view women as "any random ho" except here it's "lot…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 08:38 PM
2

You didn't actually address what I said. His interest in commitment isn't clear, but that's irrelevant and therefore has nothing to do with her abilities to "fall" for a guy and form a bond. I'm addressing her abilities or standards. Nothing to do with what the guy wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 07:19 PM
2

Even in the couple of cases where I wanted more and he didn't, I was never devastated, even if I was disappointed at the time. There are plenty of other guys in the world, and dating was fun. Why would I want to settle for a guy who didn't want me? That sounds like a good indicator of these either one of these things or a combination of them: 1) A "lots of fish in the sea" mentality just indicates a relatively lower bar for you in considering men versus other women 2) Your strength of attachment…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 06:54 PM
1

They will lock it down to use you for sex, not as actual long term commitment. Especially with that vibe you inevitably give off.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/18 06:37 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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