TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

motodoto Archive

View 0 posts and 185 comments by motodoto 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)
1

Are you implying mens perception of whether they're missing out on something is not skewed. Yes, men often put too much pressure on themselves to perform career wise, much more than is reasonable, as a result of societal pressures.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 05:54 PM
1

I think that, the odds are, your home female family members life decisions were influenced by their environment growing up. I'm not sure why that's such a controversial thing to believe. I think their perception of whether or not they are missing out on something in life is skewed by their background.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 05:30 PM
1

I'm going with a sort of deterministic view. If you are raised in a society which tells you that you should stay quiet as a woman, serve your man, take care of the kids, and have no career prospects of your own... How can you say that person really had an honest choice to make? They were led to a conclusion and their options were restricted.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 05:19 PM
1

I guess you are ignoring most of the modern history of a "woman's place" in the household in the western world or something, just to make your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 05:12 PM
1

And they buy sexual intercourse. But when you are talking about people NOT engaged in some form of prostitution, when they are seeking a relationship because they desire intimacy, I don't think economic terminology is really suitable.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 08:51 PM
1

I don't understand the persistent desire to use economic terms when it's a subject about aesthetics, desire, morals, intuitions, etc...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 06:57 PM
1

Where I'm from, using MY grans, aunties and mother, they were/are happy with male bread winners as it allows them time with their children, and organising the family and the home. What part of this has to do with cultural pressures though? It doesn't seem very genuine for someone to say they want to be subservient to the man of the house, when their culture raised them to think that is the best way to be a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 06:53 PM
1

In a relationship that could be described as a sugar daddy relationship, both parties are intimately aware that it's about money. You are referring to another kind of relationship. Sugar daddy is a pretty specific term where an older man with money pays some college student girl to be his hotty, and he pays her with gifts, or paying for her apartment, fancy car, or whatever. For example, you see men who can't get conventional pussies go on sex tourism in the third world to pay for cheap ones Not…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 06:00 PM
2

But why have an opinion on something if you haven't properly justified it first? Given the context of your comment, you are in the UK somewhere? Or maybe Dubai? If Dubai, surely you could see that the cultural and religious influence is the reason why women look to breadwinners, right? Not anything to do with actual "free market" forces.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:47 PM
2

There's still prostitute-like behavior on the non-prostitute market (sugar daddies). I'd categorize that as just straight prostitution personally, so we can ignore that. On college campuses, sometimes it's free booze+drugs. So you think that some large portion of college women will sleep with a guy only because he has booze and drugs? Sometimes commitment and love. What is the price of this. If the monetary value of "pussy" in prostitution influences this, how does it influence it, how did you q…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:38 PM
2

Wait wait, you are talking about prostitutes, I should have been more specific. What's the price of a "pussy" on the non-prostitute market?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:21 PM
2

How expensive? What's the price?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:16 PM
4

Well you were suggesting that women who aren't prostitutes have a "price" for their pussy that is being influenced by the "price" to have sex with a prostitute. I'm wondering how you justify this claim, and you weren't very specific.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:16 PM
4

Yeah but this exists for men too. I mean women invest time to see if a man is an attractive mate worthy of their time. Considering they were talking about prostitution, I assumed they were talking about money though.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 05:04 PM
5

I haven't paid any of them women I've slept with to have sex with me. It's really weird to frame things this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 04:52 PM
4

I've rarely paid for someone else's food and drink and had a pretty healthy sex life. I think it creates an uncomfortable premise for the evening when I make it seem like "you owe me" by paying entirely for dinner.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 04:50 PM
1

Jobs in general, yes, but why would you be a prostitute (in most cases) if you didn't feel like you had no other option?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 04:10 PM
0

They keep the price of pussy from over inflating more than it has. So you've only dated prostitutes? Not sure I understand what you think the "price of pussy" is.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 03:41 PM
1

It should be legal, if people want to do that for their job, more power to them. I think the majority of women who do it now are in a situation where they feel like they have no choice, and are frequently exploited. The legalization and regulation of this industry would really clean things up, but I'm worried what those women would do instead to make ends meet.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 03:40 PM
2

So you've said what it's not. What do you think is my motivation?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/17 09:59 PM
2

So what's your theory on blue pill men then? This is aimed only at women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/17 08:59 PM
1

You sure I'm being an idiot?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/17 06:28 AM
1

Do you think there is a difference between... "Women are capable of enjoying sex just as much as men." and "On average women prioritize sex less than men do."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/17 05:54 AM
1

No, actually I said that your response was a non-sequitur. Do you know what a non-sequitur is? That's probably the issue. Here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_(logic) Have a little read.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/17 04:10 AM
2

Not sure why you think I'm saying that. Bizarre.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/17 04:44 PM
1

Not what I said at all. I said the studies weren't an actual response to what I said. You misunderstood what I said, replied inappropriately, and I'm correcting you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/17 01:05 PM
8

There is a difference between the statement "women can feel the need for sex in the same way as men" and "on average men want sex more than women in the general population". Your article, as a response to what I said, is a non-sequitur. And calling that book pop psychology is a bit disingenuous, since if you actually read it, it's a pretty thorough investigation of the scientific evidence available.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 07:28 PM
5

Person A says that a woman's need for motherhood is the same as men's need for sex. I see no citations. Person B says that women enjoy sex and they can feel a need for it just like men do. Someone asks for citations. You see the problem here? Here. Read this. https://www.amazon.com/What-Do-Women-Want-Adventures/dp/0061906085 Come back, and let me know what you think on the subject. It's been established since the 60's through groundbreaking sexologist works that Freud was wrong, and women actual…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 06:20 PM
14

I don't see any reason that compels me to accept it as true. Women enjoy sex, and they seem to feel like they need it much in the same way men do. Men have personal drives to be a father, and they seem to feel like they need it much in the same way women do. What makes you think this in the way you do?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/17 03:34 PM
1

You disagree with the actual purpose of analogies, because you think they end up changing biases. h'okay. The point is you could do 20 different analogies and they are all discussing the same principles, so it demonstrates the biases are irrelevant and should be ignored. Go back to school and take some phil classes. Since you aren't actually discussing anything on the subject anymore, and you seem hellbent to disagree for the sake of disagreeing, rather than being honest in your approach... I se…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 11:49 PM
1

That's irrelevant. They are equally drunk.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 11:48 PM
1

It's not whataboutism to present an analogy. Like I said, analogies help strip biases about a subject, reduce them to their principles. The fact that you then had biases about the analogy's technical details shows you don't understand why anyone would use analogies.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 10:43 PM
1

I think you are fishing for things to be able to reject this analogy. You are working backwards to reject it, as opposed to listening to it and thinking about what the real stated purpose of the analogy is.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:57 PM
1

They were both equally drunk. That's the point I'm making. Both drunk enough to the point that if the scenario was a sober person having sex with them it would be rape. But in this case they are both equally drunk to that degree, and having sex. What is it then? Did they rape each other?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:55 PM
1

Sure reverse it to a woman tattoo artist and a male customer. I still see the problem with a woman tattoo artist agreeing to tattoo a very drunk man. The point of the analogy isn't to get pedantic about the technical details. It's consent, judgement, etc... by using something other than sex so you eliminate some of the biases from thinking directly about these things in relation to sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:42 PM
2

I think you are setting the bar for "drunk" at "black out drunk" which isn't really the legal or colloquial definition used. Whether or not he used a condom doesn't really seem relevant. Riding a taxi or not doesn't seem relevant. Both of them undressed themselves, they were drunk (so alcohol was impeding their judgement), but they agreed to sleep together (which the agreement might be considered null due to judgement being impaired by alcohol removing their capability to consent).
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:39 PM
1

Oof, this is where it gets hard. You are thinking too specifically about the case of it being a tattoo artist. The purpose of the analogy is to talk about consent, ability to give consent when your judgement is impaired, etc... Not the technical issues. There are cases of two people being drunk and then having sex in what would appear to be consent, right? So we have a problem there because did they rape each other, due to drunk=can't give consent? Or is it an individual mistake. This is a probl…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 09:29 PM
4

What do you do if the tattoo artist is drunk as well? They both drink together, the drunk person wants a tattoo, the drunk tattoo artist says "sure!" and they start tattooing. Who is at fault? I like the analogy though, in the drunk/not-drunk dynamic it's very relevant and I agree with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/17 08:23 PM
1

That is overly optimistic. A nuclear family is clearly better because it's a more financially stable arrangement, the division of labor is easier so the parents are less stressed and can spend enough time with children, and it fits in with social norms so the child doesn't have to worry about perceptions of their family situation (so less anxiety growing up).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 08:33 AM
1

Pro-prostitution BP feminist dude here: Not necessarily. He could be acting out of a limited version of desperation. But I don't see how it's relevant. People buy food out of desperation for food. The line between desperation and acting out of necessity is pretty gray. This guy could be a sex addict, who knows? I don't know if it says anything about that. People buy goods and services for all sorts of reasons. I'm not very handy, so I pay people to do handyman work around the house, because doin…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 06:06 PM
1

Statistical data disagrees with you. Children in single parent homes struggle more than children in two parent homes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 06:00 PM
1

they wont, more and more people are getting redpilled everyday and are waking up to all the progressive lies. The only reason the right won the presidential election was because of an antiquated electoral college system originally designed to keep the power in the south's hands during the times of slavery. The more land you owned, the more your vote was worth. The only reason the people on the right wing won the house and the senate is because lots and lots of eligible voters don't vote. Any mas…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 05:58 PM
2

What he said alone wasn't that offensive because he's not describing himself going around forcing himself on women, rather, he's describing the scenario where women open up to him due to his status and his wealth, which is completely understandable. Yet I know a lot of parents, especially fathers of daughters found it utterly repulsive. No. He was describing getting away with sexual assault because he's famous. They let you do it, doesn't mean they want to, it means they let you get away with it…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 05:55 PM
2

How is this not the same for women?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 05:54 PM
1

It's a misinterpretation of statistics and data fundamentally. They see that women don't get drafted. That must mean, to them, that society thinks women are more valuable than men. Well... sorta. It's actually that society thought women couldn't do anything in battle anyways because they are frail, they needed to be protected due to child birthing (which is 90% of what they were seen as, is birthing units), and that's how it came about. It's negative stereotypes about women, perpetuated by mostl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 05:47 PM
1

You just don't know where you stand then probably, haven't delved into it deeply. Do you think people should or shouldn't be allowed to make pornography? For instance.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 06:05 PM
1

so I just saw how 2nd wave radfem played out in the legal sphere and in the mass media. Which is biased towards the extreme in most cases, on any issue, so you always have to take media representations with a grain of salt. Are all Donald Trump supports like Richard Spencer and Alex Jones? Obviously not. It's important to put it all in perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 06:04 PM
1

[citation needed]
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 06:03 PM
2

Red pill is a dumb ideology. How so? Umm how about 2+2=4? Duh! Do you see the problem now?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 06:02 PM
1

I don't blame you, the topic is very confusing, and it's often misrepresented. Sorry you had a rough time.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 05:55 PM
1

Well from a technical definition standpoint it does make you sex-negative on this one issue. Do you feel that BDSM is exploitative? Pornography? These are other subsets of issues where you can be sex0neg or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 05:02 PM
1

It's just a label for someone's opinions. A sex negative feminist believes that the sexual liberation side of feminism in the 60's went too far and was misguided, suggesting that sex is exploitation in any form in our current society, and that sexual interaction needs to be considered critically. A sex positive person believes in a libertarian view of sexuality, anything goes somewhat, as long as it's consensual. So the whole BDSM crazy whipping stuff? A sex-neg may suggest that the person is on…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:58 PM
2

You realize this is a debate forum, not /r/redpillcirclejerk right? You should probably make effort to back up your opinions, not just blurt out stupid shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:54 PM
1

or surpassing it, [citation needed]
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:53 PM
1

Actually feminism is the advocacy for women's equality to that of the status of men. But in breaking down these barriers there are intersectional opportunities for critical gender theory to explore. Which is how it relates to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:52 PM
1

Well thankfully intersectionality covers your misconception about feminism. Feminist orgs have advocated for improved protections for men in prison against rape, feminist orgs have opposed the gendered draft laws (by opposing it totally, because the draft is wrong), and they make feminist driven arguments against each of these things.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:50 PM
1

As a feminist dude, I can't believe this thread went this way. It's a big ignorant anti-feminist circlejerk of misinformation and misunderstanding. There's no getting through to people who have already concluded something about things they obviously don't know anything about. You two don't know what you are talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:47 PM
1

No, you are incorrect. Dworkin/Mackinnon were 2nd wave radfems, Walker was the start of 3rd wave in disagreement to housewife-shaming and sex negative 2nd wave extremists. Dworkin and Mackinnon were discredited, seen as fringe extremists, long before the 3rd wave started.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:45 PM
1

I grew up with mid 90's third wave breakout, so I have a different perspective, Dworkin/Mackinnon stuff was a bit before my time. I only saw the right wing reactionaries end result of it, which was people saying feminism is about "hating men" or whatever, which was a misinterpretation of Dworkin/Mackinnon'esque stuff anyways.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:42 PM
2

What does this have to do with my point? My point is that the OP is painting sex-positive feminists as hypocrites unjustifiably, when I ask for evidence of sex-positive feminists saying this, the OP dodges the question dishonestly, and then you strawman my argument and attack me. What's the point of debate if you don't honestly engage your opponents? Sounds like you agree with me that the people supporting the nordic model were sex-neg.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 04:15 PM
1

I asked for evidence of this new Swedish law being touted as a sex positive feminist approach to prostitution. They replied "The Real World?" They obviously don't have an honest intent to debate or question things. They have a preconceived notion and are staunchly sticking to it, and not answering questions.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 01:41 PM
4

Literally the country of Sweden. That passed this law. I will not argue that Sweden exists. Either accept it or we'll have to end this conversation. Just want to clarify. You claimed that there were people claiming this was a sex-positive change to the law. Feminists were claiming that supposedly. I was saying you need to back that up, and you have thus far dodged it every single time every person has asked you for evidence of this. It was a law pushed by a sex-negative person, who openly is sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:40 PM
1

The real world? You aren't here in good faith. Goodbye.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:29 PM
6

Are you really going to pretend this is equally aimed at deterring women from going to see male prostitutes? Please. The law, in practice, will effect men in one way more than women, but that's only a consequence of the fact that men more often seek prostitutes than women do. Are laws against murder oppressing men because men commit most murders? Please. So we have one nay and an entire party of yays. Who is the true feminist? [citation needed] Can you please provide poll-based evidence that dem…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:15 PM
2

You think 0% of women seek the company of prostitutes? Yes. I've seen the swedish model touted as a sex positive feminist approach to prostitution. Where?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:06 PM
1

That analogy is bad and you should feel bad. I'm sex positive in the way you are ideally thinking of, and even I know the difference between a hypothetical scenario and how it actually plays out in practice. The porn industry is regulated, it's legal, etc... Yet exploitation still takes place. One studio flies women across telling them it's a modeling gig, saying they will pay for their hotel and everything. They get them a one way ticket, then say they won't pay for the flight back or their hot…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:05 PM
7

Who says it's sex positive?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 02:00 PM
2

sex positive feminists in Sweden lobbied successfully to outlaw men who go to prostitutes while keeping it legal for the women who engage in prostitution. I'm a sex positive feminist, and I don't agree with this. This isn't sex positivism. Also you are framing it as "banning a men's activity" or something, which it's banning all Jon's, male or female. Needs to be said, women do see male prostitutes from time to time. I think it should be totally legal. This is an example of "why do you feminists…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 01:59 PM
1

Wrong. If the group is privileged it just means that the likelihood of an individual part of the group goes up, it doesn't necessarily mean the individual is privileged. This is what happens, someone says "but I didn't have it good growing up, and my appearance (despite being white) makes me look dangerous so cops always pull me over and harass me" etc... The idea of racism being power + privilege came from academia and it has been used from the very beginning to demonstrate that individual pers…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 07:33 PM
1

No no no. I was saying some feminists use it on an individualistic level and they should go back to school if they think that's what privilege is. Hence why I referred to what you were arguing against (which would be feminists using the concept of privilege on an individualistic level). Sorry it came across that way. And I'm basing my perspective on third wave feminism on both academics and feminists in the media. I think they're both relevant because the media reaches and informs way more peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 07:08 PM
1

Anyone that uses privilege as a concept on an individualistic level has misinterpreted the concept and should go back to school. You should be arguing against the best representation of things you disagree with. Not low hanging fruit. Also I think you are getting your characterization of feminism from popular media as opposed to feminist literature and prominent feminist academics.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 06:44 PM
1

The gynocentric radical style of feminist started in the 2nd wave. I wasn't implying they didn't exist, just that the common association is to the 2nd wave. It's not really consistent with 3rd wave since that would be at odds with intersectionality to be gynocentric. Trans-exclusionary radfems are an example of the extreme of going gynocentric, and that started in the 2nd wave, and the majority of 3rd wave radfems I've talked to don't agree with them at all on the basis of intersectionality. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 04:45 PM
3

Sure they do, but you didn't suggest they "exist" you suggested all of 3rd wave feminism is radical and gynocentric, that's false. There is a new movement that is calling for abolishing the 3rd wave, that the 2nd wave was better, that looks up to Andrea Dworkin and the like. That new movement is problematic in my view, and they are the minority of feminists, a very tiny amount. There are some radical and gynocentric 3rd wave feminists, there are many that are not. The 3rd wave is loosely defined…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 03:23 PM
3

Don't see any problem with this. Why are you upset over women having armpit hair, and wanting to dye it? No problem with this either. It's consistent with 3rd wave feminism. The breasts are not a sexual organ like a vagina and penis. Men have the privilege of walking around with their shirt off without getting weird looks. Why not women? The way society treats this is solely on account of their sex. Not sure why anyone would think the SlutWalk is "batshit crazy". Pro-sex feminism, pretty standar…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 02:42 PM
5

Nope. You are thinking of the 2nd wave radfems.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/17 03:04 AM
3

Genuine love doesn't mean unconditional. So I'm not sure why even bring up unconditional love (which I'm not convinced exists).
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 11:38 PM
5

You are conflating unconditional love with genuine love.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 10:25 PM
8

I think both sexes experience genuine love, but due to the differences in brain chemistry and testosterone/estrogen it often leads to a seemingly different manifestation of love. So a man will struggle to understand a woman's way of showing genuine love for instance. That misunderstanding leads to the idea that it is transactional, as TRP often believes. A woman will struggle to understand a man's genuine love because they will perceive it in different ways as well. This happens all the time in …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 10:24 PM
1

Do you have any examples of a third wave feminist activist advocating that boys be ashamed of being boys in school and to actively prevent them from excelling? If you know this to be true, that this is what feminists want, then it shouldn't be hard for you to find evidence of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 03:04 PM
1

Can you cite an example of a prominent self-identifying third wave feminist activist who is advocating that boys be ashamed of being boys in school and preventing them from excelling?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 02:53 PM
2

[citation needed] 99% of the time I have discussed this with people, they don't even know what a third wave feminist is. I precisely put 3rd wave in my flair to hope that these misunderstandings would surface.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 02:45 PM
1

I'm not qualified to teach you about GRADE clinical evidence evaluation guidelines. Sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 05:39 AM
1

k Did she ever ask you about your dating life, as in who you were seeing? Yes. Did she ever try to hook you up with one of her friends? Yup, multiple times. Did she ever try to get you laid with any other girl? Yup, but I wasn't interested in her. Did she ever ask you for advice about other men (i.e. an indirect way of telling you that you are just friends)? Yup, she talked about guys she was thinking of seeing. Did she ever talk about her boyfriend with you? Yup. Did she ever talk about other g…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 04:23 AM
1

I'm not qualified to teach you about clinical practice guidelines, I'm pointing you to resources so you can read what experts have said, and why those are there. Maybe you can learn it yourself instead of huffing about incredulously. http://clinicalevidence.bmj.com/x/set/static/ebm/learn/665072.html http://www.uptodate.com/home/grading-guide I'm curious. What's your research background?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 04:22 AM
1

It's a clinical term. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC428525/ Just because you aren't familiar with it or don't understand it, doesn't make it wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 04:11 AM
1

Apparently you think a clinical endocrinology study is a sociology paper. Nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 03:40 AM
4

You are referring to first wave feminism. Show me one current prominent feminist who defends their racist actions. What you are doing is committing a genetic fallacy. Look it up. It's like when people say "but the republicans freed the slaves". Sure they did. They are racist as fuck now though.
/r/ExRedPill12/01/17 03:37 AM
2

Based on most women aren't engineers, don't care and/or can't speak about philosophy or politics past stating an opinion. No no. WHAT are you basing that on. I didn't want more unsubstantiated bullshit. You are the guys making the positive claim that there is a clear divide and that most women are these uninteresting biddies who need a man to be relevant. I'd really like to stop the conversation, since you all are aggravating the fuck out of me. It's ridiculous when I ask "what are you basing th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 11:46 PM
1

the enlightenment, the industrial revolution Where did I say it was directly correlated to these? I said modern industrialized world, not the industrial revolution. Do you not understand that the greatest strides in automation, technological advances, etc... in history all happened after women being allowed to vote and being more normalized in the workspace? Now with men not having to do almost every single job, there were other ways they could focus their talents. Sometimes women were allowed t…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 11:42 PM
1

Sometimes the sample size is incredibly important. Like that study where they showed newborn babies different kinds of toys at random. It was something like 40 or so actually evaluated babies, I think it was? Haven't read it in a long time, but the difference was measuring how long a newborn would look at either a toy truck or a doll. The variance was split almost 50/50 with girls looking at the doll very slightly more than boys, and boys looking at the truck only slightly more. They were trying…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 11:29 PM
2

The racist problems you are referring to are overwhelmingly in the past, or they are now expressing themselves because they are byproducts of past policies. No one is putting up economic or civil barriers to people of color, it's a cultural issue. Don't you see the similarity here? Women were at one time second-class citizens. Treated differently yes, but on the grounds of gender women were subjugated by society. The effects of that subjugation still has an effect today. Women in certain workpla…
/r/ExRedPill11/01/17 11:23 PM
1

You don't think being rich or successful makes you powerful?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 11:08 PM
1

Most girls would say 'But I want you to treat me like a girl.' What are you basing this on? Pretty sure the women I've been friends with don't like being infantilized and reduced to their gender. You still believe women literally mean what they say most of the time. I have nothing else to go on. It's preferable than playing the part of a mind-reader with no basis, like TRP.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:59 PM
1

In the absence of objective research (because its politically incorrect) What are you basing that opinion on? It's not being researched because it's politically incorrect? Plenty of research has attempted to rule out sociological elements in examining differences between the genders. The issue is... they still weren't able to rule it out, and it's a very succinct criticism of these studies. So people had to go to the drawing board from the philosophy of science perspective to try and fix it. And…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:54 PM
2

But being logical and skilled in reasoning doesn't get people to do what you want, nor yields you benefits from other individuals. What works in this field is another kind of skill, persuasion. I'm sorry, but the implication that you don't need logic or skill in reasoning to succeed as an aerospace material engineer/project engineer is extremely laughable. You are talking out of your ass. Scientists and engineers are brutal and if there is a logical hole in your proposed design, they will object…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:50 PM
1

Because it's consistently been on the correct side of history on social issues. On economic issues it remains to be seen since there are a lot of failed experiments on both sides that aren't a good representation, and there are a lot of hybrid experiments that are successful. Do you think there is any good secular argument for why gay people shouldn't be allowed to be married? Any good argument for why interracial marriages shouldn't be allowed? How about slavery, was that correct to do away wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:35 PM
1

You say this with pride. Yes I do. They are people to me. I'm not attracted to every single one of them. I'm proud of the fact that I treat women as people just like I treat men. The reaction was of you breaking what wasn't said but known. How do you know that? You think women can't tell when a man is infatuated with them? They're not stupid. Many women I've talked to, have been so blinded by what seemed like a genuine friendship with a new man-friend, never realized the guy was into them. I had…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:32 PM
4

Yet most women are still not like your wife. Based on what? Why don't they want to be scientists or engineers or mechanics or welders? Funnily enough, a new intern is the daughter of the head of our tooling and engineering department. She went against the grain and has been pursuing welding anyways. She literally told me she has seriously considered not pursuing it anymore because it's a boys club and how terrible she would be treated there. She's trying out engineering because it might be a lit…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:28 PM
1

Nothing too specific. Basically the idea that people won't work for wages anymore. It's inevitable I think because look at how far automation is going. Plenty of people want to learn how to do higher-level tasks, but they get stopped by pay2play expensive college or other life problems. Healthcare for everyone, education for everyone, food for everyone, living space for everyone. Since more prosperity in a culture leads to lower birth rates I don't see this as a problem to give everyone a home, …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:23 PM
3

What's going on here, are you going to accept women are capable of higher reasoning? Then what creates such a woman is something fascinating. Yes an evolving society that finally allows women to own property, work in jobs, vote, and take control of their lives. Her identity isn't confined to having to be a house-wife, nurse, teacher, etc...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 10:05 PM
1

Nope 31, married, career, house, pets, moved away from my hometown etc... I'll take the progressive label, that's fair. Deep down I'm actually what I call a Star Trek Utopian. Kind of a futurology idealist. What is correct, progressive liberalism or dark enlightenment? Wow that's tough because I don't think typical progressive liberalism goes far enough, but it's useful for now because I don't think society is ready yet for full blown utopian socialism.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 09:58 PM
1

Nope. I am always good at being friends with women. I later told her how I felt, and that's when she treated me differently, as in going distant. The reaction shows she wasn't aware. She was my homey until that point. I didn't tell her how I felt for... like 1 year after I met her. When I met her it was infatuation at first sight. Big mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 09:57 PM
1

There isn't such a thing as "your truth" and "my truth". There's just truth. So what happens is when someone generalizes how women are, and someone presents that it isn't consistent, they should update their view and say that the women THEY have met are consistent with this, and maybe not all women are that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 09:48 PM
1

Yeah I never understand that. When I was "friendzoned" it was ME being stupid in not seeing what the relationship was. She had all this pressure about losing a good friend. It was really my fault. If you go to a strip club it's YOUR fault of for thinking she wants to bang you and be with you forever. If you are hanging out with your friend, it's YOUR fault for assuming she wants to bang you and be with you forever.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:55 PM
1

Who is suggesting we need to feel sympathy for someone who is trying to manipulate someone through sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:51 PM
1

Okay so what are you basing "it's obvious" on? Common sense? What if I told you in my experience everything the red pill says about women seem outlandish and strange. I've had great relationships with women, the women in my life (friends, family, relations) have not exhibited traits of being child-minded with no ability for higher reasoning. They didn't insidiously shit-test me all the time. etc...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:45 PM
4

Apparently my wife has the mind of a child and isn't capable of higher reasoning. Even though she has a successful career as an aerospace engineer and is a self-made woman, we discuss politics and philosophy often, and she's a fuckton smarter about higher reasoning subjects than any man in her family.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:35 PM
1

The real sociological factor is that some things are off limits to study or won't receiving funding for politically correct reasons. How do you completely rule out sociologically impacting factors on a study about gender differences, gendered behavior, etc...? Because that seems to be a huge question at the front of the philosophy of science right now, and it hasn't been solved by the experts on the subject... Are you saying random red pillers have solved this problem? I don't think the gender d…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 08:16 PM
1

simply because liberals purposely go out of their way to ignore nature. But that's not "simple". Red Pillers haven't demonstrated that their views are consistent with nature completely devoid of sociological factors. Red pillers also haven't demonstrated their workaround for the obvious appeal to nature fallacy in deciding that because it's natural, that makes it correct to do or right to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 07:44 PM
9

It was only until I worked toward being a better person that I met my wife. I didn't do it TO attract someone, but it was the natural byproduct of that little bit of success in changing for the better. Their motivations are wonky. I used to have redpill ideas when I was an edgy teenager. My wife would have hated me back then lol.
/r/ExRedPill11/01/17 07:13 PM
12

Why does it matter if they haven't been subjugated to the same extent? They were still subjugated and it was wrong.
/r/ExRedPill11/01/17 07:10 PM
3

So you think racism is moreWrong therefore... the sexism isn't a problem you should be worried about? But do you think sexism is wrong or not?
/r/ExRedPill11/01/17 07:09 PM
1

The red pill is very ideologically aligned with a right wing mentality. Right wing is usually somewhat racist or very racist, depends. There is a logical connection. If they think that women are biologically inferior, why wouldn't they think that certain races are biologically inferior?
/r/ExRedPill11/01/17 07:07 PM
3

are worse then women And you people that think women are inferior to men are disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:51 PM
4

base it on low birth rates Every country, even those in the east experience low birth rates. When countries modernize after a large industrial growth, this happens, regardless of their cultural background. You have completely misunderstood the source of low birth rates. extremely high deficit spending in the west due to the welfare system http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go Sure, there is high spending, but I don't really know how extreme…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:41 PM
2

Ah okay, so all those ones doing the bad stuff are the bad liberal people in each state, right? I grew up in California. Family is originally from the south and have relatives in the south. If you are using conservatives in California for your standard, you aren't really seeing the whole picture. Conservatives in the south are a whole other group.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:34 PM
3

Back when they were taken care of.. Translation: Solely reliant upon a man, couldn't own property under most circumstances, had no real control over the life or influence on government. It just seems overly generous to the way of life to portray not being as much of a person as a man as being taken care of. Like you have this overly ideal view of everything. Sorta... delusional. Do you have problems with your mother? Or was she a house-servant too?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:10 PM
1

So you aren't really using the term hamster'ing correctly. Do you even know what you are advocating for?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:04 PM
3

Well that's weird because teen pregnancies seem to happen most in the south and southwest. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/08/20/teen-births-states-historical-trends/14294003/ Where people are more conservative in general. This is just one facet. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/07/meth-states_n_4057372.html Seems like heavy drug problems seem to afflict the conservative states in the midwest pretty strongly. http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/the-most-dangerous-states-in-the…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 06:02 PM
2

Try reading the entire side bar including The Manipulated Man. I have read that. Here, recommend me a book that describes your view, and I'll check it out too. That's tough. I can recommend you a good primer on pre-2nd wave feminism, 2nd wave feminism, and critical theory. There's a long list of over 200 years of literature and articles that have gotten it to where it is today. Here's a few. https://www.amazon.com/Second-Sex-Simone-Beauvoir/dp/030727778X - Excellent place to start. It's likely i…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 05:42 PM
3

Also, why are you calling it hamstering? Is the mere act of a woman getting a divorce bad behavior inherently in your opinion? Since all of the above reasons for divorce are justified, that's the only way I can interpret your comment without further definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 05:19 PM
4

Red pill representative folks. There's another topic about wondering why red pillers are seen as delusional. Maybe the claim that women were always seen as equal in the west, is one of those things that makes you seem delusional. It's actually provably false. Your belief is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 05:14 PM
2

Sorry, I don't know what you are basing "most men don't see it coming" on.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 05:13 PM
4

What do you base this on?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 05:03 PM
5

That's weird, not seeing a divorce in my future. My grandparents are still married after 62 years. My wife's parents are still married after 35 years I think? My mom divorced because my dad was an abusive asshole that bankrupted the family by buying stuff for his failing christian rock band and buying a house we couldn't afford. That was his fault, she didn't divorce him because she was being mean to him or anything like that. Sometimes men divorce women because they are abusive. Sometimes peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:54 PM
8

You honestly believe the world would be a better place if women couldn't vote, couldn't work, and were sexually restricted by old moral rules?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:48 PM
5

And just saying "life was better before women could vote" isn't true, agreed? Which is the comment I was replying to. They were bemoaning women being treated as equal human beings by society.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:45 PM
1

Just like if a woman says that she wants a strong, muscular, tall guy that's also a feminist and that can cry from time to time all they hear is those parts that they want to hear. See? Feminists just want effeminate cucks!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:42 PM
4

a hate group like TBP Jesus christ. I can't laugh this loud this early in the morning. Go easy on me.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:39 PM
2

I do think they are confused. I wouldn't exactly use delusional since that is kind of a clinical term with a lot of baggage. But I'll reply because I think that "confused" is what most of these people mean when they say delusional. Women are people, just like men, and should be treated like people. The red pill advocates treating women in a way that isn't consistent with this in my view. Many of them claim their motivations aren't political, but when pressed, seem to line up with a very right wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:36 PM
4

The largest growth in the western world as far as wealth and technological achievement happened almost immediately after women's rights were achieved and women went into the workforce. Some of the primary pioneering programmers and scientists were women, including the inventor of the compiler, a high ranking military leader. Now, I've justified in simple terms why I think the world is a better place after women got the right to vote, work equally, and achieved sexual liberation. What do you thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:30 PM
3

My friend didn't "get" friendzoned. He himself didn't keep his emotions in check, lacked perspective, and the hotness of the woman he was attracted to distracted him from understanding immediately that she wasn't interested in him sexually. I, as well, went through a phase with one woman in my past. Hot young thing that I had met. I learned my lesson. This wasn't HER doing something to me. I was acting like a friend, and we did have a good friendship in some ways on the cover of it. We also had …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:25 PM
6

That is why the sexual liberation of women coupled with giving them the vote has been a DISASTER for the West. Jesus christ. Yeah, it was a BIG mistake giving the vote to women, letting them work, and not holding them to antiquated sexual morality standards from catholic virgins. It only gave us the modern industrialized world where people are more prominent and wealthy than ever before in history. What fucking planet are you people on?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:19 PM
1

Good point. The beta bux thing to me seemed inconsistent with red pill ideology. If they were such a "beta", why are they so damned successful that women supposedly throw themselves at them? Seems like the rich and powerful are the "alpha" and the poor homeless "hawt" guy is still poor and homeless, to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:12 PM
2

You're a feminist and you've not met any feminists? Interesting. I edited it, but you've made it clear you aren't interested in a real conversation. Good day. Don't try to convince people, just keep screaming to yourself with your head in the sand. Go out and do some work on it yourself. I have. I've read multiple TRP threads, and lots of discussions here. I'm still not convinced. You are the one making the claim that women ARE shitty and that women are personally responsible for things yet men …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:08 PM
2

It's not an ideology. I can't continue this conversation. You either aren't aware of what an ideology is (collection of terms that help establish a colloquial philosophy by which to view life) or you are so wrapped up in just the sake of being right you can't honestly have this discussion. I don't sense any bit of good faith on your end of this. Generalizing women isn't misogynist. Just like generalizing black people isn't racist. Okay. What a bunch of stupid nonsense. I actually feel very sorry…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 04:06 PM
2

That's not my experience. Give me an example please. I've not met a single feminist like this. My wife, friends, family, coworkers, schoolmates from the past, that would say that you should give the woman a ride home but NOT the man. It's completely inconsistent with feminist ideology. I find the insinuation that a feminist, for feminist-supported reasons, would suggest you purposefully treat a man worse on purpose if he needs help as opposed to a woman, completely incredulous. You are going to …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:58 PM
2

But it's not my experience that feminists tell men that they don't have to help women -- in fact it's just the opposite. Not anymore than if a man needs help. Someone at work says "hey can you give me a lift home? My car broke down", a feminist wouldn't say you should help them if they are a woman but not if they are a man. That's bullcrap, and I don't know where they have rooted their ideology in if they suggested such a thing. It's certainly not feminism. It might be a sexist idea of women, bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:41 PM
8

Those are men who were specifically taught, trained and instructed that all women are wonderful and you are to come to the aid of any woman who needs it, any woman who asks you. Feminists would often argue against this kind of teaching. Women are just people like men. So these men get this treatment from EVERY woman around them, to the extent they get any treatment at all. Yes when you have ingrained sexist views of women, like the idea that they are all super special and should be put on a pede…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:26 PM
11

But why does Red Pill frame the conversation as if this is what someone should expect from the average woman? In my experience, and apparently many others' experiences here, this is the minority of situations, or they've never even heard of this. The whole point of OP's post is that the red-pill advice seems to apply to women that usually don't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:12 PM
6

I live in the states and I don't understand the appeal, utility, or experience of almost anything red-pillers talk about. I have had multiple successful long-term relationships (most of whom I'm on good friends terms with still), and I'm married to someone amazing now.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:10 PM
7

Yup. If a guy tries this bullshit in Boulder, CO on a typical left-leaning woman, it wouldn't work.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:09 PM
5

Some men have unreasonable expectations of women sometimes too. The problem here is I think red pillers generally invent all sorts of ways to interpret what is going on into specific definitions and rules, but the reality is that people are complex and have all sorts of traits and motivations. Saying "most women are this way" is usually going to end up in an inaccurate statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/17 03:08 PM
1

Yeah I didn't 100% list everything about him. The point was that English lit majors aren't drooling incompetent morons as stem majors seem so inclined to imply over and over.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 01:50 PM
4

But you didn't get a degree in English lit. How far did you go in English lit? If I said mathematics was the easiest of all things I studied and you find out I only have a sophomoric level of understanding in maths, you would rightfully call my comment ignorant, right? What evidence do you have that humanities majors contribute less to society? How are you defining contributions to society?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 01:13 PM
9

Oh come the fuck on. English lit is not easy. Dismissing it outright is anti-intellectual. The smartest person I know personally got his undergrad in English lit. His masters in international relations. He speaks 3 languages, has more world experience than 99.9% of redditors, can debate all of em under the table, and certainly has a working knowledge of a wide variety of difficult topics. Dismissal of the humanities comes from complete ignorance.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 12:24 PM
1

I find your line of argumentation to be a disingenuous rhetorical tactic as opposed to wanting honest discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 09:17 PM
2

You aren't actually discussing anything. You are just saying feminists blame men for everything. That's based on nothing. You are arguing against a strawman of what you think feminists are and feminism is. Until you can remove the mental block from your head, this is going nowhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 08:59 PM
2

Feminism is the advocacy for women's equality to men in society. Meaning areas where men already have an advantage, the advocacy fights for women to be equal to that. If you want to start a group to advocate for men's equality in areas where women are in such a societal advantageous position, go right ahead. Advocating for men to become nurses is fine with me, for example. There are affirmative action elements in place to encourage male nurses, even scholarships. I'm down with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 08:56 PM
2

Yes it is. To promote equal representation. That has nothing to do with my response. It's like saying "Why aren't these black civil rights activists fighting for white people?"
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 08:46 PM
1

JM4B has released books against feminism, have sponsored speeches/events against feminism. I'd say that's anti-feminism. Mens issues challenge the feminist narrative that men are the oppressor class. This is a fundamental misunderstanding. Men's issues don't run contrary to any feminist "dogma" as you put it that I'm aware of. If men are systematically oppressed they cant be oppressors. Then you have misunderstood the concept of systems of power. This is like when people are saying "Law enforcem…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 03:03 PM
1

So do you concede that they didn't in fact protest his speech because he was advocating men's rights and raising awareness of men's issues? Do you concede that in fact it was because he's an explicitly anti-feminist political speaker and it was sponsored by an explicitly anti-feminist organization?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:46 PM
2

This was exactly my original point. Please keep up with the conversation. They were acting as if feminists were opposing any public discussion of men's rights or advocacy for men's issues. I argued that they commonly block these kinds of talks and advocacy because they are predicated upon anti-feminism. They gave me an example they thought had nothing to do with anti-feminism in response. I then showed he IS an anti-feminist and the organization that was sponsoring him to speak is the only anti-…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:38 PM
3

Well, this is a different set of arguments now. Before you were saying feminist push a narrative that men = rapists. Now you are arguing against the validity of the concept of rape culture, that women might be afraid of men raping them, and that statistics you don't agree with point to rape culture. Me referencing what Marilyn French actually said was in DIRECT response to your ORIGINAL argument which was that there was a narrative she was furthering that "men = rapists". I seemed to have proved…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:32 PM
1

Feminists claim a strict monopoly on everything "gender equality". Who does? In feminist contexts, men's issues are either completely ignored or a little footnote at best, always accompanied with a "but women have it worse", "this mainly hurts women" and "this male problem can only be solved by more feminism". And that's the moderate part of feminism. I disagree with your characterization somewhat. But women have it worse is a simple excuse, so I'll dismiss that. This is often just something tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:27 PM
1

Philip Davies is more than just an advocate for men's rights. He's anti-feminist. J4MB is also an anti-feminist organization. I'm sorry, but this is not the best example. They were suspended because people were protesting giving anti-feminists a platform, not people just speaking in favor of men's rights. I'm of the idea that you should let people with bad ideas hang themselves in the court of public opinion however. I agree with this article. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/2016/aug/15…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:16 PM
0

If feminists want more women to go into STEM then they should start first by encouraging women to go into STEM. Ummm... I mean you are arguing against them wanting to do that... What's more encouraging than a financial incentive, or having role models, or the fact that women in that role are normalized? I think your position is confused. Maybe a few of those Women's Studies majors should switch over. Stupid, uneducated, mildly sexist conjecture. http://www.randalolson.com/wp-content/uploads/perc…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:07 PM
2

Feminism isn't necessarily humanism, so if you want to change the subject to humanism, sure thing. Also, what would it prove to you personally if a feminist fought for affirmative action policies for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 02:03 PM
1

It's really problematic. The loudest and most prominent voices in MRA seem to be counter-culture reactionaries to feminism as opposed to focusing on men's issues. I don't blame you for being upset at the situation. The public intellectuals representing the MRM tend to usually voice their issues with feminism and spend time arguing against feminism as opposed to arguing for men's rights. I'm sure there is a "silent majority", so to speak, that sides with just the men's issues end of it and really…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:55 PM
1

So you are a pure free will proponent. You think that we have complete control and choice over the paths in our life and our preferences, and you think that societal norms have no control whatsoever over people's preferences?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:40 PM
2

Feminists are in favor of advocating for equality of women. Why would they have to fight for affirmative action for men? What does this prove?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:39 PM
2

I agree Andrea Dworkin is ridiculous. She's an extreme case. Would it be fair for me to dismiss all of men's right's arguments and the entire movement based on a clear misogynist that has a cult following? No. So why do you do the same with Dworkin? Also Marilyn French clearly was taken out of context with the all men are rapists line. She was using the word rapist in the pillage and plunder sense to make a point. The Nazi line is her response to cries of reverse sexism, in how it personally mak…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:36 PM
3

She was obviously using that as a thought experiment. Try again. "They rape us with their eyes, their laws and their codes." Do you think that literally means that all men are literally rapists? Or is she using the word rape in the conquer and pillage sense?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:33 PM
1

Who is "Caitlin". I've never heard of her. Never seen that website before either. Either way, what is keeping men from going to college? Anything?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 01:28 PM
1

Do you think it's possible that women show disinterest because of underrepresentation in STEM?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 12:30 PM
2

Can you point out a prominent feminist activist saying all men are rapists literally and not as a thought experiment?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 12:28 PM
1

Can you give us an example? Your stereotypes about what feminists want are apparently conjecture thus far.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/16 12:26 PM
1

Lol it's all good.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/16 02:35 PM
3

Just because they do doesn't mean they should. This is the point of the blue pill perspective that it's wrong and the red pill's perspective to ruthlessly use it to your advantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/16 11:04 PM
1

It doesn't have to be more justified for the claim "moral subjectivism is necessarily true" to be dismissed. I think you have misunderstood what I meant by it being reasonably doubtful.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 02:23 PM
1

So are you admitting what you meant by "know" is absolute certainty? Knowledge is justified true belief in my book. If you mean absolute certainty, then you don't "know" much either, including your TRP beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 11:10 PM
1

Well it isn't just some people. Academic philosophers that specialize in moral philosophy generally do not believe moral subjectivism is true. Not only that I mentioned arguments for competing theories and the evidences behind them. Also considering that we know that over half of academic philosophers are moral realists... The claim "morals are subjective" has not been presented as something we should accept as fact here by the OP. http://philpapers.org/surveys/results.pl It's like if the vast m…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 10:59 PM
2

I think there are communication issues yes. People need to try harder to be clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:46 PM
1

I see the blue pill person just saying that red pill is wrong in thinking this is universal mainly, not that they are claiming that nobody behaves this way for these reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:24 PM
1

So you don't agree that it is reasonable to doubt the claim that moral subjectivism is necessarily true? I dunno, I think you are unquestioningly supporting the OP's claim that it is true as a matter of fact, for some reason, and even the soft way I described that we should be skeptical and not accept that at face value puts you on the defensive. I'm surprised by this.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:07 PM
1

But it would be wrong to apply newton's laws of physics to things at high speeds, right? That's the point they are making I think.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:05 PM
1

Whether or not someone is physically/biologically equal has no bearing on the question of whether or not we ought to treat them equally.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:03 PM
2

Give me, in your opinion, the biggest issue you can think of that men face that leads them to the redpill mindset, and I'll give you a bluepill response.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:02 PM
1

In your opinion, did I provide evidence for the claim that it is reasonably doubtful that moral subjectivism is necessarily true?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:00 PM
1

The belief that moral subjectivism is true in itself is a belief that something is true, but not everyone agrees. If your argument for subjectivism hinges on "not everyone agrees on moral issues" it falls victim to this same problem since not everyone agrees with you that moral subjectivism is true. There are better arguments for moral subjectivism than "everyone disagrees on morality somewhat sometimes therefore it's true" that's the point of me bringing that up. But this is largely irrelevant,…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 02:32 PM
1

Well before I begin underrepresenting and summarizing only some of the various positions that aren't moral subjectivism... Have you asked OP for evidence for her assertion that morality is subjective? That's why I responded the way I did (the part you omitted about the experts on moral philosophy generally not agreeing with the OP). Which is a point of evidence in itself (appeal to authority isn't fallacious when they are actual authorities). That being said. There are people that think morality…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 01:59 PM
1

On the Internet people conflate "knowing" something with absolute certainty so I was making sure you weren't doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 01:29 PM
0

It depends on what you mean by know.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 01:20 PM
2

Any other response to anything else or just that?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/16 03:54 AM
1

The truth is, without an arbitrary religious basis, morality is indeed subjective. Well, that's not necessarily "the truth". No one has any reason to accept what you say at face value. Maybe if you started this post off with "assuming morality is subjective" there would be something more fruitful to discuss. But you asserted something as true when it isn't necessarily true. Moral subjectivism isn't generally accepted among moral philosophers, and they are by far the experts on the subject, so it…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/16 11:03 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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