TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

mrsmariekje Archive

View 2 posts and 752 comments by mrsmariekje 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)
7

Both were girls, and I was in my early twenties for both of them. It can't be explained conventionally - genetic incompatibility between me and my second daughter or an autoimmune response, who's to say? There's still so much about pregnancy we don't understand. Therefore I think it's natural that pregnancy and childrearing make women really anxious. Nobody knows if they'll be one of these "fit moms" who're doing CrossFit 2 weeks post partum or if they'll be permanently disabled.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 01:00 PM
12

A pregnancy being easy or not has often nothing to do with how much you walk or what you eat. With my first pregnancy I had no morning sickness and was walking an hour plus every day with my dog with no problems. Uncomplicated birth, no stitches. With my second pregnancy only 2 years later I had hyperemesis gravidarum and such severe SPD that I couldn't move or dress myself in the third trimester. To top it off I lost 2 litres of blood due to a severe bleed during the birth. Would eating more ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/12/25 10:33 AM
7

Nice rant but notice how I never actually denied that women were more nurturing and caring. I am making an observation about how these seemingly positive traits are weaponised by men as an excuse to be incompetent. Studies and facts do not matter, as usual. Neither does reading comprehension apparently
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 03:09 PM
6

We both know it's not true, yet that is what you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:52 AM
16

In my experience, when a woman is being described as nurturing and caring, it is being done by men trying to weaponise these "compliments" to excuse themselves from being caring or maturing. It is done by those men who are trying to convince her that staying at home with children, caring for her spouse, making dinner, doing emotional labor and thinking about anyone other than himself is something that he couldn't possibly be expected to do because he simply isn't naturally "nurturing" - that's w…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:51 AM
5

So it just so happens to be that everything men say about women is true, but everything women say about men is not true. How convenient. "But women ARE neurotic little children, so it's OK for me to be a misogynist!"
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 10:43 AM
2

Yes, I do. Because there is no significant targeted program for them. All that liberalism has for them is "man up" and more shame. Meanwhile there's a fuckton of programmes and affirmative action for loser women. There are significant targeted programs for educated women and school aged girls. Uneducated women who are essentially NEETs have no programs for them just like young male NEETs. The sheltering is that NEETs of all ages and genders are usually not made homeless or sent to a workhouse or…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 12:11 PM
3

I'm sorry but what? If I say you should eat 5 fruits and vegetables a day, I am not saying you shouldn't eat chocolate. I am saying fruits and vegetables are good and you should eat them. In the same vein, saying a young woman should invest in a career for herself is not the same as saying she shouldn't get married and have children.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 11:59 AM
3

I have no clue what's going on in California or the US university system, nor do I care, because there's an entire world outside of the US that also follows a liberal/socialist/whatever the fuck you want to call it ideology. It's all the same shit. I'm pointing out that the OP is targeting women as being the ones "protected" by liberalism when it is in fact everybody that is protected from the consequences of their choices. Fat people for example are absolutely sheltered from their own choices, …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 09:26 AM
2

Everybody is sheltered under liberalism, that's the whole point of the ideology. You think that loser men jerking it in their mum's basement and refusing to work aren't being sheltered? You think that disruptive boys that won't sit still at school aren't being sheltered? You think that fat guys who drink too much and won't exercise aren't being sheltered?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 08:20 AM
0

Saying that women should aspire to <XYZ>, is inherently saying that they should not aspire to <ABC>. Feminism wasn't about opening up options, but about pushing an idea on people about what would bring happiness and fulfillment. What on earth? Maybe if you're autistic that's the interpretation that you'd naturally arrive at but most normal people recognize that feminism was about letting women and girls CHOOSE what they wanted to aspire to rather than just being told that being a wife and mother…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 08:18 AM
7

Why take vows to be with someone till death? Usually those vows come with caveats and expectations of behaviour. The point of marriage is not just to never leave it. It's supposed to be a partnership for a common good. If one person stops being a partner and failed to live up to the expectations of behaviour then why should they have the privilege of staying married? Do men just not understand this fact?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:30 AM
6

And unless there are extenuating circumstances then that should be expected. Most divorces are not for trivial reasons. Maybe the other spouse has an addiction that is destroying the family, is terrible with money, maybe they cheated or had an emotional affair, maybe they stopped giving any affection, maybe they decided they wanted more kids or no kids at all. These are all extenuating circumstances that justify ending a marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:06 AM
19

I'm pretty conservative in some ways (married as a teen, 2 kids before 25). I value the ability to defer gratification above all else. I man who cannot do this will live and die a perpetual child no matter how much money he makes - he is more likely to cheat and blow up the relationship when things get tough, which they inevitably will. I value a man who can see the bigger picture and put others before himself. I value a man who can look at himself with a critical eye and admit his own faults wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:46 PM
6

This comment makes me think that maybe men aren't lonely enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 06:17 AM
2

If you're starving, you'll eat anything. People do not eat shit sandwiches, even if they're starving. But the emotional need is met by having access to sex. Knowing someone desires you. Even if it's not anyone you know personally. Even if you never actually have sex. Just knowing that you could, if you wanted to, changes the entire dynamic. Then it is not about sex at all, it's about validation and ego. "Mummy, look! Tell me I'm a big boy!" Or "Daddy, aren't I a pretty girl?" depending on if you…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 09:37 AM
3

Yes, you do, and if you didn't then you'd be much more stressed out about not having it. Like men are. You don't seem to understand. Sex with a man who is unattractive and doesn't care about your pleasure is worse than not having sex at all. So even if it was unavailable to women, why do you imagine they would care? Why would women pine after something they categorically do not want or benefit from? I COULD choose to scrap some dogshit off the side of the street and put that in a sandwich and ea…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 09:18 AM
1

Feminism wasn't necessary and every single field is worse off than it was without it, just using education as an example: Today you have your degrees being useless The obsession with getting every man and his dog to get a degree was a left wing, liberal agenda and nothing to do with feminism. Feminism was concerned with educational and economic equality of opportunity for women, and if the standard hadn't been that getting a degree was the best way to achieve those aims (which is what everybody …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:57 AM
2

Birth control is not 100% effective and it can take time to find the right birth control that doesn't come with a host of dreadful side effects. Even within committed relationships, women and men deserve to be able to fall in love and build a life together without necessarily producing a shit load of children as a byproduct.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:44 AM
2

That may well be the case, I've seen lots of conflicting studies. Seems no concensus has been reached on this.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:28 PM
2

It's only about a year of life that they lose overall. That can be easily explained by the fact that married women usually have children. 1) Pregnancy is very hard on the body. 2) It's exhausting to raise them and prolonged periods of stress (either physical or emotional or both) can lower life expectancy 3) Parents rarely have time to devote to their health, they don't work out as often and will usually eat less healthily
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 04:21 PM
–

Is it not "completely fine" because you can only really arrive at this position by using some very questionable, self serving and dishonest logic. Men think it's fine to sleep with lots of women and that it doesn't affect their own value or sexual purity or character at all. In fact, they say it's a great thing - it means they're desirable and being desirable is good. But when a woman does it, it means she's a whore and unsuitable for long term relationships. She's undatable and only good for a …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 09:57 AM
8

How dare these whores want to eat more than rice and pasta 😡
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 01:21 PM
8

The classical women moment of doing shit NO ONE asked for and demanding praise for it, no one cares about parties, the doctor appointments for every single small thing as a nuisance, the useless grocery shopping with the house full of food, the vacation THAT SHE ENJOYS How can you expect anyone to take you seriously when you're out here arguing that grocery shopping and doctors appointments are "shit" nobody asked her to do? It's fine if you don't give a shit about eating right or taking care of…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 12:28 PM
10

Where did this idiotic idea that men love women unconditionally come from? You should try being in a relationship with a man especially a young man and getting seriously ill, losing your libido, paying less attention to him due to having a child or getting fat. You guys are absolutely dreaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 08:06 AM
4

I appreciate the amount of effort put into this comment but "at least you couldn't be mortgaged or inherited or auctioned" is really not saying much. I think you know full well that this commenter was trying to express how being a woman meant being treated like a second class citizen.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:57 PM
1

The comment of yours that I replied to was extremely critical of women in the workforce. You talk about doubling the workforce and lowering wages, "sitting in cubicles" and not forming families. You don't even seem to believe that women chose to work of their own volition because they believed it was best for them - you find it easier to believe that women were brainwashed by the CIA which is pretty misogynistic to be honest. I don't think right leaning individuals such as yourself really unders…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 01:46 PM
2

No, the majority of women were not participating in the workforce. I actually specifically said that women COULD work, I just said that they didn’t (meaning not in any significant number; most pre WW2 numbers have them around 20-30% of the workforce). This is just blatantly untrue. Even as far back as the dark ages, most men who had a trade (so most men in general) - whether that was brewing, carpentry, milling, farming, whatever - would have had their wife and children helping to run the busine…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 06:49 AM
6

Why is monogamy and family being linked in this question? Men want the company of women (monogamy) a lot more than women want the company of men, but family? A lot of men don't have what it takes to be a parent and aren't interested in being good parents.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 04:23 PM
2

Threads like this confirm my suspicions that autistic men are extremely overrepresented in this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/11/25 07:39 PM
–

Women are still having children, they're just not having 4-5. They're having 1-2 usually. That's not abandoning the gender role.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 11:00 PM
6

Jobs are not a finite resource. If there's profit to be made then people will recruit and expand their businesses. That's how economies work under capitalism. "supply and demand" as an explanation only works if either the supply or the demand do not change which is ridiculous. The supply of workers goes up, but those women who now earn also spend the money they earn in the economy, which then drives the demand for products, which then drives the supply of jobs to provide those products. For your…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 01:46 PM
6

There are no jobs because many markets are stagnant or contracting, jobs are being offshored to third world countries or replaced with machines, the service economy leaves many people without the necessary skills to compete, people are retiring later and later leaving no room for promotions and fewer roles to go around. It is literally the most intellectually lazy argument to say "well it's because we doubled the workforce" FIFTY years ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 01:27 PM
7

Everybody is unhappier now. Cities are overcrowded, most economies are stagnant or retracting, COL is going up, immigration is destroying communities, people's diets and lifestyle are trash, there are no jobs. But no, it's silly women and their silly careers that are to blame. Of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 09:15 AM
3

Women entering corporate world was a scam designed by people at the top to increase work force and decrease wages due to increased supply of labour Have you considered that maybe, in spite of all the challenges, entering the corporate world was still far better for women than being subjugated and minimized by a man who had basically free reign to do what he wanted with her? Maybe if men hadn't done that for literally 40k years, women wouldn't be so desperate to get as far away as possible from t…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 09:13 AM
1

I don't think you understand what hormones are and how they work
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 05:06 PM
1

Libido is mostly a biological and hormonal process, how does having a low sex drive due to pregnancy or stress mean that you find your partner repulsive? That's a pretty childish view.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:43 PM
0

Then it is up to those men to say no if they know they can't handle it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:42 PM
0

Well your wife is fortunate (and by extension you are also fortunate) that her sex drive has not been affected by pregnancy. The majority of women experience significant loss of libido post and pre partum and this is biologically normal, you acknowledge this right?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:42 PM
0

Sex cannot always be a given though. I'm talking about very specific and unavoidable events in people's lives, not every day. If someone cannot control their sexual urges even for a short period of time, they should not be in relationships and should stick to hookups exclusively. FYI, every woman I’ve dated loved the fact I was sexually all about them I imagine you are young, unmarried and also childless and date women who are also young, unmarried and childless. So yes, I'm sure it was a great …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:52 PM
0

Then maybe those men should not agree to a lifelong partnership with somebody, or agree to have children, if they're just going to go along with the first woman who gives him bedroom eyes? If by "chores" you mean "supporting the family you agreed to create" then where is the injustice in that?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:48 PM
-1

What is the point of a romantic relationship if there’s not wild, lustful sex involved? Can you see that having this opinion would make a man very unattractive to a large swathe of women? Apart from the fact that some people (more women) are not very motivated by sex in the first place, there will be times in a relationship where sex is very infrequent and it's nobody's fault. Pregnancy and postpartum, during bereavement, maybe significant health problems will come along. Why would a woman want …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:55 PM
1

Based on my experience dating neurodivergent people and having neurodivergent family, dating a neurodivergent person is a pain in the ass a lot of the time, especially people with autism and ADHD. You constantly find yourself having to make up for your partner's shortcomings. If it's mild then whatever you can probably get over it, but if it's really bad, they can't multitask, they forget things, they can't organize themselves, they say inappropriate stuff to your family or friends, they hyper f…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 11:36 AM
4

I agree that it's nothing something I would ever do and it's not something I would ever encourage/sanction my daughters or female family members to do... But there are benefits to a traditional relationship. It's up to the individual to decide whether those benefits are worth the tradeoffs to them and how much risk they are willing to accept. I. A free society they get to make choices and I/you get to disapprove of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 09:37 AM
3

Society does pay for it. With the husband's money But what if the husband doesn't pay? What if he walks out? What if he leaves you for another woman? Who is paying then?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 05:58 PM
10

Because she picked a cheater as a father. Not because of what he did. How are you supposed to know that a man will cheat on you especially after so long of being together? Genuinely, how can you rationalise this? And what punishment, social or financial or custodial or whatever, are you suggesting that the man who cheated receive if the victim of his betrayal is deserving of social ostracisation?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 05:57 PM
1

Patriarchy "is" in a state of nature, but we're not living in a state of nature. We seem to be completely fine thwarting nature when it comes to prolonging lives with medical care and not leaving disabled people out in the woods to die, but when it comes to implementing/endorsing a system other than patriarchy, suddenly we should be listening to what nature is telling us. Awfully convenient, isn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 12:14 PM
1

Can nature not be oppressive? Is nature always a moral good?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 11:31 AM
1

I think we're having two parallel conversations and this isn't a productive use of our time. Try not to be so angry though?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 11:23 AM
1

Thanks for the explanation. I broadly agree with you, however in defence of choice feminism, if one can successfully find a partner who is willing to pay for one's lifestyle, privately and without subsidies from the state, then it would be immoral to prevent them from exercising their choice to stay at home. I agree it's stupid and puts one in a vulnerable position and I would strongly caution anyone against doing so, but you'd have to force people to work even without an economic incentive to d…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 11:20 AM
-1

LOL so 90% of us are oppressed now? You need to read more. Your posts are laughable. We don't live in a patriarchy. Are you aware of what year it is? You were the one that brought up patriarchy, not me. What is it with this sub and angry little boys swarming all over it? Swear it didn't used to be like this. Who are the 10% being inconvenienced by feminism? The stuff you write literally makes no sense. Men who don't want to compete with women in the workplace and men who have little chance of ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 11:00 AM
1

Please show me widespread conservative thought which says women "shouldnt work", how does this even track with the same ideas conservatives hold that government should be small and programs should be gutted. They call themselves conservative and others call them conservative. Doesn't mean they actually are conservative? And you seem to think there's only one flavour of conservatism. C Conservatives themselves can't even agree on what the tenants of conservatism are. You're another tiktok brained…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:57 AM
3

What exactly do you mean by 'shared social projects'? What about feminism is not sustainable for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:52 AM
0

I started my sentence with "and that has nothing to do with feminism" ...
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:35 AM
1

That's... Not a good comparison. If a system oppresses 90% of people for the benefit of 10% (patriarchy) then that's an oppressive system. If a system benefits 90% of people and inconveniences 10% (feminism) then that's a better system. Simple, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:34 AM
1

Again, you're framing women who have higher earning partners as 'tradwives' or 'conservatives' which makes no sense. I really think you're strawmanning here because I never said this. I'm referring to women who do not work and think that women should not work for bullshit reasons like "it's against nature" or "it's unfeminine" - I'm not referring to how much a woman earns, whether she's the breadwinner or whatever. Again the problem I have with many women here is you backwards rationalising your…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:32 AM
-3

fact that feminism offers absolutely no upside for men. Feminism does offer upsides to a lot of men, just not all men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:22 AM
3

I agree. The backlash against feminism has always been and maybe always will be from low status men who know there's little chance that a woman will choose to be with him without legal/social/financial coercion.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:18 AM
1

The problem is you're framing being financially successful and marrying a man as somewhat mutually exclusive I don't think I did this at all actually. I myself am a breadwinner and also married with 2 children. I am referring to women who don't wish to work or can't seem to make a career for themselves. Women who actively dislike being independent and want to be looked after by a man. Those women exist, some people call them 'tradwives' or 'conservatives'. Those women's preferred lifestyle has b…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:12 AM
0

That's absolutely true, it's just more difficult for those specific women to get what they want due to inflation and the expectation that there will be two incomes rather than one. There aren't as many men who could (or even would) provide for those women. It's unfortunate for them, but better for women as a whole for society to be structured this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:06 AM
2

I agree, it doesn't have anything to do with feminism and it's impossible to know if women were happy back in the day or not - it's not like they were given a choice even if they did admit that they were unhappy. But it's fairly well established that modern life makes us unhappy - we spend too much time looking at screens, sitting on our asses, never going outdoors, spend less time with friends and family, do shitty meaningless work that makes no difference to anyone, it's just not a good time. …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 09:39 AM
2

It's true that women are unhappier than ever, but people in general are increasingly unhappy because modern life is complicated, overstimulating and not very fulfilling. Blaming feminism is something people do to push a political/social agenda. It's also not entirely that no women have been disadvantaged by feminism. Some women unfortunately lack the qualities required to do well in the workplace or survive independently. Those women probably would be happier living in a society that had very lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 09:30 AM
2

noun noun: solipsism 1. the quality of being very self-centred or selfish. To be honest I can't think of a more fitting word to use to describe your blatant hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/25 07:43 PM
5

You're being a hypocrite. You say: I have just claimed that they don’t have to be based on transactional exchange of utility other than the pleasure one receives from simply being with a person based in who that person is not based in what the person does for you. And yet you just said a paragraph before: The essential point of being in a committed sexually paired relationship is having sex. Having sex is something that the person does for you. They could be having sex with anyone and yet they'r…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/25 06:12 PM
3

Men are just as transactional though. Think a man will stay with a woman if she doesn't have sex with him? Transactional. If she gets ugly? If she can't have any children and he wants some? It's all a transaction no matter who you are. Nobody's in the relationship for charity.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/25 04:42 PM
3

In that case, every single person to ever have a relationship is a prostitute, man or woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/25 11:22 AM
5

The truth is exactly what you are denying with the above statement. The truth is that men are forced? Forced? Men have a selection of choices available to them and it is not women's responsibility to make all of those options equally attractive. If men want to work dangerous jobs for the money, then that's their choice. Take accountability. Well, it wasn't 99% then and isn't 99% now; it was always about an aspiration to provide a safe, secure, and enjoyable environment for women at the expense o…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 04:28 PM
3

Interesting that you would automatically leap to the defence of "women aren't coercing you" when I didn't suggest that at all. Also interesting how you refer to women as "pussy" rather than the chance to have a meaningful relationship and children. And also interesting that you sarcastically refer to the lack of these things as an injustice when denial of our literal reason for living is a pretty important thing for most people of either sex. If I were you I would not want to be the sort of pers…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 03:32 PM
3

You speak as though women would have absolutely no incentive or rationale to co-exist with men at all Of course they do. I have a husband and two children. But I chose my husband, was not coerced and could leave him at the drop if he ever mistreated me. Therefore even if he had the capability of being a horrible abuser, which all men do, I would be out the door with half of what we built together plus our two children before he could say "I'm sorry I don't know what came over me". It's not 'if I…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 03:26 PM
3

History didn't begin at the end of serfdom and you can't have your cake and eat it when talking about 150 years as a small era. Serfs were paid 'in kind' meaning goods. Not fairly, but paid. More than you could say for women. Men are coerced into these jobs by having to out-earn women due to hypergamy. They don't take dangerous, unpleasant, risky, uncomfortable, painful, physically exhausting jobs in the same way that women choose personally fulfilling, safe, comfortable, easy jobs. I facepalmed…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 03:14 PM
1

Your argument is that over 5,000 years ago in a very specific country women could own property and work? Slaves are paid in housing and food and clothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 03:06 PM
2

'pairing out of necessity' - yes, that's biology for you. How can it be biology if the deciding factor on whether the behaviour happens is the culture in which people are living? This is the opposite of biology. For a nation that values its continuity, that is absolutely a negative thing. The only reason that developed nations care about their birthrate is the existence of social security and pensions. If those things didn't exist, there would be no need for the moral panic around birthrates. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 03:04 PM
0

I have no idea what you're talking about. How did women get paid or respected?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 02:54 PM
4

Except for a very small era men historically weren't paid or respected for work they did either Men were not paid for their work? Unless you were a slave, you were being paid in either currency or goods for your labour. This is how economies work and have worked since literally the 7th century. And in all the careers since then where death or injury is most likely men massively outnumber women, so again by your own yardstick men still aren't treated like human beings Not only do these men volunt…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 02:53 PM
7

Only for a very small era in history did women have the choice of whether to work or not. They always worked. Every day. Just like men. The difference is they weren't paid or respected for it. Now, they get to do all the things they were expected to do 150 years ago, but now they actually get paid and get to be treated like a human being.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 02:10 PM
3

I'm just pointing out that it might not be accurate to say that the rates of pairing seen throughout history were natural and that our society is the unnatural one. They were very much pairing out of necessity and all the evidence points to this. Therefore, in a society where it is not necessary, how could we ever expect for pairing rates to remain the same? If it really was natural for men and women to pair together neatly en masse then it would be happening regardless of policy decisions, rega…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 02:00 PM
9

as a species it means a lack of natural gravity between men and women and their relationships, Is something really 'natural' if it can be abandoned within the space of a generation or two? If something is truly a natural inclination, you usually can't socially engineer your way around it very easily. one of the crucial things women find attractive about a man is his being superior; How do we know that this is truly a natural inclination of women rather than a contextual, socially enforced prefer…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 01:02 PM
–

Some women perhaps, it varies from person to person how their body responds. Some people produce more mucus when they have a cold. Some people sweat more than others when it's hot. Why does it matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 08:53 AM
–

That's true, lubrication is important in either case so that there's no pain. A sudden increase in lubrication as the result of an orgasm is especially important when you're being attacked though and the person penetrating you isn't likely to care about whether you're in pain or not. You can tell an intimate partner "stop" or "that hurts" - can't tell a rapist that, they won't care. Therefore extra lubrication is needed.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 08:50 AM
–

I said there was no reason for the body to prioritise orgasm as a matter of self defence, as you aren't being attacked during consensual sex. The body doesn't need to protect you. But that doesn't mean that an orgasm won't happen, it just means it won't happen as a means of self defence. It will happen as it normally should.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 08:45 AM
–

I'm not at all saying more women orgasm from rape, no. I'm explaining why it appears that it is very common to orgasm from rape (because of protecting victims) and I am explaining why orgasm from rape occurs even in people who don't orgasm from consensual sex (which I thought is what confused you). In terms of raw numbers, a vastly greater number of women orgasm within their relationship than from assault.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 08:40 AM
–

I'm going to give an actual answer for this. As other posters have pointed out, the reason there's so much content out there about orgasming during sexual assault is to combat the narrative that just because a woman orgasmed, that meant she enjoyed it and therefore it wasn't rape. It can really compound the trauma a woman or girl goes through to believe that her body betrayed her so completely by orgasming. It is important to reassure her that having an orgasm does not invalidate trauma. In real…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/25 08:19 AM
0

Alright, you have free speech. But don't expect anyone to feel sorry for you when you refuse to make the choices that would emancipate you. That's just whinging and it's what children do. Make the choice and own it - you would rather chase sex and the validation that comes with it, even if it disadvantages you, rather than disengage with the system and try to build a new identity for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 09:29 PM
4

Ok, it appears that you cannot see the difference. So I'll spell it out for you. First of all, divorces and breakups exists, you don't need to marry anymore and none can force anyone to do anything Your husband very much can force you to do a great deal if he is the only earner in the house and you depend on him for everything in your life, the roof over your head, the food on your table, the clothes that you wear. Men have abused this power for millennia to force women to behave in certain ways…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 09:27 PM
1

OK, if that's the case, then men forfeit the right to complain, yes? You are all making the active choice to submit yourselves to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 07:34 PM
4

Women changed from subservient to the household to subservient to the powerful. And can't even notice it. Many times defending it. I do not consider it a win. We're all slaves under capitalism, but can you not see the difference between being a slave for a man who you cannot leave and who will not pay you and can exercise complete control over you in the private sphere versus being a slave for a company with whom you've signed a legal contract, only have to associate with for 40 hours of the wee…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 07:33 PM
0

Not going to work unfortunately. Urge is too strong. If this really is true (and I have a hard time believing that it is) then can men finally forfeit their right to complain about gender roles? If getting your dick wet is more important to you than clearly men don't care that much about injustice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 07:27 PM
1

1 and 2 basicaly the same point and is very subjective, i have corporate experience, usually good ideas are taken seriously and bad are not Unfortunately the data doesn't support your view on this. In closed experiments even if a woman and a man have the same idea, that idea is more likely to be considered and accepted when presented by a man. The fact that you don't acknowledge it, as a man, somewhat proves the point. It's about subconscious bias so of course people don't acknowledge it. Look a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 10:36 AM
1

There are male specific advantages already. 1) People are more likely to take you seriously at work. 2) They're more likely to respect your authority on a decision regardless of whether you're actually qualified to make that decision. 3) Your responsibilities towards reproduction are almost non existent and your reproductive system doesn't cause you pain by functioning normally 4) People will congratulate you for doing the absolute bare minimum as a husband and a father. 5) You're likely to orga…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/25 09:48 AM
2

I'm just not sure legalizing it would actually make that much of a difference... It would still attract the poorest and most desperate women. But on the other hand it would protect those that do engage with the industry from the worst abuse which is the most important thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 09:20 PM
3

How completely devoid of morals do you have to be to have sex with someone knowing that the only reason they're doing so is because they're in the grip of a drug addiction or are getting pimped out by their abusive boyfriend. Even if they're technically making the 'choice'. Literally, look at yourselves in the mirror and wonder no longer why you are single and lonely. SMH.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 07:42 PM
3

It's just a very sad situation all around and there are no winners. It's undeniable that the men paying her for sex are profiting off her misery though.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 06:52 PM
4

In a vacuum it's not. But we don't live in a vacuum. We live in the real world. And in the real world, you usually can't buy sex without contributing to someone else's misery. That makes it wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 06:42 PM
7

You're looking at this very one dimensionally in order to rationalise it to yourself. It is not true that most women "choose" sex work when there are other options available. If you were deep in a hardcore drug addiction and knew the only way to get your next fix was to suck a random man's dick, is that really a choice? Can't get a minimum wage job because of possible criminal record and the fact that she'd need to shoot up at work. It's the best of a very bad bunch of options. And you're morall…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 06:16 PM
6

There are a bunch of problems with prostitution. It is and always will be rife with exploitation. Given that being a prostitute (as opposed to an escort which is a little different) is a low skill job any woman can do, it attracts the most desperate in society who might not have access to other work - drug addicts, homeless women, women in poverty, women in abusive relationships, women with mental or emotional disorders. Those women are not 'choosing' to engage in sex work as much as they are be…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 06:05 PM
6

Because it's not enough of an advantage to compensate for the disadvantages of having horny frustrated men constantly pawing at you from the age of 14?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 03:29 PM
1

You're telling me over the course of a whole lifetime that the average man will have 0 women wanting to fuck him? Come on now. Maybe at this very moment in time there are 0 women wanting to fuck you but you only need 1 woman, just 1, to want to fuck you and hopefully have a relationship to be happy. You don't need a harem of 20 chicks wanting to fuck in order to be happy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 03:27 PM
10

How is this different from men though? It's not like a man will realistically have 0 women wanting to fuck them. If 10 women out of 1000 are interested then that's still something and it's no more than a woman would want herself. So I'm struggling to see the privilege?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 10:50 AM
41

This is a very male interpretation of women's situation. Men's sexual attraction to women is 99% of the time completely useless to women. Being found attractive by a man is not difficult and it is not an accomplishment. Men's standards are very low and they do not have to care about you in the slightest in order to fuck you. Why is this an advantage exactly? What you don't seem to understand is that, if the attraction is not reciprocated (which it isn't 9/10 because I have standards and expectat…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/25 10:31 AM
2

Bro, this isn't my post, not sure why you're getting mad at me? I'm agreeing with the OP that thinking women need or want to have a provider is misogynistic. You questioned it in your comment so I replied.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 12:12 PM
5

You're deliberately missing the point. If someone says that women are unable or unwilling to provide for themselves, then the insinuation is that this is because the woman is too stupid, too lazy or too entitled to do so herself. This is misogynistic. Saying that men enjoy it when a woman dresses sexy isn't implying anything negative about men. Therefore not misandry. Misandry would be "men are incapable of thinking about anything apart from sex and have no thoughts or feelings outside of sexual…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:42 AM
4

Those are all fair points and I wouldn't dispute it - it just frustrates me when people say ALL women unanimously prefer sexually experienced men when it just ain't true.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 08:02 AM
4

I just don't understand this. I only ever date virgin men and I do this on purpose. Why the hell would I want to sleep with a man who had loose sexual morals? Where is the benefit for me in doing that? All I'm doing is cheapening myself. I'm clearly never going to pursue a relationship with this man because our values are so clearly misaligned. So I'd want to make myself a cheap lay for a man slut who'll probably just fuck off afterwards and move on to the next girl? Why waste time with that whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 06:57 AM
–

I'm not sure they are two different people... it tends to be redpill men and incels saying both of these things. I tend to subscribe to the viewpoint that biology can explain behaviours but NOT excuse them.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 05:17 PM
6

I don't think it's fair to say that women have never been more oppressed than men. Sure, throughout most of history life was miserable for everybody. However certainly in the UK once the industrial revolution arrived, there was serious and systemic discrimination against women. For example, even if a woman had full time employment it was common for her 10 year old son to earn more than her due to the belief that a male's labour was inherently worth more. A woman's property was owned solely by he…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 03:04 PM
–

Why is this someone else's problem? Why is it that when women complain about getting pregnant and giving birth, they're told "well that's just biology, take it up with God" but when it's men struggling with their absurdly high libido, it's a public health issue and they can't be expected to keep it to themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 02:44 PM
–

They're her sweaters to give to whomever she chooses. If you're cold, either buy a sweater or make one yourself if nobody likes you enough to gift you one of theirs?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 02:41 PM
5

I don't agree it has little to do with feminism. Feminism and technology (mainly the introduction of the birth control pill and the rise of the tertiary sector/knowledge based economy) are the main contributors of high divorce rates and low fertility. Very few countries have managed to industrialise without their fertility rates being hugely impacted. This happens 9/10 with or without religious pressure being put on women to marry. But make no mistake, it is being driven and accelerated by femin…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/25 01:59 PM
4

The question is why the leader has to be the same person all the time? If I make better financial decisions than my husband, I should be the leader on matters relating to our household finances. If my husband has a better memory than me, then he should be in charge of scheduling things for the family. Why is the one with the penis automatically the most qualified to take on every single task that relates to leading a family? Unless you have a completely useless wife that you probably shouldn't h…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/25 01:53 PM
6

That is nonsense. Pair bonds don't have to be lifelong. They can last any number of time If you don't agree with the definition from the Wikipedia article YOU cited, maybe I'm not the retarded one? Yes of course your lefty argument is against nuclear families and not pair bonding No, your argument was that human being mated in pairs and raised children as an independent unit. That's you making an argument for nuclear families. Not me. Nuclear families are a very good way to set up society. It wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 12:02 PM
5

Excuse you, but what makes YOU believe that we are a pair bonding species? From the Wikipedia article that you yourself cited that I bet you didn't even read: "Pair-bonding is a term coined in the 1940s[1] that is frequently used in sociobiology and evolutionary biology circles. The term often implies either a lifelong socially monogamous relationship or a stage of mating interaction in socially monogamous species. It is sometimes used in reference to human relationships." You used the term pair…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 11:12 AM
2

Which is why women immediately become bed bound and forced to quit work whilst pregnant... Oh wait, that doesn't happen at all, because that's bollocks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 09:23 AM
4

If you're not talking about providing food or protecting children, what exactly are you referring to when you say "nurturing"?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 09:18 AM
6

We are absolutely not a pair bonding species. Historically families were large and children were raised by groups of adults who took responsibility for many people's children as well as their own, likely in shifts. Please do better than falling for the nuclear family cereal box propaganda. The separation of society into nuclear families has been nothing short of disastrous for mothers, fathers and children's mental and physical health.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/25 09:17 AM
–

control over the continuation of the family line and the upbringing of children First of all, what control? Children were still seen as the property of the husband in most cultures, not the mother. And secondly, you think this is in any way equivalent to being granted control over all of society? Participating in the labour market? Owning property? Having political and legal representation? You can't seriously believe that.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/25 12:36 AM
–

Well I would have had to go through childbirth multiple times, which had a 30-60% chance of killing me. Where's my fucking medal? Why the hell should women listen to men when their chances of dying in the fields was nowhere near as high?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/25 12:33 AM
–

someone still has to swing the axe, build the shelter, and defend the village. That usually fell on men, which naturally put them in positions of authority. Why exactly would this put men in authority 'naturally'? That would only be the case if you think that building shelters and defend the village was inherently more important than the work women were doing. Which it wasn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 06:43 PM
–

Oh I completely agree with you. I was just arguing that, even IF we accept that the view on men being harmed by equality was true, it still wouldn't change the fact that equality was a good thing for society at large.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 06:36 PM
–

As long as your parents have equipped you with a reasonable level of self confidence, some degree of social skills and the ability to earn a living, then any loneliness suffered in one's adult life is your responsibility and not theirs. If they didn't at least attempt to provide these things, then you might be able to blame them somewhat.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 06:02 PM
–

true. If what replaces the old structure ends up making things worse, then we need to go back to what worked. Ignoring past successes because you don't like them is the stupid move here. By pretty much every metric, things are much better for people living in a post patriarchy. The only people who aren't doing better are a certain subsection of adult men. But even if every single adult man was established to have been disadvantaged by the dismantling of patriarchy, that's still only about 40% of…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 04:50 PM
–

I really think it depends how far back you go and which societies you're talking about. Back in prehistory, the world was simply too dangerous and unpredictable to mess around with concepts like rights, justice and equality. With danger around every corner, food insecurity, environmental stress, people just did what they had to to survive. Once civilisation really begins though, around 4,000 years ago, it becomes something else entirely. Something much for cynical and predatory. Patriarchy becom…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 04:44 PM
–

Where are you getting this idea that it is a parent's job to intervene in their children's dating life/engineer the optimal conditions for sons to get laid? Are you expecting your parents to set you up on a date with Suzy from next door? To butter up her parents and subtly pressure her to date you because you're a "nice young man from a good family"? Get a grip. My children's romantic lives are their responsibility and their prerogative. My job is to make sure they are functional, independent ad…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/25 01:39 PM
2

In order for this to be true, you'd have to assume that the children of conservative parents never access the internet, never read any literature, never pick up a history book, never talk to any adults who aren't also conservative and never have any original ideas about how they want to live their lives. Which is obviously a brain dead assumption. Children will be exposed to feminist views regardless of whether their parents are hardcore Christians or liberal lentil weavers. Thus feminism would …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/25 03:23 PM
2

I agree only in so far as the more of a "village" you have, the better your experience of parenthood will be especially in the early years. However, where is the logic in allowing the male partner to slack off? There's simple, effective ways to control your man and incentives his contribution to the household. Never ever become a stay at home parent, always get married before having children, make your expectations of his behaviour extremely fucking clear before getting pregnant, and let him kno…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 02:25 PM
4

So you are going to have to put out or enjoy the new dark age And what if women still refuse? Then men are left with no civilization AND no romantic prospects. Own goal.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/25 06:45 PM
2

Why are you even on a debate sub if you're going not going to engage with the argument? Are you lost?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 04:42 PM
3

I'm just pointing out that the argument "well if you care then don't have sex" doesn't really work in a world where young men can't stop screeching about the "loneliness epidemic" - but, as is to be expected from an antichoicer, you're not in the habit of considering the bigger picture or the fallout of your dumb policies.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 04:38 PM
-1

Is this the part where, 5 minutes after agreeing to never have sex with a man again, you then threaten that men will simply rape women who refuse to have sex with them anyway?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 04:15 PM
0

And you're built to labour for decades in the fields and probably have your skull caved in by a rival male. Probably still going to be painful and traumatic though
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 03:45 PM
1

People also know that getting into a car or walking through a bad neighbourhood leaves you open to being maimed in a car crash or mugged at knife point. Should those people be expected to live with the consequences of their actions also, or is it only women need to be accountable?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 12:07 PM
2

Feel like addressing the point or is continuing to shit on women much more fun?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 11:51 AM
3

Imagine that you found yourself in a position where you were in pain every day, undergoing permanent changes to your body, being unable to sleep properly, unable to eat properly, feeling the strength being sapped from your body. You ask for a cure and somebody denies you treatment. When you asked how they could justify this, they said "well it's not like you're doing to die, what are you complaining about?". This would be completely fine and dandy with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 11:37 AM
3

The woman's body is not under attack by her offspring the act of reproduction This really tells me you don't have much experience with pregnancy. It can absolutely be characterised as an attack in a lot of cases. You're starting dangerously close to the appeal to nature argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/25 11:33 AM
8

A lot of things are completely taken for granted when talking about declining birth rates in the developed world like they are inevitable facts of life rather than deliberate policy decisions. We do not need to operate a pension system or spend lavishly on welfare for the elderly. It's a nice thing to do, but unnecessary for a functioning society. People should pay for their own retirement, or not get one. We do not need to keep offering life prolonging healthcare to people who are older than 80…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 08:32 AM
1

It's your right to believe this, but I don't think the evidence is strong when you look at what happens when men do not get the female attention they apparently don't need. If men were only concerned with the validation of their peers, they wouldn't behave the way they do when they can't get laid. They wouldn't care, as long as they have friends. But they do care. A great deal. What's your explanation as to why?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 09:24 PM
3

It's not necessarily a bad thing - everybody has the right to be egotistical about their own lives, right? I'm not trying to pass judgement, moreso to explain why I believe men's unhappiness is actually about sex and not connection or intimacy. Just explaining, not judging.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 03:21 PM
3

We do all act selfishly but it's not always to do with ego. Sex is inherently tied to ego. When you have a healthy sex life, it might not seem so obvious. But look at people who don't have a healthy sex life and you'll see that the only true damage done is to the ego. "He doesn't make me feel beautiful/handsome" "I am clearly not enough for them" "He/she makes me feel like less of a woman/man!" "I am clearly horrible in bed but he/she doesn't cum easily" "I don't feel seen" "I need someone who a…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 02:39 PM
4

Judging by the language you use - "make love", "intimacy" and "connection" - you're trying to put a nicer, more palatable spin on a fundamentally egotistical and self serving aspect of human nature. Human sexuality is about ego, nothing more and nothing less. Men are not looking for "intimacy" or "connection" from women - this is nothing but PR - they are looking for sexual acceptance for the sake of their own egos. Their behaviour proves this. And if it wasn't clear, women are exactly the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 02:19 PM
7

There's a cohort of young women endlessly complaining about how pointless and cruel their lives are because men won't sleep with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 01:26 PM
1

Pretty sad to be so personally and spiritually dependant on the opposite sex's approval, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 01:25 PM
13

It is about sex. It's always about sex. Specifically the validation they get from voluntary sex and being chosen/selected by an attractive woman. Ask any man if he would be in a relationship with a woman who offered companionship and love but not sex, and you'll find your answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 01:24 PM
8

Only very attractive women have simps. What about the other 50+% of women? Where are they getting their male validation? Why aren't they behaving similarly to incels?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 01:22 PM
6

I don't think women are blowing up their lives to the degree that a certain segment of young men are. I don't see the same sentiment that life isn't worth living without a boyfriend or a husband from young women, do you? My point isn't about hating on men - it's about how men's dependence on women's validation is a bizarre quirk of male psychology that has been thoroughly exposed by the sexual revolution and we're only now realizing how far it goes.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 01:21 PM
13

Is it really just a want when their whole sense of identity and self worth and sometimes their whole motivation to keep on living is tied to us providing those things? That's a pretty goddamn strong want.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 11:13 AM
15

I've always believed this. Look at the lengths most men go to for female validation. Pumping iron at the gym, joining hobbies they don't enjoy or organisations they don't believe in, buying meals at restaurants and drinks at bars they can't afford... For what? For the satisfaction of knowing a random woman thinks you're attractive enough to fuck at least once. Wow. What a payoff that must be. And look what happens when the tap of female validation is turned off! "There's no point in getting a jo…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 11:11 AM
1

My husband and I didn't do the engagement ring thing You might be the first person I've ever seen online that also didn't do the engagement ring thing. We didn't either because we didn't really see the point in one. Why not spend all the money on a really nice wedding band that commemorates your actual marriage rather than an engagement ring that commemorates your... Promise to get married one day? Makes no sense to me lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 02:29 AM
2

Totally agree. What a waste especially if you have an actual wedding to pay for alongside all of this fuss.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 02:26 AM
5

How do you know they're not paying for it? If a couple shares finances (as all couples should IMO especially if they're serious enough to get married) then they're both paying for it?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 02:25 AM
6

I do agree with OP in so far as demanding very expensive rings and very elaborate weddings is a red flag though. Like the 2.5 month salary rule is completely ridiculous, especially if it's all about how much it cost and no thought has been put into the actual craftsmanship.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 02:22 AM
15

Picking a wedding ring should be a balance of finding something high quality that will last and something beautiful/with sentimental value. You shouldn't ever have to spend more than £1k to get a ring like that. Buy antiques or hand crafted from a proper jeweller, never buy from chains on the high street.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 01:56 AM
0

That's sad that you believe that. Enjoy your life I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 03:26 PM
0

You can't seriously believe that, right? If having a family prevents you from achieving great, meaningful things then it was likely you A) were never going to achieve them in the first place because you don't have what it takes or B) Made other stupid choices around having children such as having children with an incompetent, abusive or absent person or being a helicopter parent. None of these things are necessary parts of having children.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 03:21 PM
6

All of this boils down to fear. Childree people are usually scared. Fear of being ugly. Fear of pain. Fear of being alone. Fear of change. Fear of regret. Fear of the unknown. All very normal fears, but why let these fears rule your entire life? You will never do anything meaningful or achieve anything great with this limiting mindset.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 11:20 AM
1

You're seeing something that isn't there. Can you address the argument I am making rather than the one you think I'm making? I am not saying having children is a selfless act. It is not. It is a selfish act. It is NOT something you do to make yourself happy, that is my point. Edit: You clearly feel attacked in some way by my comment. Why is that? Do you feel called out or do you feel like I'm calling you selfish for being childfree, which I'm pretty sure you are given your reaction?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 04:26 PM
1

That's fine, you can disagree. Being a parent myself and knowing a great many parents, my experience tells me that people do not having children for that reason. They do it for long-term fulfillment, for personal growth, for a challenge, for moral/value-based reasons. These things aren't about making ones self "happy" unless you define "happy" as any generic positive emotion. Having children is difficult and not very pleasurable most of the time but it is very fulfilling and helps you grow as a …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 04:19 PM
-1

I never argued that having children wasn't selfish, I think you're projecting here.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 04:12 PM
0

I don't agree. I think a lot of people have children for fulfillment which is very different to being happy. Most of being a parent especially to young children doesn't make anyone "happy" in the traditional sense and certainly not in a sense that childfree people would resonate with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 04:10 PM
3

Having kids or not having kids is mostly a values/personality issue and it is fundamental. Parents and childfree people will never understand each other. At the crux of it all, if your main aim in life is to gratify yourself, make yourself happy and avoid unnecessary challenge, then you should not have children and it is unlikely anyone could convince you that it's a good idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 02:23 PM
4

Men work harder. We sacrifice more, even if it’s office jobs. We will chase promotions knowing our personal quality of life drops because our families will benefit. I think what you mean is that you work harder. Which is great by the way, and very admirable. Most men are not working significantly harder than their female counterparts whilst doing even less at home. You sound like you are very conscious of your contribution to the family, but statistically this is not the norm hence the general d…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 09:56 PM
5

We have to look way further back than just your grandma's generation. The 1940-70s were a blip in history in terms of how the working class lived. There's a reason they were called that, you know? Most times in history were not prosperous enough for women to waste their time going to "housewife school" - everybody had to work to survive.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 09:48 PM
3

Then why is it beyond the capabilities of most men that they can't even do the easiest job in the world? Very mysterious.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 04:47 PM
3

Most men do, this is a fact you're going to have to deal with. Nothing but respect to men that don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 12:44 PM
3

Evo psych and Evo bio explains a lot of this Yeah, it does explain, but it doesn't excuse. If I'm rude to someone and I say "I'm autistic so that's the way my biology works" does that mean nobody has the right to be pissed off with me? There's a difference between acknowledging the certain parts of our biology makes things more difficult, but it is not give us a free pass to say "fuck it, might as well not try and be better for the sake of the mother of my child". If you think it does, do not ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:35 AM
8

You should already know areas your child is having a hard time with and be working on helping them overcome it. This is usually done in collaboration with a teacher? Which requires you to know their name. If you are waiting for correspondence from a teacher to help your child with school you already failed You have failed as soon as you judge knowing the names of the people responsible for your child's education as "irrelevant"
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:28 AM
6

. If my wife didn't remember them, what exactly would happen? Will we celebrate our birthday on the wrong day? Or will we not celebrate it at all and just have the party another time? And what terrible thing would happen because of that? And you think your child would be OK with having his or her birthday become a floating holiday because neither of his or her parents could remember the actual correct day? This wouldn't affect their self esteem at all or make them question what was more importan…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:26 AM
6

It's reasonable to assume that, if you do not know the same of your child's teacher, you also do not know the subject that this teacher is responsible for, you don't know about your children relationship to that teacher and you don't know about any correspondence you've received or not received from that teacher. If you know all the above things, then it would be highly unusual for you to still not know their name.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:22 AM
8

It's not about paying child support. It's about mothers spending years upon years being sleep deprived, emotionally and physically battered by the demands of raising children, neglecting themselves for at least 5 years per child, and men just sitting back and letting this happen because "dads aren't moms 2.0". It is dishonest and frankly exploitative to expect women to be OK with this division of responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:17 AM
0

most importantly, men and women are different and serve different purposes. Mothers are more valuable when the children are young, fathers are more when the kids are a bit older. It is what it is. Biology is a bitch. There is little evidence for this. There is almost nothing to indicate that there is a biological reason for the disparity in parenting effort put forward by both sexes. And for the small amount of evidence that does exist, it does not and should not completely absolve men of the re…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:13 AM
1

There are plenty of reasons. Sometimes it's because the paternity leave is not paid and the couple can't afford to lose 2 incomes. Sometimes (maybe even more often) it is because there is 0 social enforcement of fathers actually being involved in their children's lives at all, so some men don't bother. They are satisfied being a "provider" and feel that makes them a "good father"
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:10 AM
5

How is this arbitrary and irrelevant?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:08 AM
5

Do you realize that your last paragraph is a prime example of the problem? Why the hell is your head filled with useless stuff that is of no use to anyone but couldn't be bothered to remember your child's birthday? Judging based on this whether a father is interested in his child and whether he devotes time to that child is very unfair. No, that is a fair judgement. People remember the things that are important to them. Even if your natural inclination is to remember stupid stuff at the expense …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 11:07 AM
8

Come on now, let's be real. Most people in the West work easy jobs. It's not back breaking labour or hair loss inducing stress unless you're a surgeon or a wall street trader. You're not a "provider" you're a normal dude trying to ride on the coattails of better mens' hard work.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 10:59 AM
0

Yes, many men (but not all) are too single minded and self centered to be effective parents by themselves. But women do not have to accept them doing less parenting, because there are definitely ways that you can make your partner take 50% role in parenting. 1) Never ever earn less than a man, because chances are he will hold it against you and justify doing less because of it. 2) If possible, he needs to take at least a month of paternity leave as having mum take over all baby care 100% from da…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 07:33 AM
1

I think it's because most people agree that a bigger family is usually better and having more loving parents is better than having fewer. Accepting new people into your family doesn't cheapen your love for your biological parents - perhaps you feel like it does and that's why you're hostile to the idea of step parents? Do you think your mother would have been offended if you'd treated your step mother equally to her? IME jealous/insecure biological parents are the biggest barrier to healthy, fun…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/25 05:27 AM
3

I had a stepmother who was a nice person but she was never going to get the same respect as my mother. I had a step mother and a step father and I treated them both the same as my biological parents, because they were functionally identical. They did the same stuff, they took care of me, they showed me they loved me, they helped me at key points in my life. Why do you think that your step mother "was never going to get the same respect as your mother"? Did you just decide this from the beginning…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 07:35 PM
2

I'm from a blended family, and sure there were times where it was challenging and my relationship with my step siblings is a little bit unusual, but I am WAY less fucked up than my husband whose parents stayed together for the kids like good little conservative drones. Blended families are just as complex and messy as nuclear families. Black and white thinking strikes again.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 07:30 PM
0

If you want a wife and a partner, there will 100% be times in your life together where you cannot have sex. Perhaps due to illness or having very young children or due to pregnancy or work stress or something. This is completely normal and expected. Most decent men can cope with it because they love their partners for more than just being a sex buddy. If you would leave your partner or GF for being unable to have sex, even if it's for a legitimate reason, then you have no business getting marrie…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:54 AM
0

There's a big difference between saying "I am only interested in sleeping with you and nothing more" (which is verbatim what you said) and "I want to have a sexual relationship with my partner". I am not saying wanting sex is bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 09:37 PM
1

Ok, sure. Everybody else is lying but you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:42 PM
1

I have never in my life met a man who didn't want to get married and have a proper partner. In my experience people like you exist only on the weird spaces of the internet and on reality US TV shows. So I'm going to have to go with you being the one who doesn't know about men, sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:37 PM
0

That is a very... particular outlook on relationships that I don't think most men share. You're entitled to your preferences, but most men want a wife and a partner, not a perpetual sex buddy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:31 PM
2

This really, really depends. If they've been asexual from the start, then most people would probably say no. But if you've built a life together and sacrificed for each other and THEN a medical condition or sexual trauma renders the person sexually non-functional, then most (decent) people would stick it out. At that point it should no longer be about serving your personal needs and more about serving the needs of the partnership and honouring your vows. However in truth there are very few condi…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:29 PM
0

women’s main value that they provide is sex This may be true for you but it is far from the main value that women provide men in general. Companionship, family, support mean nothing to you? And by the way I hope you are honest with any female partners you have about the fact that your main reason for dating them is getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:22 PM
21

As someone from a family where most people have children in their 30s but had her own children at 21, it is undeniably true that there are both benefits and tradeoffs to having children older. Benefits of having children older: - You're more likely to own your own home and have a stable career at that age - You've had more time to make sure your partner is the right one for you - Unless you happen to be a naturally mature person, you probably will be more mature Tradeoffs of having children olde…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/25 05:01 PM
3

Some people are highly motivated not only by sex but the validation that comes from partnered sex specifically. It is hard for those people to feel good about themselves without sexual validation from an attractive partner. We can debate forever about how valid or logical that is, but it's a fact. That validation alone is a great incentive to get into a relationship for those people. But even for people for whom sex is not a high priority, there are great reasons to get into a romantic relations…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/25 04:22 PM
7

I do agree with the "everyone gets a wife" experiment being over, I don't agree that monogamy and marriage itself was an experiment. Monogamy is the best system we've come up with for your average person in our entire 40,000 year history. Broadly, it makes people happy. However many men in history did not have the opportunity to marry. Here's why: 1) Back in the day you really had to earn a wife, one wasn't just given to you. For example, in 197AD Roman soldiers were forbidden from marrying when…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 07:20 PM
–

"You have character, integrity and merit" - that's funny 🤣 Where is the merit in spewing hate-filled tripe on the internet as if anybody in the world gives a single fuck what you think?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 04:50 PM
2

I dunno, I kinda feel like men who like opinionated, driven and confident women would just date those women in their age cohort. They would have had plenty to choose from. But those women didn't want him, I wonder why that is? Why wait until your 30s or 40s to try and date a young woman? I seriously doubt it's because they're opinionated, driven and confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 05:58 AM
1

Well I was attractive enough to date the men I actually wanted to date, who were in my age group so I guess who gives a fuck. Are we saying older men have higher standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 05:56 AM
6

You're pulling out the "women love Christian Grey" trope? People read books for fantasy, because they know it isn't real and they wouldn't even want it to be real. Do people who read game of thrones wish they could live in a world where being killed in a dragon attack is a real possibility? Do people read Steven King because they want to get murdered by an alien clown or eaten by vampires? It's escapism and exploration of new ideas. Novelty, something different from their every day. The women wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 07:48 PM
4

That's fair, I think men do LOVE alternative girls. I remember being 14 and experimenting with the traditional black goth and I got a lot more attention then than I did at 18-22 lol. Maybe it's because I got serious and boring. Anyway the point I was trying to make was that it isn't just being a young OK looking woman that gets you attention. You've also got to be attractive for other reasons whether that's having a great body or by how you dress or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 07:35 PM
4

Fine, guess I was ugly and I guess all my friends were too. I remember we were all just very average, normal looking girls and none of us got hit on regularly. Could it be, just maybe, that men only notice the most attractive women and you in fact do not get lavished in male attention for just being normal looking, despite what men here claim? Surely not. 🤔
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 07:31 PM
17

I disagree anecdotally. When I was a younger woman (18-22) I didn't get any attention from people outside my age group at all despite me being reasonably attractive. I believe that was because I'm opinionated, driven and confident (and a little masculine). If these men just wanted to date young women because they're young and hot, then me and the rest of my friend group would have been valid targets for their approaches. But they don't just want young women do they? They want a particular kind o…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 06:31 PM
6

Or do I use my time and resources to just focus on someone who doesn't have red flags? Isn't being in a bunch of relationships and them not leading to anything just as much of a red flag, arguably a bigger red flag? It suggests they are frivolous, commitment phobic, has a history of sabotaging relationships or has a hectic lifestyle not conductive to being in a relationship at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 10:04 AM
12

I think that's sad. There are plenty of very legitimate reasons not to date and most people don't engage in casual sex. What if you wanted to focus on yourself? What if you were suffering from poor mental health or poor physical health? What if you just never met the right person? Anyone who thinks that's a red flag without finding out more is likely pretty immature and you're dodging a bullet staying away from them, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 09:18 AM
13

You can't possibly know that, and the fact that you immediately jump to conclusions based on a Reddit comment involving someone you've never met suggests you are extremely bitter. It's no way to live, honestly.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 09:15 AM
15

You know what they say about assuming? It makes an ass out of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/25 06:46 AM
6

No it's not, people will sleep with people they find attractive enough no matter the personality or quicker than personality shows itself. People with a particular flavour of sexual ethics will do that, but not everyone. Most people want to like the people they have sex with and get to know them beforehand?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/25 01:20 PM
3

Sorry but it's more like a symbiotic process. A woman's body is not just a gestation chamber. A woman's body produces more blood to supply to the foetus. A pregnant woman produces 30-50% more blood than a non pregnant woman. The foetus would have no nutrients or oxygen without this exchange of fluid from mother to baby. The mothers kidneys filter the foetuses blood. The heart beats faster to pump all the extra blood. A foetus cannot build itself without materials produced by the mother and that …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/25 06:25 AM
1

Fair, I guess we just disagree then
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 03:05 PM
1

I was more talking about you saying that women who proposed would get tired of their passive partners. That assumes both that the partner is passive, which he might not be, and that the woman wouldn't truly love her partner, when she very well might not give a damn about dating an "active" man. That's pretty judgemental, no? But you're entitled to your view.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 03:02 PM
2

Yeah, I'm not saying that everyone has to do it, but it's really annoying that people get judged for doing it. Like, you yourself judged them in your OP. What is the need for that? Just because a man doesn't propose does not mean he's passive. There's plenty of reasons to not propose. Maybe he doesn't want to put you under pressure. That's being considerate. Maybe he doesn't care for the dramatics of formal proposals and would prefer to involve you in the conversation. That's being pragmatic and…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 02:51 PM
2

Seems pretty mean to call people desperate for making a move TBH. Couldn't they just as easily call you arrogant and stuck-up? Plenty of women fall in love with their partners extremely quickly and know for a fact they want to be with them, hence why they make a move. It's not desperate, it's the act of someone in love. If you weren't in love with your boyfriend at first then of course it wouldn't make sense for you to make a move on him. But if you had been instantly in love, you'd have been fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 02:48 PM
2

That's fine, I was just interested in what you meant
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 09:10 AM
1

It all depends on your personality. I would find being a SAHM incredibly challenging because I get easily overstimulated by the noise of my two kids and both my toddler is highly extroverted meaning they demand a lot of 1 on 1 play. If I wasn't getting overstimulated and my kids were more chill/independent maybe it would work. As it is, my toddler thrives at nursery and I get a break by working. But my next door neighbor is a SAHM because she couldn't stand to be away from her daughter even part…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 07:22 AM
5

100%, single working mums have the absolute worst of all worlds. Hats off to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 07:18 AM
3

The OP is referring to the fact that you cannot take advantage of most of the advantages of being in a relationship with a very young person. You can't really share a social circle, you can't rely on them to contribute financially, you can't bond with them about your life experiences, you can't really be "friends" with them a lot of the time. Ergo, the only reason you are with them is because they are hot and it strokes your ego to know you have a young SO. That's not a good foundation for a rel…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 07:15 AM
2

Let's be honest, OP, only a particular kind of man consciously goes out of his way to date very young women and avoid women his own age. Those men are not introspective or humble enough to ever CONSIDER, much less accept, that what they're doing is for the benefit of their ego and nothing else. Leave them to make their mistakes and behave like wannabe Hugh Hefners.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 07:12 AM
4

Same, threads like these remind me how many Redditors are from the US. I proposed to my husband which is still quite unusual in my circle, but paying for dates and taking an active interest in the guy is completely normal. Why is the US still so conservative in this regard, and they still can't figure out why their gender relations are so incredibly fucked?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 07:05 AM
2

Is it necessarily bad to do something masculine every once in a while? Especially if it results in something that you want (presumably, getting married) happening?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 06:59 AM
1

Or they're just very active in pursuing what they want?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 06:57 AM
3

I proposed to my husband and we've been married 5 years. At the time, I didn't give it a second thought but I've come to realize how unusual it was as time goes by. It's odd to me that people find it odd! But to be fair, I didn't want a traditional wedding at all. I didn't wear white, I didn't walk down the aisle, my dad didn't give me away and I was married in a registry office. Wedding probably cost £3.5k in total. Yet we're just as married as the next person except we are £20k better off... A…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 06:56 AM
4

Why look down on women who make the first move? Did you not "want" your boyfriend since you didn't make the first move on him?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 06:45 AM
4

That's really interesting. I proposed to my husband, and the result is that I'm the only person in my friend group happily married and in a secure relationship. Everybody else is sat twiddling their thumbs waiting for their SOs to propose and getting increasingly annoyed that they won't. So I asked them, why not propose to him? They looked horrified. I don't understand it at all. Like, if you want something, isn't the best thing to do to ask for it? Otherwise the logical conclusion is that you d…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/25 06:44 AM
4

Secondary as in they wouldn't exist if men didn't do harder work to make them possible. And men wouldn't exist if women didn't feed them and make them clothes and make their medicine. Because they would be dead. Your argument is completely circular, surely you can see that? Ancient humans simply didn't have the luxury of proclaiming one task as more important than another. Everybody in a group made vital, irreplaceable contributions. It is modern men and women, who haven't known a proper day's w…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 06:52 PM
1

If we're talking about submissive as in a character trait, which submissive is, then the psychology is important. Very few people are trying to argue women aren't physically weaker.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 04:36 AM
4

Most of the things you listed were secondary jobs to support the men that did far harder ones. Are you joking? Wearing clothes is a secondary job? Taking care of children is a secondary job? And what, pray, is the point in doing any of that "important work" if you have no children, yous starve to death as soon as a few hunts prove unsuccessful and have died from exposure to freezing temperatures as soon as you step outside? I'm not being funny, but you sound ignorant as fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/25 04:33 AM
4

You are making the claim that it's due to socialization but i have to prove it isn't? Bro, you made the original argument. I responded with a counter saying it might be socialisation. If I made the original argument that it definitely was socialization, I would have to prove it. I am poking holes in your argument because you didn't provide proof. Are you sure you're a scientist? t's a dummy visualization of what a cohen's d of 0.5 would look like, because i assume, that you are scientifically il…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 05:11 PM
3

I am presenting 3 separate counters to your argument. They stand independently from each other. You don't have any evidence that the reason women are as they are today is because of genetics. You would need to prove that what we're seeing is a result of selection pressure and not just a result of deeply ingrained socialisation. The burden of proof is on you to prove that. Also, that graph doesn't mean anything without a source. Is it a reputable one? How is dominance and submissive being measure…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 04:41 PM
5

I think you will be very hard pressed to prove this for a few reasons: 1) Submissiveness was only recognized as a positive feminine trait since around 4,000 years ago. That is not long enough for natural selection to really make a difference. We don't know what prehistoric humans selected for and we will probably never know. 2) Not all men like submissive women. Maybe even most do not like submissive women. It certainly isn't something that genetically fit men automatically prefer. This is impos…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 04:04 PM
4

As an aside, you clearly haven't read much of the smut or erotica you claim to be basing your opinion on. If you had, you would know that the male lead in those books is usually extremely competent and powerful, but crucially, the woman is still in control most of the time. That's the ideal for women, to wield a competent man like a weapon and have him respect, love, cherish us. How is that "wanting to be submissive"? At best, it's wanting to be a power bottom.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:26 PM
6

I am absolutely not proving your point. You're saying I want those things because I want to be submissive and that's incorrect. I can't think of anything more unattractive than a man trying to dominate me and control me, I don't give a single shit how rich or confident he is. I'm saying I want those things because I want to benefit from them, personally, and a poor man doesn't benefit me at all. We don't want DOMINANT, we want COMPETENT men, please learn the difference for the love of God. Certa…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:22 PM
6

Because it makes sense? Why would I want a poor, overly sensitive, useless man? How am I, as a woman, going to be able to extract maximum resources from him if he sucks shit and can't offer anything? Loser men are no use to anyone and definitely no use to me. I think it's really funny that you think that any of this has to do with women wanting to be submissive to be honest. What we want is for the man to be a good return on investment.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:16 PM
10

How is it that you think wanting to be dominated in bed means that you want to be dominated in all aspects of your life? Those two things are unrelated and most people know this.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:11 PM
9

I take huge issue with this. Men were doing "most of the important work" and how do you think that was meant to work? How would it make any sense for any society, prehistoric or otherwise, to have half their population sitting around not contributing properly to society? Women were responsible for: - preserving food for winter (pickling, salting, drying, storing) - gathering (which sometimes depending on your geography and the climate accounted for more calories than hunted food did) - pottery -…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:10 PM
11

In a physical sense, yes. Psychologically there's not much evidence that women are innately submissive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:04 PM
9

Then explain how evolution and sexual selection wouldn't have favored a submissive gene setup in women. How exactly has evolution favoured "submissive gene setups"? What even is a "submissive gene"?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:51 PM
3

... Gorillas court each other. Bonobo females court males. Kingfishers... Lions...Orcas... Hyenas... Lemurs... I'm afraid nature is not quite as simple as you like to make it out to be? Sorry but the appeal to nature argument is intellectually lazy and only used to justify preexisting biases. Secondly I would add the "courtship" in biology refers simply to the male and female interacting and sharing information. So whilst most animals do court in a general sense, only certain animals have courts…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:48 PM
1

Males courting females is only done by certain animals. It is certainly not the norm at all, not even amongst mammals.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 05:42 AM
3

I agree with you. The appeal to nature argument is the most intellectually lazy and scientifically illiterate take out there and those making it have usually done no research on actual anthropology anyway. They just say what feels true or sounds right in their head to justify their own positions. The dynamic of men chasing and women choosing was born out in the early 19th century and is a result of religious/culture attitudes towards what the ideal woman was like. Women could not be seen to be a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 05:39 AM
2

No. Characterising people's feelings changing as "being fickle" is being emotionally immature. People change through their lives and you must accept that. Relationships end, you can feel sad or even angry about it, but if you imagine that falling out of love with a boy you met at 13 is "fickle" then I don't know what to tell you.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 11:30 AM
1

You're free to not get married if you're not emotionally mature enough to handle it, I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 11:07 AM
2

I would be devastated honestly if I found out he didn't love me any more, but he's done nothing wrong? It's certainly more honest to split than to keep a dead relationship alive or cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 10:47 AM
3

But... How could I be emotional cheating if I broke up with my ex literally the same day as I fell in love with my husband? What I did was the opposite of stringing him along? Emotional cheating would have been pretending everything is fine and I still loved him, even when that wasn't true and I was in love with someone else, which is in fact the exact opposite of what I did?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 09:03 AM
3

I agree that it is really sad when relationships come to an end. It really hurt my ex, I'm sure. But what I'm saying is that what I did was not malicious and I'm not a bad person for doing it. Do you think that everybody should spend the rest of their lives with the first person they start dating? Because realistically that's the only way that you can go through life without ever breaking a heart or getting yours broken. It has nothing to do with cheating either, direct or indirect. Sometimes re…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 08:53 AM
3

A) Already fell out of love a while ago and were stringing him along, or I had fallen out of love, but I didn't know it at the time. I was only 17 after all, and he was my best friend and I was in denial about the love not being there any more. I didn't want to hurt him. Once I met my husband I realized that if I continued for a minute longer, I would genuinely be stringing him along, since now I knew exactly what I SHOULD be feeling for him but didn't. Out of respect for him, I immediately ende…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 08:32 AM
1

I hadn't said a single word to my husband when I ended things with my ex, it definitely wasn't monkey branching. It wouldn't have been fair to treat my ex like the backup option when it was clear I didn't love him any more
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 05:53 AM
2

I was under the impression that monkey branching was when you don't break up with your current partner just in case your new partner doesn't work out, like keeping your finger in both pies? I ended things with my ex before I even spoke a word to my husband so surely that isn't monkey branching?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 05:50 AM
4

I would say the majority of asexual people are not repulsed by sex per se, so framing it like that makes it seem like a worse option than it actually is. Asexual people simply do not feel sexually aroused by other people and they do not feel spontaneous desire. Plenty of asexuals still have a libido though and the majority of asexuals still have sex to please their partner. There are benefits to dating an asexual person: - You don't have to worry as much as changes to your body, such as getting …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 06:08 PM
2

What makes you think putting a low value on sex is abnormal? I know way more people who don't care than do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 06:01 PM
4

I had a "long term" boyfriend from 13-17 at school. Then I went to college and met my husband. The minute I laid eyes on him I fell madly in love and I ended things with my ex boyfriend on the same day just for a chance to be with him (I could never cheat or monkey branch). Turns out he felt the same way. We dropped out of college together, got married and bought a house within 3 years. Now we have 2 children. Edit: It appears that the men here think that "monkey branching" just means breaking u…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 05:57 PM
2

It is NOT reasonable to assume that it took women 3 years to finish reading the 1969 act. Take a moment to think about this logically. Whenever there is significant change in the law, the culture does not immediately change to reflect it. It usually takes a few years for new ideas to become mainstream. The birth control pill became available in the 1960s but it wasn't until the 1980s that it became the most popular birth control method for example. In 1970, the average divorce took 2-5 years fro…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/25 06:23 AM
1

Why is the conclusion being drawn here that the REASON those misogynistic men are having more sex is BECAUSE they are misogynistic? That is a huge leap in logic and the study doesn't prove that. You're seeing what you want to see to justify your own misogyny. It is equally likely that men who have a higher sex drive, are more sex sensation seeking, etc etc are more likely to be misogynistic. It makes sense to me - if you have a desperate craving for something that only women can satisfy and your…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 08:46 PM
3

I feel you on this. We are a 2 parent 2 kid 1 dog household and managing the mental load is legit harder than my actual job. All these things in isolation sound like they don't matter, but all together it's like constant noise that never ever goes away. At least that's how I feel. Maybe the reason some people don't understand it is because they're better at going with the flow and can "let things go" easier?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 04:00 PM
6

In England and Wales no-fault divorce got introduced in year 2022; "massive wave of divorces" [started (in UK) in 1970]( Apologies, I was referring to the "Divorce Reform Act 1969 marked a significant change in that people could end marriages that had "irretrievably broken down" without having to prove fault." Women of the past had no way to know what standards will exist today, and were as much products of their own time as their husbands. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I mean that bo…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:32 PM
2

There is some evidence but it's flimsy on paper. I believe it though. I'm a young parent and a lot of people in my family and friends circle are young parents. The young men I know are fantastic, involved fathers that are really putting in the work. I think, because it's so difficult to start a family, only the really committed of my generation have managed it. So you get the cream of the crop as compared to when everybody had children, even people who really shouldn't
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 06:39 PM
7

Like everyone, my family is a mixed bag. There's some brilliant men and some dog shit men. I'm just writing about social trends and history in my country.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 06:36 PM
4

My dad was a SAHD and a great parent and my husband is an even better parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 04:56 PM
9

(Almost) infinitely more men died providing for their families than women changing diapers; there's little to no evidence that men are significantly more abusive to their children than women are (a lot of m/f disparity in abuse of children comes from single moms' fuckbuddies). You are making this into a he said/she said. I'm not arguing that men were the only ones abusing their families, plenty of women did that too. I am explaining why the men of the past were very poor fathers and co parents a…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 04:54 PM
–

Again, this is not relevant. Men have the physical strength therefore women are right to be afraid of them. Women don't so men usually aren't afraid of them. What each gender wishes it could do to the other is not relevant. It's what each gender does
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 12:27 PM
29

It's not about blame. It's about protecting themselves from ending up like their mothers and grandmothers. What's wrong with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 12:25 PM
36

Men have a huge roll to play in the fall in birthrates in the West. Well, not the men alive now per se. Mostly the men of the last few generations before now. Most fathers of the boomer generation were fathers in so far as they nutted in a woman at least once. They were absent, avoidant, belligerent, often abusive. All they did was work. That was "parenting". You could make an argument about how they were providing for the family and that was their excuse but it doesn't change the fact that many…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 12:14 PM
–

Then women are baby killers. Even if we accept this premise, why would that make men rightfully afraid of women? Men are not targeted by women's violence most of the time. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to prove here. You don't know if women has physical capacity they would absolutely do all of that and they actually do. Again, they don't, so nothing you're saying here is relevant at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 12:04 PM
0

That's exactly what I said, it does depend on the marriage and the partner. Did you even read my comment? I wouldn't be caught dead being a SAHM, but it frustrates me how many men seem just mystified as to why it's such an unattractive option for women. This is exactly why.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 06:37 AM
1

Bold of you to assume that SAHPs would get "a say" - that depends a lot on the nature of the marriage and their spouse. Also "a say" is not much of a consolation prize. As a fully grown adult I wouldn't be happy just getting "a say"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 06:17 AM
2

Joint accounts can definitely relieve a lot of the danger on this front. Where I live joint accounts are definitely the norm but I hear it's not so common everywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:29 PM
10

That's the thing though, it is much harder to claim half of everything if you are not joint owner of the assets which many SAHP aren't. Say you're a SAHP and you are NOT on the deed to the house or the mortgage agreement. Or you are not down as a joint owner of the car. These things will likely not be awarded to you post divorce. Anyone wanting to be a SAHP should be very careful to put their name on absolutely everything - every agreement, every contract, every mortgage, every loan - only then …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 04:49 PM
16

"Unpaid" is not the same as "uncompensated". SAHPs are compensated by their spouses that earn (some much more than others and it may or may not be enough to make being a SAHP worth it depending on a bunch of factors). SAHP are not paid. As in, they do not get a salary with money. Here's something to think about: 1) Money is generally worth more in its raw form than goods that are equal in value because you can make your own decision about what to spend the money on. This is why we transitioned f…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 04:34 PM
2

Never ever in a million years: 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 14, 16, 20, 22, 23 No but it's not personal: 7, 11, 13, 24, 25, 26 That's fine with me: 3, 6, 18, 19, 27, 28, 29 It's a plus: 9, 10, 12, 15, 17, 21, 30
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 08:08 AM
6

Well if they told you that straight up then they're terrible, manipulative people for sure and I feel sorry for the women they're dating
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 02:59 PM
12

Are you sure that's what low maintenance means? I've never, ever heard it used in that context and I've a lot of male friends. It just seems like a really mean spirited interpretation
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 02:39 PM
18

I think this is a pretty cynical take on what guys mean when they say "low maintenance". My understanding of low maintenance is that the woman is fairly independent, emotionally resilient and generally easygoing. Some guys really do not want to date a woman who'll give him the silent treatment because he left her on read, or a woman who spends extortionate amounts on self care. It doesn't mean that he just doesn't want to put in effort. Just that he wants a particular kind of personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 02:16 PM
4

White collar careers are by their nature very stressful and time consuming. They dominate your life. I think most people who work very high up in their field are unhappy doing so, especially if they have a family, but won't step away due to social pressure, personal pride or financial obligations. You seem to be under the impression that high earning men are having the time of their lives working in these very pressurized environments... Have these men actually been asked how their mental health…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 02:07 PM
11

I get to be a stay at home mum married to a loving husband Then, after 10 years of daily service to your family, your husband stops "loving" you when his young secretary starts making a pass at him in the hopes of getting a promotion? Or, he never actually loved you at all and only married you because extra marital sex was harder to come by. Not that you'll ever know, because you'll hardly spend any time with this many who allegedly "loves" you. He'll interact with you only to make demands, give…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 07:27 AM
16

Maybe not to avoid marriage entirely, but the majority of grandmothers will tell their granddaughters: A) not to marry the first man they see and seek experience with men first B) always have a career or a business to avoid becoming dependant C) raising children on your own as a single mum is better than being in a bad marriage especially if it's abusive These were lessons learnt the hard way
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/25 06:35 AM
1

What does that have to do with my point? Men still beat women to death all the time, lesbian women aren't out here beating each other to death at record rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 10:39 PM
17

The point OP is making is that as soon as that sexual access is turned off for whatever reason, even if it's only temporary or due to factors outside her control, suddenly all that "love" evaporates into thin air.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 10:33 PM
1

What planet are you living on? How can men love more authentically when they cheat on their partners more, beat their partners to death at 10x the rate that women do and are also more likely to leave their spouse if they were to become critically ill? The only thing that most men love is themselves, unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 10:31 PM
0

"Had" - I feel like there's a story there
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 10:11 PM
1

Well, not that long ago it wasn't possible for a woman to earn a living for herself. That was a conscious decision made my men and the reason was so that a woman for forced to marry a man and provide the sex, support and service OP is talking about. That's just one way.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/25 10:08 PM
2

I would always recommend dating within your economic and social group. It can save a lot of heartache. But people don't always make the most logical/practical choices and sometimes it turns out fine. These are just general rules.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/25 11:19 AM
8

It's not about assuming the worst. It's being prepared for the worst and that's always a good thing. Do people buy insurance believing that they'll need to claim on it? No, but they'll be glad they had that insurance one day. Besides, if one is confident that they would never financially abuse their spouse, then surely them making provisions for that eventuality wouldn't bother one at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 05:21 PM
8

You don't have to, sure, and I would recommend not being with a man who doesn't respect your opinion because you earn less than him... But the reality is that many women (perhaps women who are young, who have self confidence or attachment issues, etc) will be manipulated by these men. It's easier to avoid it by just not dating men who earn a lot more than you, ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 04:24 PM
8

I'll give you an example: Say you want to buy a house together. You want house A and your spouse wants House B. Your spouse says "Well, I earn more money and I'll be paying most of the mortgage, so I get to pick the house." Another example: Spouse wants to move to a different country or move far away for better job opportunities. This would really hurt your career. But your spouse says "My career is more important than yours, so you need to be OK with this move." Another example: Spouse wants to…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 04:18 PM
20

Plus many men are under the bizarre impression that if they earn 3 x as much as you do, they should do 3 x less housework than you do (even if you both work the same number of hours) which is a dreadful situation to be in as a woman
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 04:14 PM
12

It's important to note that even if you have your own career, the higher earning partner will always have more power in the relationship than you. So whilst earning something mitigates some of the risk, it doesn't eliminate the risk entirely.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/25 04:12 PM
3

Only to a man who wanted children though, that's my point. If you didn't want children and wanted to live a luxurious DINK lifestyle then a woman who wants children will be extremely unattractive to you. My point is that you simply cannot make sweeping statements about which qualities do and don't matter to "men", you can only speak for yourself. My own husband was specifically looking for a no-nonsense, practical, stoic woman who he could start a family young. He was much more likely to find th…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/25 04:01 PM
–

Where are you from where it is "likely" a woman will stop working when they have kids? I don't know a single woman who stopped working other than their 4-8 months maternity leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/25 02:31 PM
4

"whether she will be a good wife" - there really isn't a standard for what a good wife is, though? Some men want women who will look after the home whereas some men don't care about that and want women that will contribute significantly (50% or more) to the finances. These women are both "good wives"?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/25 02:19 PM
4

... But some men are attracted to a woman's accomplishments? Men who genuinely like the woman will view her accomplishments as just another reason to love her. No woman alive thinks that they're going to get a man PURELY because of their accomplishments. But men usually also do not get women based purely off their accomplishments so I'm not really sure what's being argued here?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 06:30 AM
4

It's not about money. It's about hiding away in an attic/basement/bedroom with their headphones on and their friends on the Discord, ignoring household chores that need doing, kids that need looking after, etc etc, not speaking to their wife or spending any time with her until they feel horny and start asking for sex and wonder why she says "no because the emotional intimacy isn't there". Many MANY men do this.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/25 06:11 AM
9

What you all seem to forget is that most women have men that truly, deeply care about them in their lives. Fathers, brothers, friends, lovers, etc. Why do you expect that they would allow random men to simply take away the rights of the people they care about? You talk about all men as if they're a monolith when in reality partnered men and men with healthy social ties have completely juxtaposed priorities to lonely men with a need to oppress women. So it'll always be women + partnered men again…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 12:39 AM
14

It won't. But neither option will result in a benefit.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:43 PM
16

Surely they must know that that would never work though, right? There is no way to go back to a simpler time. We have new technology now, new ways of structuring society. Even if women's rights were to be repealed on a governmental level, women aren't going to collectively forget what was taken. It's a complete waste of time hoping. They must know that, surely.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:33 PM
15

And what will that achieve in practice? How will that benefit men?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:31 PM
22

Genuinely, what do you think that being less empathetic to women will achieve?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:20 PM
18

In the UK, the biggest reason women got the vote is because the right wing Conservative government didn't want the hoards of shell shocked and pissed off men coming back from the First World War to vote them out of Parliament. They thought enfranchising the women would protect them. They didn't do it because men were on board, they were not.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:13 PM
13

Your framing of this issue is really odd. You want women to be more grateful for the world men built for them in which they are privileged. My friend, women have been the biggest advocates for female emancipation since forever. Men only begrudgingly gave women the vote. Since then, the majority of women and a minority of men have fought extremely hard and persistently for women's emancipation for almost 100 years. We did it together. It was not something that men decided to graciously give us. M…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/25 06:08 PM
5

I think this all comes down to people being desperate. When you go on a date with someone, the aim should not be to get them to like you. All this does is make you more likely to overlook serious incompatibility. The aim should be seeing if they are the right fit for you and you should be prepared to walk away if they aren't. The best way to turn an abusive partner "off" is to be a confident, self assured person who will always advocate for themselves. If that means splitting the bill and not ta…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/25 10:27 AM
2

I suspect it will increase in time. The point of that stat is to demonstrate that in just under half of marriages, the man does not earn more than his wife, which refutes the common red pill talking point that women will only date guys that earn more than them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/25 12:00 PM
8

I agree that you should speak up if this is a behaviour you didn't know about prior to dating. But if you already knew about it, then you should have known what you're getting yourself into, no? If you get into a relationship with someone and you try and change them fundamentally to fit your ideal, that's controlling hence the accusations of misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 07:05 PM
5

It seems the obvious answer is that more households will have female breadwinners? But I feel like this is a gotcha question. People seem convinced that women will simply refuse to date men that earn less than them even though this isn't born out in the stats. From Pew Research in 2023: "In 29% of marriages today, both spouses earn about the same amount of money. 16% have a breadwinner wife."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 07:02 PM
15

Being uncomfortable with your girlfriend going out to clubs and wearing revealing clothing doesn't necessarily mean you're a misogynist (although it could) but it 100% means that you do not trust your girlfriend. Without trust, you have nothing, so you should not be dating her. Plus you obviously have different morals and lifestyles. Misogyny is the least of your problems here.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/25 06:52 PM
3

We don't have enough resources to support that many people In fairness, it has been proven that we absolutely DO have the resources to feed every single person on earth and will do for a long, long time. However our systems of distributing resources is not efficient enough to end world hunger and there are too many competing incentives (profit, keeping poor nations poor, politics) that means it'll never happen. But it's not because the food/water doesn't exist. It does.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/25 06:19 AM
4

In many ways he's right. The poorest in society today have terrible quality of life but only in comparison to the richest in society. The wealth gap between richest and poorest is wider than ever. But as a baseline, compared to 100 or 200 year ago, the actual quality of life for working class people generally is good. Clean, safe food quality food is available for supermarkets. Clean safe water just comes out of a tap on command. Almost everyone has access to indoor plumbing. Most countries (not…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/25 06:14 AM
5

There's absolutely nothing worse than being the child of a single parent and having the new partner treat you like nothing but an annoyance.People who don't want to be a parent should stay far, far away single parents!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/25 06:26 PM
1

The thing that annoys me about these discussions is that people have such short memories. When will people realize that the mid to late 20th century was a truly exceptional era. Never before was such prosperity experienced in the western world. People were rich, the world was largely at peace, technology was rapidly improving the standard of living, capitalism was working its magic, mortality was low and life was amazing. How is it reasonable to expect such an ideal set of circumstances to last …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 07:10 AM
4

There are a whole bunch of problems men are suffering at the moment, chiefly amongst them that women have been offered an alternative life path (focusing on career not family) and men have not been offered the same. We should: Stop treating men as if they are all naturally career minded or they're a loser. Some men will struggle in their careers, just like women do, or won't be motivated by climbing the corporate ladder and that is completely OK it does not make you a loser. There are plenty of …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 06:54 AM
4

I think it's sad that some people's response to this question is just to drag women down. "Not being overly emotional" "Not being weak" "Being taken seriously". Like come on, you seriously can't find anything inherently good about being a man? You have to shit on someone else to make yourself feel better? Sad.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/25 08:28 AM
1

If the research says that, then on a population level it must be true. But I happen to think most people are absolutely terrible at choosing the right partner for themselves which is why most marriages were at least semi arranged until recently. Women "like" disagreeable men until they marry one and realize that every little thing is a battle. Women "like" muscular men until they marry one and she realizes he is even more high maintenance than most women. Men "like" extraordinary pretty women un…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 12:55 PM
3

Would you not have married her if you were the one making slightly less? Is that enough to invalidate all the other great things about her?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 12:35 PM
1

You have a list of 35 dating preferences. Confidence was 19th on the stated preferences list but only 27th on the revealed preferences list. How can we be sure that this is because people don't actually care about confidence? Could it also not be because there simply aren't enough confident people to go around and not everybody can settle with someone who is confident despite their intentions? Humans are a dimorphic species and we like partners who have traits that are different from ourselves. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 12:34 PM
3

I think that depends on the individual. Some men would prefer a more beautiful partner at the expense of everything else, some would value stability higher.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:51 AM
3

Couldn't it be argued that those women are in for a very rude awakening too? They deserve to be miserable?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:51 AM
2

The only men who say they wouldn't date a women who earns more than them or who is more educated are men that sensible women would never consider dating anyway. Why put up with that when you can find a man that supports and respects you?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:48 AM
7

Nobody gives a fuck if a woman is confident and capable. I think you're projecting. Dr Helen Fishers research suggests that 87% of men would date a woman who was more educated than they are and made more money, and 86% said they actively search for a woman who is confident and self assured. Maybe it's just you?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:43 AM
7

The AAMC reports that as many as 40% of male physicians marry female physicians, not nurses although I'm sure nurse is also a popular choice. And nurses are well educated so I'm not sure how that disproves my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:40 AM
12

Doctors and lawyers overwhelmingly tend to date other doctors and lawyers. Or similarly career orientated women. Often because they are "bitches" (AKA confident and capable)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/25 10:26 AM
4

I actually agree in a way, but I think you're focusing on having children being the thing that makes people happy when in actuality it is connection that makes people happy and fulfilled. People find that connection in different ways. For example, I have absolutely no friends at all and never have, but I have a large family I am very involved with, I have my children, and my husband. This is enough for me to feel very connected and fulfilled. I would not be happy living the single career woman l…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/25 03:01 PM
3

That wasn't ideological, it was a group of Asian men taking advantage of vulnerable English girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 07:27 AM
3

Taiwan is a small island very close to their borders - it's the lowest hanging fruit they could target. Kind of like if the UK targeted the Channel Isles or the US targeted DR/Haiti. It's a very different prospect than taking over a very large, well developed nation.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:23 AM
2

Let's draw a few scenarios. In 50 years, how can we guarantee the state of the world that we take for granted today? First, the pension system fails. The 20 year olds of today are 70 year old in 50 years. The US social security system already is set to run out in 2035 Make no mistake, we are in agreement on one thing - the pensions system will collapse and it will collapse within our lifetime. My generation and yours will not receive pensions unless the pensions that have been individually inves…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:21 AM
4

It's more likely that just like in the natural ecosystem, a more effective predatory nation will take advantage of weakening countries and impose their systems on them. Just think for a moment about how this would work. Even if the population of the Anglosphere were to decrease by 50% (so from half a billion to a quarter of a billion) and the population of Western Europe were to decrease by 50% (from 200 million to 100 million) that's a broadly liberal coalition of 350 million people spread out …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 05:04 AM
6

OK, I've finished reading all the comments to this thread. Let's say for the sake of argument that another culture with a higher birthrate than ours does decide to try and "take over" the West. What does this "takeover" look like - a land invasion? Russia has been at war with Ukraine, it's next door neighbours and not even a particularly powerful country, for 2 years and hasn't come close to taking over. How are they going to subjugate the entire of Western Europe, the UK, the US and Australia? …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/25 04:40 AM
7

If a child's parent or parents instill that "men aren't to be trusted, or men are too risky" of course the child is NOT going to want to choose a man over a career! It is a fact that many men aren't to be completely trusted, so there's no use getting emotional about it. Why would one lie to their own children? You didn't want to spend more time with your mother instead of being sent off to a public system, being raised by someone who had zero skin in the game? Well, that says more about you as a…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/24 05:39 AM
14

I didn't say having a career was a "bad" thing I'm pretty sure you were suggesting that having a career was selfish and that women with careers don't want to be part of something bigger than themselves? That decision and belief was made at a young age and/or instilled in them by their parents. Well, yeah, usually it is a parent's job to warn your child away from dangerous choices, or which being a stay at home mum is definitely one of them especially if you have no education or work experience t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 09:58 PM
45

First of all, to answer the question, if I had to choose, I'd go with being a mother and a wife since I am already those things and they're pretty awesome. But I take huge issue with your framing here. My hypothesis is that most women do NOT want to be the married woman with a husband and kids, and dedicated her life to something bigger than herself. Not all careers are purely about making money. My career involves me helping people at the most difficult times of their lives and it's a privilege…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/24 09:34 PM
3

Hmm, I'd be inclined to agree that a woman who struggles to orgasm after 30 minutes of stimulation is either completely unaroused or has some emotional, hormonal or physiological issues... Or simply has bad technique? Either way, this is something that deserves sympathy, not disdain. It's sad for someone to be unwell like this, but not necessarily a reason not to date them, especially if you're compatible in other ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 09:08 PM
3

How much time and effort do you think it ought to take to bring a woman to orgasm? How long is too long? How much clit attention is too much? I just want to know what is considered 'sexually unresponsive'.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/24 11:58 AM
–

Respectfully I disagree. Why isn't the husband doing a certain number of night wakings? Why is the woman doing 90% of the child and home care? You don't have to run your relationship like that. Young women must advocate for themselves at home otherwise they'll never achieve the family dynamic that works for them. Everything they ever wanted and everything they used to do for fun gets put on the back burner, up to and including (often) bathing themselves and self-care Who on earth told you this? …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/24 06:10 AM
5

This doesn't have to be true. The US has a very toxic parenting culture, but if you choose not to engage with it, parenthood can be the making of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/24 10:26 PM
62

The decision to be child free is more socially acceptable now, so people feel more confident expressing their feelings.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/24 04:25 PM
19

Actually it's wired into us to want to have sex, and then care for a child once one arrives. We do not have the hardwired desire to have children just for it's own sake.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/24 06:11 AM
–

Red pill is just as individualistic and self-centered as feminism. I find the idea that red pillers care about anyone but "me me me" to be pretty laughable.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/24 09:11 PM
2

Don't believe anything you're saying. Why are you so rude and combative? Not that it matters but I'm not from America, and out earning your husband is very common here because we aren't backwards. If you were half as smart as you think you are, you'd realize that liberal, high earning woman are overrepresented on Reddit. Your "woman" doesn't earn anything so of course she does all the housework. If she did work, she wouldn't be obliged to. End of story.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/24 06:20 AM
2

If you dont think someone making 200k a year warrants having a partner that does the majority of the "domestic labor" then you have a fundamentally twisted expectation and understanding of real life. It most certainly doesn't automatically "warrant" having a partner that does more chores. You should explicitly state whilst dating that you're expecting this dynamic so that people can make an informed choice about whether that's something they want. Most people do not organize their families this …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/24 11:13 PM
1

And did the study conclude that these changes only happen in women that stay and home and don't happen in women that work? Because if not, it doesn't really align with your arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 07:56 AM
1

Yes, it is well known that pregnancy affects a woman's brain. What does that have to do with children's attachment to their parents?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 07:53 AM
3

For an infant, it kinda is. Why do you think baby wearing is a thing. Most people do not baby wear beyond 6 months old. I'm not sure what that has to do with needing to be present 100% of the time to form attachment. Where's your evidence that this is necessary? But that person won't bond as strongly with the infant. Just look what happens with step parents/children Vs biological parents /children. Where is your evidence for this? Uhhh so you think you can create an attachment to the child, then…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 10:23 PM
7

Raising an infant takes your whole day (and night) That's true, but why do you seem to think that being a good mother means being physically present 100% of the time? This is really not necessary for a secure attachment between parent and child. but an infant can't form attachments to anyone else until it has a secure base attachment to it's mother. This isn't true. If it was, would that mean people whose mothers died in childbirth would be unable to form secure attachments for the rest of their…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 10:09 PM
3

Honestly, agree with a lot of what you're saying. There are real benefits to being a young parent - easier pregnancy, easier birth, dealing with sleep deprivation is easier, more energy, etc etc. I had my first child at 21 and married at 19. However you completely lost me and probably a lot of other people with your strange assertion that you can't be a good mother and work at the same time. This is what puts a lot of young women off being parents you know. If you give young people a choice betw…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 09:50 PM
2

I guess, I just think it's strange that 0% said they wanted their partner to be financially dependant on them, unless financially dependant means unemployed in this case. To me financially dependant can just as easily mean the lower earner. It's not clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 11:06 AM
2

I totally agree I think it's all down to phrasing
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 11:05 AM
3

No, these are the female responses from two different questions
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 11:04 AM
5

I think it's a matter of how the question is phrased. The second way of phrasing what is essentially the same question gets to the heart of the issue much better so people end up changing their answer. Like I can imagine people's thoughts going from "Ew, I don't want my man to earn more than, I can earn my own money" to "Ew, I don't want my man to be financially dependent on me"
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 10:57 AM
6

I just think it's strange that 14% of female respondents said they wouldn't want their partner to earn more than them (presumably meaning they want to earn more than their partner) yet absolutely none of them said they wanted their partner to be financially dependant on them... If they wanted an equal partner, they should have picked the "doesn't matter" options. You can't say you want to earn more than your partner whilst simultaneously saying you don't want to pay for him/her.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 10:55 AM
5

Would you prefer that your significant other makes more money than you? M: F: * Yes: 34% * No: 14% * Doesn’t matter: 52% Would you prefer your significant other/potential spouse to be: F: * Successful and the breadwinner: 54% * Financially dependent on me: 0% * Equal positions in life: 46% These two data sets completely contradict each other. Which one is the truth?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 09:25 AM
6

I think the OP was referring to the fact that women in less developed countries don't have any options for their life apart from having children, so it's no surprise that that's what they do. Women in western countries have education and options in their lives and they choose to exercise their options by having few/no children.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/24 09:16 AM
1

And this stagnated wages making any gain moot, so congratulations? Entering the workforce made economic sense for the women individually, not necessarily for society at large. A woman who works is 100% more wealthy than one that doesn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/24 08:12 PM
1

Women don't always pick the richest man? They just don't pick men who are poor generally. Big difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/24 08:06 PM
2

So many parts of modern family life still tacitly assume there will be a SAHP available This is so true and totally bizarre. Things like school starting at 8:45 and finishing at 15:00 like in my county. There's still 2 hours left of the working day, where are the kids supposed to go whilst I finish work? Better hope you live within walking distance of your kid's school or on a bus route. And school plays happening at 12:00 midday. Why can't they be at 18:00 so that parents can attend without hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/24 08:05 PM
3

What would you consider as "someone seriously fucked up?" Cheating? Becoming an alcoholic or drug addict with no desire to change? Spending all of the other spouses/the family money without permission? Saying mean things to the other spouses on a regular basis? Withholding sex or affection for a long period of time? Failing to treat their children kindly or parent properly? I just can't see how keeping a marriage going in these conditions does anything except prolong suffering and reward terribl…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/24 06:03 AM
1

For mild disagreements like "he only showers every other day" or "she's a vegetarian and I love meat" then I see the merit in encourage people to work on the relationship. But for serious issues like "he won't have sex with me or show me any affection" or "she keeps spending all the money we have and now I'm in debt" or "he/she is an alcoholic with no desire to change" then what good comes from mandating that such a relationship continue? One spouse is just dragging the other down indefinitely. …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/24 06:00 AM
3

If a woman quit her job and the husband cheats on her, she should be entitled to financial compensation. She was essentially providing labour under false pretenses and he scammed her out of the money she would have been earning if she knew he was a cheating ass and left him. That's the only situation where I think the wife should be entitled to money.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/24 05:54 AM
0

Pregnancy is hardly the same as parenting. You don't play an actual role at all until birth. And most people breastfeed for 6 months or usually much less, a small drop in the ocean of parenting as a whole. You know full well that these are not the things that women are complaining about, don't you? And what exactly do "hormonal profiles" have to do with parenting? What "hormonal profiles" are you talking about? If you're referring to the fact that babies tend to prefer the faces of women to the …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/24 06:45 AM
2

I wouldn't really be up for 50% parenting though no. Biologically there's an obviously "dominant" parental role for women. Trying to fight that just makes things more difficult for mostly ideological reasons (or maybe it's due to material circumstances). Can you point to the element of women's biology which makes them the naturally dominant parent and the element of men's biology that prevents them from being as such? Because that sounds like a completely woo-waa excuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/24 05:52 AM
3

I'm the biggest feminist I know and I don't see anything wrong with this. Apart from the requirement that she contribute an equal amount financially - I think it's fairer if you go by number of hours worked, so as long as you both work 40 hours you split evenly.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/24 05:47 AM
3

I don't like men who "take charge" - I want decisions to be joint unless it's something frivolous like what present to buy me for my birthday. My silly little woman brain doesn't need a "break" from having to think and make decisions so let's make them together thank you. I don't like men who gets angry. Nothing gives me the ick faster than shouting or seething or sulking. It's toddler behaviour. I don't like men who drink. Here in the UK our drinking culture is heavily tied towards masculinity …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/24 06:17 PM
12

In order to prove your argument, you'll need to explain how things that are natural are "good" and that doing things that are unnatural is "wrong". Otherwise your argument doesn't mean anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/24 03:54 PM
22

It's depressing and unnatural that people are living their lives how they choose and not how you choose? What a strange attitude
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/24 03:32 PM
0

People wouldn't have to have children as a retirement fund if they didn't want to. There are other ways to save for your future. As long as people aren't forced I don't see a problem with it, but other people might not see that distinction as important.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 07:35 PM
2

Indeed, when formal retirement becomes a thing of the past people probably will have children as a retirement plan. I'm not sure what's so terrible about that?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 07:28 PM
1

I'm talking about far far further back than the 1800s which is well into the industrial revolution, when the concept of welfare and socialism first began to take shape. For most of human history, there was no "retirement" and the social order was much stronger than it is now. The French and Russian revolution weren't caused by a lack of retirement, they were caused by very complex social and economic problems which convened all at once. The French rioting last year is hardly proof that the world…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 06:44 PM
2

So what happened in a time before retirements? The social order didn't break down then. People just worked until they couldn't any more, and then their children looked after them. It sucks, but no more than it sucks having to spend your whole working life paying for somebody else to go on holidays to Spain and watch daytime television for 40 years until they die. Our grandparents were very lucky to live during a time when state retirement was a thing, but not everybody can be so lucky. Surely yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 06:14 PM
4

Is having a retirement really worth taking away the reproductive rights of fertile people? We aren't entitled to a retirement. Maybe people should just live frugally and save for their retirement like people used to for 1000s years
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/24 05:25 PM
0

I think values are far more important than politics. I don't believe in gender roles at all, but I'm very family orientated and I do believe in living a very disciplined, modest life. As long as those values are present, I don't care who my partner votes for. I've never even asked him.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/24 03:10 PM
2

That's fine if that's your belief, but I don't believe a happy marriage is possible if you see relationships this way. It would be better for those people to stay single as they'll just end up hurting themselves and/or their partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/24 11:52 AM
0

But some women genuinely do not care about their man earning more. I've always been the breadwinner in my marriage and I don't expect that to ever change. It makes me proud that I can provide for my husband and daughter. Men should have higher standards for themselves. Never marry a woman whose respect for you is contingent on something external like fame or money or possessions. Those women are incompetent, insecure and shallow. Marry somebody with actual values or don't marry at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/24 11:07 AM
2

if we want our wives to love us and to have a stable family life - we need to outearn them as much as possible Or you could... Find a decent woman who thinks you're funny and kind and interesting? And then communicate well in your relationship, prioritise the relationship and do fun things together? That's usually a great way to have a stable family life. "Earn more money than her" is such an autistic piece of advice to give someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/24 09:52 AM
3

Not at all, men worked very hard. All I'm saying is that men have continuously belittled and devalued the female gender role. It's "just cleaning" or "just watching the kids" when in reality running a household well is very much "labour". That's what I'm saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/24 05:58 AM
4

The idea of unpaid labour was intended to demonstrate the amount of work the traditional female gender roles actually involved, because men historically (and currently, as you have demonstrated) have no clue.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/24 08:51 PM
1

Society might be better off in the abstract, but biblical marriages only work if the two partners love and respect each other. Very few men have the capacity to love and respect women. So biblical marriage very rarely works out well. Edit: As the below commenter points out, few women also have the capacity to love and respect men
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/24 01:30 PM
11

No, it isn't. Because a parent "not pulling their weight" is still a lot better for the child than no parent at all. She's doing it for herself. So you expect women to become slaves in their own homes with a spouse who won't lift a finger? Also why are you blaming the put upon parent for leaving and not the one who is neglecting their responsibilities to their family?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/24 01:17 PM
2

3 children per woman is entirely unsustainable for Western countries. There isn't the infrastructure to care for all those children. Even 2 would cause strain. Also, what exactly do you mean by social debt?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/24 01:09 PM
4

Nobody ever seems to think things through when it comes to the fertility crisis. Say you got what you wanted and woman started having 2.5-3 children each. Maybe even 4 if it became financially beneficial. It would be an unmitigated disaster. Those children all need houses. They need educating for 12 years. They need healthcare. They need facilities like swimming pools, sports facilities. They need childcare. Where the hell are all of those things going to come from? Many schools in the UK are al…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/24 01:02 PM
5

What a depressing thread, feels like this was asked just to make PPD men look bad
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/24 07:27 AM
3

Confident enough to admit your flaws on a public forum though which is already a lot better than some people! Probably one of the reasons I'm attracted to confident women, because I'd hope to be with someone more assertive and decisive than myself. I think this is also smart. I wanted to be with a man that was methodical and even tempered in the hopes that I could learn to be more of those things myself. It worked! Maybe their assertiveness would rub off on you in the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 10:20 PM
2

Men want a "submissive pick me"? Maybe certain men...
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 10:11 PM
4

Not too fussed about whether they are overly masculine or feminine in presentation Then you've significantly widened your pool of potential partners! It's smart. I would also wager you're pretty confident and capable yourself. Like attracts like most of the time IMO.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 10:09 PM
13

My mum is a business woman who took absolutely no shit from anybody. Confident, charming and ambitious. She fell pregnant with me by accident at the height of her career so my dad offered to stay at home and raise me (if he hadn't offered, she would have sought an abortion since she was away 90% of the time). My dad is an extremely kind, sensitive man who is a huge nerd and whom I respect greatly. He's the kind of man that will cry at sad movies and not apologize for it - he's fat, loves food an…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/24 08:25 PM
2

Why does something have to be done? If humanity decides that, if given a choice, it prefers not to reproduce itself then who are you to say that's wrong?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 09:09 AM
0

They weren't liberal, they were just democracies. And culturally enforced is not the same as legally enforced.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/24 09:08 AM
1

Why should people care about their societies dying off? What could possibly be so valuable as to mandate the curtailing of the rights of millions just to preserve it? Nobody's culture is that goddamn valuable. And everything dies eventually.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/24 08:29 PM
0

The introduction of feminist policies can't necessarily be concluded to cause the decline of birth rate (who knows?), but they definitely don't appear to help. That's because the only thing that would "help" is forcing women to have children they don't want, which would never be permitted in a liberal democracy. Expanding abortion access, equal pay laws, no fault divorce laws and anti discrimination laws are all feminist policies that, yes, do have a large part to play in the decline of the birt…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/24 08:23 PM
2

Gender roles are the natural consequence of the physical and innate psychological differences in men and women. Alright, what is it about women's physiology/psychology which prevents them from working?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/24 02:54 PM
4

Nature decides gender roles? There's nothing in nature that prevents women from working or being financially independent.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/24 02:15 PM
6

How do you imagine that they would bounce back? Rampant misogyny hasn't worked very well for Korean men so far, what makes you think that dialling it up would change the outcome?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/24 02:10 PM
–

That's funny. That must be why the same women from those generations tell their grand daughters to never become financially independent on a man. Being with a wealthy man was better than being with a poor one and those were your only choices as a woman. As soon as they were able, those women divorced their husbands and dropped them like hot plates. The early 80s had the highest divorce rate of any decade. All women and men born in the 50s and 60s. Because they were such great husbands. Right.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 06:19 PM
–

The 50s was only a great society if you were a white American man, which I'm guessing you are. Nobody else with any sense would wish to go back there. People were still queuing for rations in the UK during the 50s. The standard of living was low unless you were middle class. Women could not buy or sell property and could be legally discriminated against. The 80s was a much better and more prosperous time for most people. I would recommend you read more history.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 06:15 PM
–

I don't doubt that this is what your grandad said, it's what everybody says. And maybe he was one of the people that actually did have sexual morals. Most people don't however and are/were too stupid to exercise restraint. Hence the legions of bastard children and STDs floating about since Edwardian times. Did you know 1 in 5 londoners had syphilis in the 18th century? That didn't happen because people were faithful to their spouses.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 05:52 PM
–

One sexual partner in their lifetime? People might have only had one wife in their lifetime, but men have been having sex with prostitutes and secret liaisons with pretty young milk maids behind the outhouse since the dawn of time. But they'd never "count" them. Where do you think all the millions of bastard children came from if men were so faithful to their wives. Don't fall for the conservative propaganda.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 05:41 PM
–

Your position that modern dating "isn't working" seems to be based entirely on how closely our society reflects a traditional Christian society. High marriage rates and high birth rates are not an intrinsically good thing, people with certain politics just think that they are. For somebody that values autonomy and liberty, modern dating "works" just fine as long as people are given maximum choice in who they pursue. For example, I got married at 19 and had my first child at 22 because I chose to…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 01:59 PM
–

Failed in what sense? As far as I can see the feminist movement has achieved the majority of the things it set out to achieve. Civil rights, economic independence and less rigid gender roles for women. How is that failing?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/24 01:46 PM
0

My friend, you, along with many other men on this thread, are the ones talking about how easy it would be for men to beat women into submission and take away their rights. If you don't want to be treated like savages then maybe stop presenting yourselves as savages? Just a thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/24 07:12 AM
4

Women in that part of the world do not stand up to their oppressors for a whole range of reasons, mostly that they are religiously and culturally conditioned into accepting treatment as a 2nd class citizen. That conditioning is a powerful thing, which is why ancient societies used it to keep people in line. Plus there are no protections under the law for women, so even if there were to escape oppression, there's no infrastructure for them to live independently. It is not just because they're afr…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 10:51 AM
4

For what exactly? Trying to prove a point that just because men are physically stronger doesn't meant they'd have an easy time subjugating women?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 10:08 AM
–

I'm really confused as to why men in this comment section act like women aren't a threat to them even if they have weapons, acting like they all wouldn't shit themselves if a woman pointed a gun at them. It's very cute. There are innumerable ways to kill somebody beyond engaging in one on one fisticuffs with them. Let's imagine that men did decide to force women back into the kitchen en masse. I don't think it's very smart to trust the person who you've subjugated and abused to make all your mea…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/24 06:18 AM
–

But honestly, I think women were better off then, than they are now. I think they are too focused on the outliers and headwinds of the time, and are missing the big picture overall how it was just generally better. Then why don't you become a househusband and let your wife provide for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 05:32 PM
–

Yes, hence why it's important to just find good partners You say this as if it's the easiest thing in the world. A lot of people change significantly over the course of a relationship and not for the better. Plus, some people pick bad partners because of poor self esteem or attachment problems. Why should those people be tied to someone who is wrong for them for life? Without economic independence, women would not have the opportunity to be as discerning about their partners as they are now. If …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 05:30 PM
–

I meant benefits as in social security payouts, not benefits in a general "this is a benefit to me" way.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 02:40 PM
–

Once the amount of disaffected men reaches a certain point, they will start organize -- aka find ways to take what this society is denying them by force. In literally every society, especially polygynous ones (where we are going) lower status men respond by forming gangs, raping, etc. It's a predictable response. They are welcome to try, but my position is that they will fail. Think about this rationally. The sexless men in this scenario are the men who have been left behind. They are the shorte…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 01:40 PM
–

If there were to ever come a time when the majority of men were jobless, passionless, porn-addled angry man children, then I think women would happily move on without them. Thankfully this is a small minority of men, so my comment was meant to be tongue in cheek.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 01:11 PM
–

Well we'd need to do something with all the left over men. I doubt men would accept becoming literally nothing more than sperm donors.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 01:00 PM
2

8, 1, 9, 7 and 5 are the most important in my marriage, in order of importance. Marriage is the coming together of two individuals to make a much more powerful unit than either could achieve alone but you've got to be racing in the same direction to really get anywhere. Me and my husband are richer, more successful, more resilient, more organized, healthier and all around better people for being together. Love is not enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 12:45 PM
–

Sorry, I was being tongue in cheek. Women doing all the working and the childrearing wouldn't work in the long run.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 12:35 PM
–

others just no longer see any worthwhile purpose to grinding hard, with no stability or family or future to build anything for What's the incentive? Who's going to be there to appreciate your achievements? Who's going to be there to share the fruits of that labour? That's really interesting. I suppose it's easy to say that self improvement is its own reward, but even typing it, I don't even know if I even believe that myself... I probably wouldn't go to work every day if I didn't have my husband…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 12:35 PM
–

Young men 'opting out' is very similar to labour strikes but with one major difference. Labour strikes are most effective when the people striking offer vital services to society that we simply can't go without. Unfortunately most men choosing to opt out aren't being relied upon for anything in the first place, so their striking is likely to be ineffective and just ends up hurting them in the end. Do you think these men are cognisant of this, or aren't really thinking further ahead than "fuck yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 12:12 PM
–

How would that work unless 100% of men were on board. A lot of men are doing very well out of the modern way of living. They'd have no incentive to nuke society through lawlessness. It's unlikely a minority of men would be able to terrorize all women and a good portion of their more successful male counterparts. They'd just be culled or imprisoned or otherwise dealt with.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 12:03 PM
1

I really can't conceive of a situation where we could correct the majority of issues we're facing, which are mostly a product of industrialization, medicine and the Internet. Who is going to agree to live in a world with less medicine, less access to the global market, less accessible information, fewer opportunities, etc? I just don't see it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 11:59 AM
–

Your assertion that men won't ever rebel is hilarious. Men already are rebelling. They are dropping out. Dropping out of society is a kind of rebellion I guess, but rebellions usually involve an effort to change the current situation into one that is more favourable to you. Otherwise it's just giving up rather than rebellion, right? Men who organize out of shared sense of oppression = rebellion. Organize to what end do you think? Form a political party?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 11:53 AM
–

The majority of people receiving benefits in my country are young women with children. Men see almost no benefits at all. Unemployed men are eligible for 1 room rate which is about £300-£400 a month that's it. So really it would be women taking the majority of the work paying other women to have children... Which kinda works I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 11:46 AM
1

How exactly are we supposed to do that? What could possibly be done to "fix" the myriad of problems affecting the developed world? Why not spend all that energy finding ways to adapt to the coming change rather than wasting our time trying to wind back the clock?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 11:38 AM
0

Society as we know it is certainly hurtling towards collapse, but all societies do, eventually. It will be replaced with something different by the most creative ruthless and resourceful among us.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/24 07:39 AM
3

Alright, I'll concede that "I don't like brown people" isn't the sole reason that mass immigration makes people uncomfortable, but I'm very certain that it is the strongest reason. Anti migration arguments usually boil down to "we're going to lose our culture" and "I like my neighbours to look like me" - I doubt most people are sufficiently informed to hold the kind of objections you hold in the first place. expanding social security systems That is the absolute last thing we should be doing. We…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 05:02 PM
5

Lopsided population pyramids This is only a problem if we insist on maintaining the pensions system, which we aren't obliged to do. mass migrations We don't need to engage in mass migration at all if we just accept that the population will fall, pensions will disappear and the GDP won't continue to rise. These are things we are chasing and the only reason mass migrations are being sanctioned. hyper inflationary welfare obligations Again, welfare obligations are fulfilled by the good graces of th…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 09:55 AM
8

I don’t think there are any easy solutions. It’s another social revolution and we’ll have to live it through. Maybe when there will be less people around, we’ll feel the desire and need to have more children. Maybe a heavier propaganda of family and children will affect younger generations. We absolutely do have to automate everything we can and prepare to the future with no pensions though. I think this is the truth. Most people are only really worried about population collapse for a few core r…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 09:45 AM
1

I'm sure the mega rich would have felt both oppressed and harmed by paying a higher rate of tax, but feelings are not the same as facts. Bernie Sanders is many things but a psychopath is not one of them unlike Mr. SPQR up thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/24 08:10 AM
–

I'm the primary earner but we've always just had a joint account. No personal ones. It's easier to budget if the money is all in one place. We're both very frugal and we don't ask permission to buy things. Any other arrangement seems a bit suss to me honestly.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/24 06:16 PM
1

I think a lot of women take their frustrations out on people who follow traditional gender roles because they're resentful of the amount of shit they get for not following them. I know I was guilty of it. When I had my daughter, I went back to work when she was 5 months and put her in nursery. I got so much shit for that from everybody - family, strangers, doctors, even the nursery staff - that I became really angry at traditional couples who I felt were attacking me just by following gender rol…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/24 06:01 PM
1

This is the part where conservatives pretend to give a solitary shit about other people. People who genuinely advocate for enforced monogamy so do either because they know it's the only way they'd be able to get laid reliably, or because they want the ability to treat their spouse like shit and not worry about being cleaned out in a divorce. I value everybody's liberty to enter and exit relationships freely.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/24 07:23 AM
2

Wow, you're aggressive as well. Who'd have seen that coming?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 07:41 PM
7

Wanting to oppress and actively harm other people because they make choices you don't agree with is pretty psychopathic, not to mention narcissistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/24 08:45 AM
5

For example, if a woman isn't active in some type of volunteer activity (regardless of if it's something I agree with), or if she ever raises her voice at me or her family in an argument, we're done You want somebody who generous, empathetic and communicates properly instead of throwing a fit. I can't believe women in this thread are acting like these are unreasonable standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/24 07:43 AM
–

There are no reputable studies that prove that men are more logical or have better judgement on average than women. There are studies that point to men having better spacial awareness than women, but that doesn't qualify you to make decisions on women's behalf.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/24 02:55 PM
14

Duh? The man should far exceed the woman in these areas. If he doesn't that's fucking pathetic. How is this supposed to work when there is no difference between men and women on average? Are naturally logical, reasonable women supposed to never enter a romantic relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/24 02:41 PM
2

People love to overcomplicate this issue. The main reason people don't want to settle down these days is because there's not a lot of reason to settle down. You can live your whole life being happy and healthy and single. Likewise, the main reason people don't have very many children these days is because there's not a lot of reasons to have children at all. There are 0 incentives. Children just eat your money for 18 years then fuck off and live their own lives without so much as a thank you. Ju…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/24 12:22 PM
0

You haven't actually proven her wrong though. It is about sexlessness. More specifically a chronic validation drought caused by no sex. But it's still about sex when all is said and done.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/24 12:05 PM
1

Of course there can be two leaders in the relationship, and I believe there should be. Everybody should take the lead on something, whether it's a house move, or meal planning, or interior design, or gardening, otherwise they're no different from a pet you have sex with. You just can't have two people leading on the same thing at the same time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/23 09:56 AM
21

They want women to be obedient worker drones for lifeless corporations and not raise children right Do you genuinely believe that this is why governments brought women into the workplace? the vast, vast majority of people would want traditional roles, especially women. If women wanted to stop working and start relying on men, then there's nothing stopping them. They could all start wearing tea dresses, curling their hair and staying at home like good little trad wives. The fact that they don't d…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/23 07:39 AM
9

There is an argument to be made that more free time is what's needed, but there are more young people out there who are NEETs (not in education, employment or training) than ever before. Those people have nothing but free time and it seems to be doing them no good at all, quite the opposite in fact. This is me being a bit nihilistic but I don't think the future is something that is designed or imagined or manifested - it's just something that just happens to us and the way in which it happens is…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 11:34 PM
16

You see this issue a lot. Many people are reluctant to face up to our most prominent social issues because there truthfully isn't a lot that can be done to solve it without taking away people's autonomy. So it's easier to just try and ignore it, or to adapt as best as you can. Truly, what is the use in complaining about how things are and making yourself miserable in the process? So in short, it's not that people are happy with society as it is currently - it's that there's nothing we can do but…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/23 11:24 PM
5

imply a negative connotation towards, wait for it, men. If you want to take that implication, then you go for it. My actual intention was to suggest that women's role in relation to men was what made them miserable. But you'd prefer to get defensive and then come at me for being too emotional. please verify your claim that men are at fault. Men are at fault because it was their decision to bar women from public life, belittle them, abuse them, force them into marriages they didn't want to be in,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 03:07 PM
6

Why shouldn't she be the captain and you the first mate?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 03:00 PM
4

My response was to suggest that men were in fact at fault for this issue. That is my response. You responded by claiming that men facilitate women's lives (which is wrong) and that means they couldn't possibly be garbage people (which is also wrong). I in fact did not claim that men sucked in the first place, making your whole response to my comment the real non sequitur.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:58 PM
13

Abortion is a special case because somebody's fundamental right to bodily autonomy is at stake. Therefore no compromises can be made because you cannot compromise on human rights. 99.9% of relationship issues are not like this and you know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:52 PM
5

Nice attempt to try and take credit for the work of other men by the way. Should I demand that you curtsey before me because Queen Victoria was also a woman?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:48 PM
5

Precisely as you said. I would never date anyone that can do better in life left to their own devices and choices than they can do obeying me. You know what, if that's what you want in a partner then have at it I guess. How is respect in any way related to obedience? I can respect someone that obeys me. I can respect someone that I don't obey. I'm not sure how you can claim to have a mutually respectful relationship with your wife and then refuse to treat her like an equal in the decision making…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:37 PM
13

I struggle to think of a situation where a compromise is genuinely not possible. Not palatable maybe but definetly possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:33 PM
16

If you disagree then you discuss why you disagree and either change the other persons mind or find a compromise. Is this not obvious? Do you just brute force your way through every issue in your life?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:31 PM
8

He pays for you. If you picked the right one. The right husband is always the one that earns more? Interesting. We can have a mutually respectful relationship and she can obey me at the same time. That would only be true if she did what you said even if she doesn't want to, AND you did what she said even if you don't want to. Somehow it rarely works out like that in trad relationships. Saying you respect your wife in this instance is plain dishonest. And the answer is that I have better decision…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:31 PM
17

Decisions need to be made and someone needs to be the final decision maker. Just make the decisions together? If you are both good communicators and respect each other then this should be easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:24 PM
11

you can't decide both what's best for the family ... why not? Can't a discussion be had and a joint decision made?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:23 PM
11

Maybe women would rather be men because they tried being women and all that brought them was heartache and misery? Maybe the men of the past should have made being a woman suck less and then we wouldn't be so eager to run away from you all? Just so thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/23 02:21 PM
2

Immature outlook, Not understanding money or value, or credit, Inflated self-worth without the actual skill or experience to back it up, I cannot believe I had to scroll as far as I did to see these - the most important red flags to look out for for men
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/23 09:11 AM
–

There's always somebody who loses out when it comes to beauty trends. In the 90s when heroin chic was the in thing then women with shorter, stockier frames and big booties were ridiculed and harassed for being 'fat'. You just have to find men who aren't bothered about what is fashionable. There are plenty around.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 07:15 AM
6

Let's be clear. Going to work, which everybody has to do, is not 'parenting'. He would have been working even if he had no children. He's not adding anything to the family, just doing whatever he would have been doing before. To suggest that sitting in an air conditioned office for 40 hours a week, which is what most men are doing, is somehow equivalent to taking care of a child 24 hours a day is pathetic. The reason we don't expect women to go back to work days after giving birth is because it …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/23 06:41 AM
7

Now we expect dads to be hands-on caregivers (when most would probably rather eat a bowl of hair than change a diaper) The fact that men expect respect from women when they make childish, braindead comments like this is absolutely baffling. It's a nappy. You literally get closer to touching poop when you wipe your own arse. If you do get some on your hands, you wash your hands. Now parent your goddamn children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/23 07:04 PM
–

My take is that the only reason men care about how much women earn is because they are subconsciously still trying to bribe their way into womens' beds - "I'm a pROvIdeR" - and they realise they can't do that if the woman earns more than them. You rarely see men with plenty to offer besides a (usually very average) pay packet worrying about being 'monkeybranched' even by successful women.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/23 12:32 PM
0

I'm married thank you, and my husband isn't mentally ill or obese and he earns just as much as I do.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/23 12:23 PM
0

I never said it was a choice, but it's also other people's choice to not deal with you because of it. A decent figure means not morbidly obese.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/23 12:20 PM
–

She is not getting the man she wants. The man she wants has better options. (A woman in her early 20s that decided that family comes first and acted accordingly) Not all men want a family or an airy-fairy wife. It sounds like the woman in this example wouldn't want to be one either. So a man who wanted or expected that wouldn't what she 'wanted' anyway. She does not have the time to properly vet her potential partners. She needs 2 years to vet a man and she has.ñ a limited time before being infe…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/23 12:18 PM
-1

Having a job, a decent figure and not being mentally ill do not make you a 'high valued male' - they make you a functioning one
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/23 12:04 PM
2

Women have a laundry list of problems just like men. Almost everybody in the modern day is under socialised, under exercised, over sexualised, under utilised, spiritually bankrupt and that's only the start. None of us are "okay"
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/23 08:36 AM
2

It's a stupid thing to get bent out of shape about, but I actually agree with you OP. It annoys me when women who fancy themselves progressives still insist on a big white wedding with all the pomp and ceremony that is completely devoid of any meaning when done by progressive people. When I got married, I didn't wear a white dress, my father didn't give me away, I did not get an engagement ring and I didn't take my husbands last name. These things are all against my principles and I'm not intere…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/23 06:04 PM
1

In my experience, people who use the term boyfriend and girlfriend are still in the honeymoon period of a relationship. It's cute, but pretty juvenile. Partner denotes a more adult relationship: more serious, more down to earth, and more homely. It's interesting that you think the word partner minimises intimacy - I think the same thing of husband and wife, which to me feels more like a formal, description of my marital status in the eyes of the law than a term of endearment. I don't think it's …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 10:41 PM
2

Sorry I'm not sure I understand this. A marriage is a partnership between a man and a woman. So how can calling each other partners not the calling something what it is? Are they not partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 10:36 PM
2

Why are you being so rude? There really is very little difference between being married and being long term cohabiting partners. One of you chose to have a fancy party, and the other didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/23 10:31 PM
0

It just says that the man shouldn't give up the moment the women insists to pay. And why not? If she says she wants to pay, then let her pay. If she doesn't want to pay, then why did she offer? Offering to do something with the expectation that the other person will say "no, no, it's fine" is called being fake and disingenuous. 99% of the time she's doing so to signal she's not a leech Letting a man pay for you is being a leech, whether you pretend you want to pay or not. Don't want to be a leec…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/23 10:48 AM
2

Is it harmless if it tells people that a woman saying no doesn't matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/23 07:46 AM
3

Don't you think that sets a really uncomfortable precedent? "You're saying no, but I don't accept your rejection" is 100% not a way of thinking I would accept in a partner. No means no.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/23 07:00 AM
2

I wouldn't go on a second date with someone who paid the bill despite me asking to split. Like you, OP, what kind of social contract does he think we're entering into because he's paid the bill? Does he think I owe him sex? Is he going to insist on being the main earner? Does he think that flashing his cash at me is the way to get me to respect him? Red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/23 06:57 AM
1

I would never advocate for people to have children before they're ready! But equally I don't think it's fair that people who do want children at our age are not being empowered to do so. It goes both ways, doesn't it? Who knows how many people would choose to start families early if they were given the opportunity. Maybe it's more than people realise.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/23 02:56 AM
1

I would never advocate for people to have children before they're ready! But equally I don't think it's fair that people who do want children at our age are not being empowered to do so. It goes both ways, doesn't it? Who knows how many people would choose to start families early if they were given the opportunity. Maybe it's more than people realise.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/23 02:56 AM
2

I'm genuinely not trying to make decisions for anybody - quite the opposite, I feel like the way our society is set up makes the decision for a lot of people and I don't think that's right. I want people to have options in how they organise their lives that I don't think people are afforded nowadays.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/23 02:54 AM
2

Don't you think the reason for that though is that if you encourage people to spend many years of their lives in education, they feel compelled to go out and make use of their education, thereby leaving less time to start a family? I don't know anybody who's first thought after spending 4 years 18-22 getting a degree would be: "I'm going to devote myself to motherhood now."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 10:28 PM
2

Personally, my child goes to nursery and is looked after her grandparents. I love the time I get to spend with her, even if it isn't all day every day. She still spend more time with me and her dad than everyone else, but I think it takes a village to raise a child, so we are all 'raising' her I guess. The benefit is that I had a very easy pregnancy, a laughably easy birth and a lightning fast recovery. I have plenty of energy to wake up during the night with her and play with her at the weekend…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 10:21 PM
1

I absolutely agree that removing or at least reducing the motherhood penalty on women would make a huge difference. Affordable childcare, normalising flexible working and shared parental leave are a good start, but encouraging hands on fatherhood especially in infancy is the ultimate goal.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 10:16 PM
1

Economic factors are a huge part of the equation for sure. It's easier in some places than others. For example where I live me and my husband were able to buy a house and afford a child on two average wages. I know you can't do that everywhere though. So do you think that having children young is just a bad idea full stop, with or without adult education?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 10:12 PM
2

That's really interesting, it sounds absolutely gruelling. Do you think that older people would struggle to keep up with their younger coworkers in intense industries like law?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 09:11 PM
1

Honestly, I'm not sure I agree that people should have as easy a time entering highly specialized professions later in life as they do earlier. Someone down thread made the good point that something like medicine or dentistry will realistically never be accessible to older folks, no matter how much money was thrown at it. Which is a shame but most professions could accommodate later entry, I believe. Teaching, engineering, IT, nursing, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:57 PM
1

Medicine probably is an extreme example... you probably do need to do that earlier rather than later... but lots of other professions would be perfectly accessible to older people if the resources were there to train them.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:53 PM
-2

That's completely legitimate! Some people want to do that when they're young. But you can also do that when you're older. And you'll have more money to do it. I think both options should be presented to young people rather than pretending that the only time to do exciting, outrageous things is when you're young. It's not true!
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:32 PM
-1

I wouldn't want to push women in a particular direction, I don't think it's inherently better to have kids early. But the vast majority of women I associate with would love to start a family early on in life, but couldn't because a lack of adult education would have made it almost impossible to follow their passions later in life. That's what I have a problem with. I think lots of people run into this problem. If you want to work in medicine, or law, or in academics, you have no choice but to wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:27 PM
1

Now you suggest putting them 10 years behind their peers so they can raise kids. For a lot of women, the alternative will be to not have children at all. At least by having children first, you can have a little bit of both. Coming into the workforce after a 10-year resume gap and less experience, it's fair game to expect less pay. I'll never, ever trust a man enough to sacrifice my career. I'm actually not a fan of women giving up working entirely, and I would never have wanted to do that either…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:21 PM
-1

Some women are more than ready to have children at that age and I think it should be made easier for those women to have them. More choice is what we need.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:16 PM
2

I wouldn't want anybody to have children before they were ready! Nobody wins there. Maybe it's the circles I move in but most of the young women in my family, my friends also, would love to start having children, but don't feel like it's very sensible to permanently handicap their earning potential. They want access to high value professions that would be impossible to access later on due to poor quality adult education. I think that's really sad and also unnecessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 08:02 PM
3

I totally agree, not everybody wants a career. Quite a lot of people do though and it really frustrates me that intelligent, ambitious young women (and men) are not being empowered to start their families early if that's what they'd prefer.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 07:39 PM
2

Ideally, it would be the same. But in reality, it's extremely difficult. Not impossible, but difficult. You have to take time off a lot, you have to pay for and organise childcare, you're available less often to work over time or at unsociable hours. It does hold you back. And men are held back as well unless they have a stay at home partner to take on that load.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 07:36 PM
2

It's not crazy at all, it makes total sense. But there are tradeoffs, I'm sure you'll agree. It would be better if people had a true choice about when they start their families rather than being forced to start them later.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 07:33 PM
1

I didn't mention the husband being involved because in my experience young women are more hesitant than men to start a family, plus women carry the heavier burden biologically. That's the only reason. I'm not so convinced by the 'can't afford it' reasoning unless you live in a very high COL area. The poorest have the most children after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/23 06:58 PM
3

Essentially most women are threatening to commit genetic suicide rather than settling. Why is this so shocking? Do you think the desire for offspring is sufficiently strong in women that it would be worth condemning herself to sleep with and spend time with someone who they do not like, respect, admire or lust after, just to have one? For some women maybe... most women realise that it simply isn't worth it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/23 07:01 AM
4

1: people will age out of work without the necessary amount of youth able to contribute to social security pools -> retirement age goes higher or retirement becomes "impossible" for average person Retirement is a concept we invented fairly recently. For most of history people worked until they physically couldn't, or died. If people can no longer spend their golden years sipping beer on a sunny porch or watching day time television then that's simply a return to how things have always been. 2: s…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/23 06:48 AM
1

I'm not trying to suggest that having a strong sex drive is damaging like taking drugs would be. However it is true that sex can have an addictive quality to people who experience particularly strong hormonal reactions. But the same is true of eating, dancing, sports, extreme sports or anything else that activates our brain's reward mechanism.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 03:03 PM
2

That's an interesting perspective. It sounds to me like youre experiencing a hormonal high. A dump of serotonin/oxytocin maybe? Either way I'm sure those hormonal highs can be very addictive.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 02:39 PM
1

You said, quote, that sexual attractiveness was the measure of a person. 'The measure of a person' refers to the defining characteristic of an individual that can be used to measure their moral value. That's why I brought it up. Your comments suggest that you have a biologically deterministic worldview which is a rabbit hole that won't lead you anywhere happy, so good luck with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 10:45 AM
1

Most animals aren't intelligent enough to assign a moral value to anything. Human beings who assign moral value to things just because they're sexually attractive are commonly referred to as 'simps'
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 10:25 AM
-1

How much testosterone you have in your body doesn't change the hard facts that the thing most people get from sex is validation first, orgasm second. How else do you explain why people aren't content to masturbate their whole lives?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 10:24 AM
-1

Why do you think that?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 09:33 AM
-2

It's not the act of having sex that people feel like they need. It's the validation, pure and simple. The people who feel like they 'need' sex are the people who think that being sexually attractive is the measure of a person. Sad.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/23 06:06 AM
1

There is a real struggle against biology happening inside a lot of women. Biology doesn't care at all that you are happy, fulfilled and safe, only that you have lots of genetically healthy offspring. And the best way to do that (technically speaking) is to partner with the biggest, strongest, most capable man that you can and submit yourself to him in exchange for access to his genetic material, his resources and his protection. But this isn't actually the best thing for women as individuals. We…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 05:27 AM
1

Isn't behaving in that way a gigantic red flag? I've known women act like that towards their male partners and it's always because they either have extremely poor self esteem, they get off on the excitement of conflict (especially common on young women) or it's a kink. I don't think that confident, secure, healthy women would act like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 04:56 AM
1

That's my point though. When a woman earns more than £5000 a year that's a good sign that the country's economy has industrialised. If women are earning a wage then presumably they aren't working on a farm. So there's no need to have children.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/23 06:31 AM
1

Sure, but taking them away isn't the magic fix right wingers think it would be
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/23 06:28 AM
6

Women's autonomy is a reason that birthrates are falling, but it isn't the reason. The reason is urbanisation and industrialisation, which are processes that the vast majority of countries on earth have now been through. For most of history, children were absolutely necessary to perform labour around the house to earn money or keep the household running. Now, children are very expensive pets; there is no incentive to have them. So people don't. It's very simple. Some heavily religious communitie…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/23 10:42 AM
1

You are suggesting that women en masse disadvantage themselves and date men they don't want to date just to keep the average man's dick wet and stop him from throwing a tantrum. Who is the narcissist here? Clue: It ain't the women.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 03:12 PM
8

Anyone who sees this as a problem that can be fixed is in absolute denial. It's bizarre that certain people (usually on the right wing of politics) refuse to accept the idea that a significant number of people do not want children and won't be bribed or compelled into having them. The reason people had children in the past is because 1) they had sex drives 2) there was strong religious pressure to be fruitful and most importantly 3) there. Was. No. Birth. Control. Only 1 of those things is true …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 06:36 AM
1

I'm not sure in what circumstances anyone would get to choose the consequences of their actions. The consequences just... happen... independently of you, like a chemical reaction
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 06:27 AM
1

What do you mean by freedom of outcome?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/23 06:18 AM
5

SMV is basically a shittier person than the female when it comes to contributing to relationships. I understand why you think that but I actually never said that women are any better. Young women are also insecure, immature and unreliable, but that doesn't matter in this equation but the young woman isn't being expected to date herself. For some reason young men put up with pretty terrible behaviour from women that women themselves simply don't tolerate from men. And if you assume that both part…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/23 05:24 PM
15

The average man has far less to offer women in the modern day, that's why Jo is losing. What is he offering her? She can earn her own money, there are no invaders that need slaying or bears to fight off, young women usually do not have children that need taking care of and you can pay some stranger to do heavy lifting or DIY in your home. What does Joe have to offer that outweighs the running costs of the relationship? He constantly demands sex and validation and he rarely contributes equally to…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/23 03:42 PM
6

This isn't an answer, just an explanation as to why young women don't find long term relationships with men very attractive. It is well documented that domestic and emotional labour is not shared equally within the home. For many young women having a partner is a time and energy consuming affair without the payoffs to make it worthwhile, and the longer the relationship goes on, the more maintenance is required. It does explain why serial monogamy has become to norm amongst younger people these d…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/23 03:26 PM
14

Men put in plenty of effort trying to start relationships, but once they're established they completely take their foot off of the gas and leave the woman to clean up after them. That's what women are avoiding.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/23 02:44 PM
5

You're right, it is extremely demoralising to feel like you can do everything right and still not get what you truly want. To a certain extent, that's just life though. You simply can't compell people to fall in love just to bribe men into contributing to society. The other things you mention can and should be addressed though, so that will help at least a little with general hopelessness. You might not get a wife but you should get a job and a house at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 08:17 PM
8

That's interesting, but it does kind of fit with what I'm saying. You're angry because you were told if you did X then Y would happen, but you did X and Y isn't happening. That's an injustice in your view, you're not getting what you earned, hence your anger. But you're treating relationships like prizes for doing the right things. That's how it looks to me anyway. Doesn't that suggest that you do feel entitled to a sexual relationship, on the grounds that you did everything you were told to do …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 06:10 PM
4

Its not sexual entitlement to be frustrated and lonely and angry etc. Have you ever stopped to think about why you feel angry about not having a relationship? Is it because growing up you got the impression that everybody found loving partners and started families and now you expect that to happen to you, and it's not happening and you're angry the world isn't living up to your expectation? Is it because you think you're more than attractive enough for women to want to sleep with you and you're …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 05:51 PM
5

I'm not denying that men will simp for women online, I'm saying that it is unattractive for relationships, which it is to most sane, mentally healthy people with self respect. Just like being a desperate man is unattractive. Sure, posting provocative pictures will get you that dopamine spike that you crave, but just the fact that you need that dopamine spike to begin with means you have serious issues. Even the people who want to have sex with her know that, that's WHY they're picking those kind…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 05:38 PM
8

I actually do agree with you that this issue is treated very differently from other issues such as having no jobs or no affordable housing. This is because having a relationship requires access to other people's bodies. Protesting against having no sexual access is akin to protesting against the bodily autonomy of others, which is immoral. People who are sad/depressed about being alone generally get a lot of sympathy, but people who are angry or frustrated don't. This is because a)where sadness …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 05:27 PM
8

Do I agree that it's attention-seeking behaviour that I don't necessarily want any part of in my personal life? But you agree you wouldn't want her as a partner, which was the point I was making. Desperate men, vain women, people aren't lining up to be in a relationship with either of those people.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 05:18 PM
6

Having a strong desire for a relationship is completely normal. It is one of the best things about life. However how you respond to that strong need is what people will judge you on. If you respond to your lack of dating success by pouting, begging, sulking, blaming others, complaining etc then that is an immature way of handling not getting what you want. If you respond by being patient, trying different methods and not taking your anger out on others then you won't come across badly to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 03:07 PM
9

The reason that it's unattractive is that it screams insecurity and insecure people make horrific partners. In the same way that a young lady dressing provocatively on social media because she's fishing for attention is unattractive to most people.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 03:01 PM
4

Why won't you acknowledge that what you really want is the validation that comes from sex more than the actual sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/23 02:57 PM
–

I'm afraid I don't know much about social security as I'm not from the US, so I can't really comment. Here in the UK the pension is paid for as part of national service contributions which also pays for the NHS
/r/PurplePillDebate23/08/23 06:38 AM
–

I get your argument, but there is a school of thought that says you benefit from those things if only indirectly. Schools need to educate the doctors and engineers of the future that will provide you healthcare and keep the lights turned on. Child benefit payments help keep children out of poverty, reduce crime and improve outcomes for the next generation. Subsidised childcare is the only one where childless people literally recieve no benefit so I agree that is unfair.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 11:24 PM
–

That's true, which is why there isn't a fair or moral solution to the problem. And that's before you even start thinking about what people would actually vote for. Nobody would ever vote for a policy so blatantly discriminatory as childless people not getting pensions.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 11:22 PM
–

If the purpose of the policy is to incentivize people to have children, it doesn't matter if there are some people it doesn't apply to Morally it doesn't sit right with me that infertile people would miss out on a pension through no fault of their own. Missing out on a pension should be a conscious choice in this scenario I think. Do you think there are currently a lot of people incentivized who shouldn't be having children? I can't speak for the US, but in the UK this is a huge problem. Our ben…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 11:20 PM
–

That's a fair argument, and it makes sense. The only issue is that parents could not ever hope to finance their own children's education. So either everyone pays for it, or children aren't educated and there are no doctors, plumbers or construction workers. Obviously not educating children isn't an option so we opt for everyone paying. Although I agree that it is unfair.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:59 PM
–

The reward for that is that we will benefit when the future generation pays their taxes to cover us. It is completely unrelated to whether or not we personally have children. Whether or not we procreate doesn't negate the fact that we already paid our dues. Having a future generation pay for your retirement is a reward, but why should the people who didn't actually produce that future generation get that reward. Those people didn't actually contribute. The dues we are paying is the support of th…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:56 PM
–

I'm not sure I understand you. Childless people pay taxes to cover the services that they are currently benefiting from (healthcare, roads, etc) and to pay the pensions of their parents generation. What are they paying for that they aren't benefitting from?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:42 PM
–

That would appear to be fair, but childless people constantly benefit from the work done by other people's children. When they get old, they'll be cared for by other people's children. The roads they use will be maintained by other people's children. Their toilets will flush thanks to other people's children. And on it goes. Those children need educating, and since childless people are still benefitting from those children being educated, I see no reason that they shouldn't pay for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:39 PM
–

This is clearly implying that the situation where people don't get state benefits if they don't have children is a punishment. Using the word punishment here was wrong of me. The situation where childless people don't get access to a pension isn't a punishment as much as it is a consequence of one's choices. However infertile people have had that choice taken away, and I think it would be immoral for somebody to suffer a consequence that wasn't their fault. This only works if the childless peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:37 PM
–

I take issue with the way you're framing the issue. Childless people wouldn't be punished for not having children, they are simply not getting access to a particular state benefit. Are able bodied people being punished because disabled people get state benefits and able bodied people don't? Of course not. Just because other people are getting money that you aren't getting doesn't mean you're being punished. Punishing childless people would be like asking them to pay more taxes. Secondly: Why sho…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:25 PM
2

Everybody is more attractive when they're young, both men and women. Old people aren't attractive, they never were and they never will be. The point of being in a long term relationship is to build a bond that is stronger than physical attraction so that when lust fades then love remains. Everybody wins.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:18 PM
1

It is true that marrying (for both men and women) is an inherent risk and the possibility of infidelity destroying the relationship is always there. But this is why it is VITALLY important to vet your partners for the single most important element of their person before marriage - their values/character. Never marry somebody who has issues with insecurity. Most cheaters have huge self confidence issues, truly confident people tend not to cheat. Never marry somebody who has an envious nature, go …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 10:08 PM
–

I wouldn't in principle be opposed to a system where childless people are prohibited from claiming state benefits like the pension, but there are a few big problems with this. 1) What about infertile couples who wanted children but couldn't have them? They shouldn't be punished for something that was outside of their control. 2) I would worry about a perverse incentive of this system where people are encouraged to have children they shouldn't be having just to gain access to state benefits. Thos…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/23 09:49 PM
2

However much money you can make yourself, you can make twice as much with the right partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/23 11:27 AM
4

Sniffing out the potential in young men used to be an invaluable skill that young women needed to have if they wanted to choose a good partner. In the past, if you were an average girl looking for a husband, and you knew lots of other women would be trying to date the most successful men in your circle, it made more sense to choose a poorer man with lots of potential because you knew the competition would be far less fierce for such a man. Unfortunately, due to our instant gratification and fast…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/23 06:39 AM
2

I think that men needing to pay for dates is a very American hangup that needs to die. Where I live, I don't know a single couple who didn't go halves on the first date. It starts to feel like prostitution but with extra steps when the man feels like he has to pay. Just go halves, it really isn't hard. If one person is significantly less well off than the other which could make paying half difficult, then just... go somewhere inexpensive? Like a cafe or something? Hell, my husband and me went fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/23 07:30 PM
1

I meet maybe one man a week where I think "wow, that is a very attractive man" but it's more that I appreciate them in an aesthetic way. How can I be truly attracted to a stranger?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/23 07:18 PM
2

I don't know about you but I've found the answers in this thread really shocking. How is anyone supposed to build a life and a family, sustain a marriage, invest financially in a relationship it the only thing holding it together is how each partner feels about each other in the moment? The relationship is built on literal sand, no wonder so many marriages are failing. Very depressing thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/23 11:49 AM
1

Only if he’s kinda pathetic. If he needs me to act like an invalid so he can feel important, then he’s not good enough as a partner in my view. I It's not pathetic to want to add value to your partners life by doing something they can't do themselves. And not being able to do everything under the sun doesn't mean the female partner is an invalid, not everybody can do everything. You seem to be interpreting mens desire to be needed as a way for men to patronise women whilst stroking their own ego…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:56 AM
2

I made an edit to address the last point at the end of my post, but it's still getting lost amongst the noise unfortunately. My post is more about men feeling needed as individuals by the people they care about instead of being objectively needed by society due to their profession.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 10:36 PM
3

I have one: being fathers. We someone need to brainwash the population into the idea that raising children is cool as fuck, but only fathers and mothers can make a difference. What's funny about this is that this is something we've unlearned over time. It used to be common knowledge that one of the most honourable ways to spend your life is by being a parent. Now it's become very unfashionable. For most people, having children is one of the simplest ways to add meaning to your life and become a …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 09:38 PM
3

I disagree, but that's an interesting way to look at that analogy and spin it on it's head. Maybe it's because I don't remember any of my toys that I got when I was younger! They’ll feel their value is determined by their usefulness and then society reinforces that. I personally think that being needed is the best way to unlock a person's potential, and (if you believe in Maslow) achieve self actualisation. Therefore, being needed isn't actually for societies benefit, but rather for your own. He…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 09:33 PM
1

That's a fair perspective, and you're not wrong, it's just a matter of values. I think that things that are useful are inherently more valuable than things that are desirable. For example, a child wants a new toy but he needs new school shoes. I think we would all be in agreement about which is more important that he receive first. I wouldn't want to be the toy, I'd want to be the shoes. Plus, in my experience, wants change more frequently than needs. Ultimately, some people feel like being need…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 09:15 PM
7

Also move away from the desire to be needed and instead into the desire to be wanted Personally, I think that people's wants are inherently ethereal and unreliable so I think they're a poor foundation upon which to build an identity, but that's just my opinion and lots of people will disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:53 PM
3

if you tell men to be a provider they say that women are gold diggers and that children are too expensive. I like to think that only really jaded people think that, the people that have no interest in improving things and just want to give everybody the middle finger.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:49 PM
2

Oh no I didn't mean that. I more mean ahead as in ahead of where they are currently, not ahead of women per se.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:44 PM
0

I suppose because women are broadly more comfortable in the classroom, so there's less need to encourage them to explore alternatives. My country has an extremely academic-orientated culture which really hurts the young men here. In fact young white men are the worst performing demographic by quite some way. I want to see young men be proud to take on apprenticeships, instead of being looked down on.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:43 PM
3

In a day to day sense, I think you're right. But more broadly, I think a lack of purpose is a serious problem. Which of the needs if Maslow's pyramid do you think young men aren't meeting?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:36 PM
2

I suppose I didn't explain correctly, I should put an edit in the post. This post isn't necessarily about being needed, but rather feeling needed. Of course men are objectively needed in society, but if you were to ask a young man, say 20 years old, whether or not he feels needed, I think it's safe to say he would say no. Protector, provider, soldiers, in the past these are all roles that young men could take on to feel like their lives mattered. Now we've taken that away, what is there left to …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:34 PM
-1

All those arguments can be applied to women too Absolutely they can, but I think that young men are struggling slightly more than young women these days and so their needs deserve more consideration. They don't need a purpose given to them, they need to be guided to find their own purpose I agree with you, maybe I didn't explain myself properly in my post. I don't think men should be allocated jobs like slaves, I think they need a shove out of the door, if you will, so they can find their own wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 08:08 PM
7

Young men are suffering more than young women today, so it's fair that they need some extra consideration. Although all of this stuff would benefit everybody, not just men, young men need it the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:53 PM
3

Of course, men as a collective are needed. Everybody is needed for society to function. But on a personal level, most men are not needed, and that's the problem. Being needed by society is too macro for men to feel like what they're doing makes a difference. They need to feel like their lives make a tangible difference to, let's say, their wife, or their child, or their coworker, or their boss, or their neighbour or whoever. Of course I'm not saying men are useless.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:48 PM
3

Humans are some of the most ingenious, adaptable mammals on the planet, I'm sure we can find some way to help men get ahead again.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:46 PM
5

Yeah, like don't eat yellow snow! :D
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:38 PM
9

The feeling is almost illusionary, people can be easily fooled. But it's an important one for men, to feel like they're needed, to be seen as exceptionally capable. That's a big part of what makes us feel safe and secure in a relationship I think this is really wise. A lot of old school marriage advice aimed at women basically tells them to make her husband feel needed at every opportunity. Just like a lot of dating advice for men basically tells them to make their woman feel special. In reality…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:33 PM
4

I think you're right that no good comes from idolising anybody. Don't you think that young men's obsession with women is driven at least in part by having nothing better to do? Wouldn't giving men another purpose help men focus on themselves rather than what women are thinking/feeling?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:27 PM
6

I'm really trying to find ways to help men lead happy lives, which I believe starts with finding a purpose. Naturally, I think success with women would follow. So I suppose that's the 'why' - because the alternative is being miserable and despondent like so many men are today? I'm not sure what the alternative is other than continuing down the path we're on which clearly isn't working. What would you prefer young men do?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 07:21 PM
4

I do have a lot of sympathy for young men. Very few people are interested in finding something positive for young men to do. It's no wonder that young men are either dropping out of society, or pursuing self destructive lifestyles - there is no 'work' so to speak for them to do. If there's one thing that men thrive on it's the feeling of being needed. That feeling of need can be fabricated though, which is what a lot of what modern dating and marriage advice aimed at women boils down to - make h…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 06:41 PM
4

The progress made since the 1950s hasn't so much been about womens rights but rather womens liberation from the 'deal'. It started with the secularisation of society, then the birth control pill, the workplace/wage reform, then no fault divorce, until we arrive at the present where interaction with the opposite sex is entirely voluntary. Except now we're pushing it a step further, and some women are actively better off on their own.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/23 05:54 PM
1

For casual sex, I think the political differences between partners would have to be pretty extreme to make a difference - being prolife trying to hook up with a prochoice girl for example. Simply being right or left leaning won't put someone off you for a fling. But for long term relationships, your politics must be aligned, it's non negotiable.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/23 06:51 AM
–

Sure, if it were easy, everybody would do it. But that doesn't mean it's impossible. You don't have to put sex at the centre of your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/23 07:54 PM
–

It doesn't have to be like that. You have agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/23 07:47 PM
–

Don't you think that you're putting an awful lot of power into the hands of women by having your experience of a happy life rest on whether they'll let you sleep with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/23 07:40 PM
9

'Turn women into dudes' How exactly are women turning into dudes? Having a job isn't 'turning women into dudes', or are you referring to hookup culture?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 07:47 AM
4

Why is it sad for men who want an LTR? There are still women who want LTRs, just pair up with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 07:35 AM
5

what you’re saying is that 70-80% of men should somehow magically increase their value, even though they have no way of doing so due to the structure of our society. I'm not saying that at all. I don't think a man's value is based solely upon how much he earns, otherwise I agree with you. A man can be valuable because he's funny, he's interesting, he's attractive, he's physically fit, he's educated, he's caring, he's dependable, the list goes on. Almost everybody has the capacity to have a least…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 07:31 AM
9

The statistic on female happiness is not a reliable metric at all. Firstly, it's a self reported study, so it's just as valid as the copious other studies that claim that single childless women are the happiest demographic in society. Either they're both reliable or neither of them are. Secondly, you're presuming that the reason women are unhappy is because of feminism, and not the plethora of other social issues we face as a society today (social atomisation, poor parenting, social media use, e…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 07:18 AM
6

If having kids isn't for society's benefit then why do you care that the birth rate is going down? Maybe most people don't care about their genetic legacy?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/23 07:12 AM
5

For literally millenia, low value men have relied on socially, economically and biologically strong arming women into relationships with them. Gender equality removed almost all of the leverage men had over women, and now a generation of below average men are watching the only chance they ever had of getting a wife and reproducing dissappear down the toilet. Those men are far worse off than they would have been. Thankfully, everybody else is better off, so it's a sacrifice we are willing to make…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/23 07:21 PM
9

Firstly, how the heck would anybody know what he did in a previous relationships? In which kind of conversation would it be normal to say 'Oh I ate her pussy for breakfast lunch and dinner'? Maybe my conversations are super boring. But anyway, the bottom line is that if something is important to you and your partner can't/won't provide it, then you either suck it up or you end the relationship, it's your responsibility to make the choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/23 07:16 AM
6

If you think it's a good idea to entrust your finances, your livelihood and ultimately the welfare of your children to someone who is 'not bright' then you're even more stupid than they are
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/23 08:48 AM
3

You should never pretend to be someone you're not just to get access to the opposite sex. Even if you did give up videogames, start going to the gym, meet a woman and start a relationship... you would know in your heart of hearts that she doesn't love you, she loves the character that you're playing. And you would have to keep playing that character 24/7 if you wanted to keep the relationship going. That's a one way ticket to a miserable, superficial existence. All for the sake of scoring some p…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/23 12:04 PM
14

Generally, I think proposals are a waste of time. Being 'engaged' isn't real thing, it doesn't mean anything legally until you actually marry your partner, socially it's only half a step up from boyfriend and the amount of money spent on engagement rings is utterly irresponsible most of the time. Having said that, I did 'propose' to my now husband in a way. I asked him one morning over breakfast 'so are we going to get married then or what?' and 4 months later we were married. I encourage other …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/23 07:24 AM
2

Women cannot fix men's problems with women. If you don't like a way a woman is treating you, stop chasing her. It is literally as simple as that. 'Not how it works' - that's exactly how it works. Stop giving bitchy women your attention. Women can't do that for you, therefore it's not our problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 01:26 PM
–

I can't say you're wrong because it's all a matter of principle. I will say that when beauty fades, which it always does (sometimes a lot sooner than expected) you better hope there's a solid foundation beneath the exterior otherwise it was all for nothing. I do think you're right about men's physical attraction being a lot more varied than women's. But then women are not as motivated by physical attraction anyway. As an unattractive man, there are ways to still have a successful relationship wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 10:18 AM
–

What you're describing makes sense - the nurse wife is a great example. My definition of 'what she does for you' is very broad - if you love your wife for her spirit of self sacrifice even if that spirit causes her to make choices that aren't always ideal for you, it still ultimately benefits you because you can rely on your wife to put you and the relationship first. Obviously that's invaluable. I would still count that as 'something she does for you' because if you felt like your wife would be…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:59 AM
–

A beautiful woman is by definition not average though, so I'm not sure I understand, unless you're saying men find all women beautiful. Generally, it's a bad idea to want to be valued by others based on your appearance since it's one of the only assets you have that is 100% guaranteed to depreciate over time - unlike wit or charm or kindness which have the potential to increase exponentially over a lifetime.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:49 AM
–

I think the waters are very muddy on this. What exactly do you love about this hypothetical woman if it's not something that she does for you? If she's funny, then you love her because she makes you laugh. If she's kind, you love her because she makes you feel loved and cared for and important. If she's beautiful, you love her because it makes you feel good that you attracted such a valuable partner. Maybe you love her because she's a devoted mother to your children. All of these things are thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:42 AM
13

Of course, but love is built on mutual dependency, commitment, trust and companionship. Wanting someone for their body is called lust, and a certain amount of it can be healthy, but it's a poor foundation for a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:35 AM
–

I'm sorry to say but the only reason anybody loves anybody is for what they do. If the most attractive woman in the world stopped having sex with you or validating your ego, you would still love her? Of course not
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:27 AM
7

Ah yes, the veiled threat of an incel revolution. Classic
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:23 AM
6

Then it's not our problem
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:21 AM
5

If men don't like the way that women treat them, they should stop chasing options or no options.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:20 AM
8

Isn't it men chasing after women though?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:07 AM
–

What do you mean by 'who men are' ? In my eyes, being with someone because they're sexually attractive isn't really being with someone for 'who they are' either but rather what they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 09:00 AM
38

Has there ever been a point in history where women have praised and desired the average man for being attractive? Where male sexuality has been praised? Things are the same now fundementally as they always were. The relationship between men and women has always been one of mutual self interest and the fulfilment of need. I'm not sure who told you otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 08:53 AM
4

Many people are in a dead bedroom because of taking her advice. And if you're going to stalk someone's profile, maybe you should actually read the post, because I'm not in a dead bedroom.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/23 02:41 AM
0

Because it's hurtful to neglect your partner's needs It's hurtful to pressure, guilt or pester your partner into having sex they don't want. it's good for the relationship Sex had in the absence of enthusiastic consent is not good for a relationship, only when both partners are fully engaged is it beneficial. because the female sex drive is very fickle and responsive so waiting until you're "in the mood" can often create a negative feedback loop where you're NEVER in the mood, whereas having mor…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/23 03:36 PM
2

Sure, I'll accept that. Although I'm not sure that works for an anonymous survey. Why lie if there's no way to trace your answer back to you? Fundementally I do believe there's a certain amount of cognitive dissonance regarding young women's body count. Frustrated sexless young men have a persecution complex and desperately want to believe that everybody else has this amazingly varied sexual past, partly because that's what they're desperate for themselves and they're projecting, but also becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 12:25 PM
2

It might well not, it depends on what the disability is and who the person in context comes into contact with throughout their lives
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 08:59 AM
3

More delusional than someone who thinks that his opinion on how much others are worth actually matters?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 07:14 AM
14

What should they do? The same as everyone else: try their best and see who's interested. If that's nobody, then that's sad for them. But what else can they do? Force people to go on dates with them at gun point? People with disabilities such as autism 'wanting' to date is unfortunately irrelevant. I'm sure lots of people with cerebral palsy would love to climb a mountain, but they're disabled, so they probably can't. It's harsh, but there's nothing that can be done. The only thing that could wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 06:52 AM
7

Who's the arbiter of what's valuable and what's not? Who decides a woman's value? You? No, it's the market. If women want a certain standard of man, then it's up to them to find that standard. The woman I know have had no problem finding good men to marry. I don't think wanting a man that is attractive, kind, funny, has a stable career and has same values as you is a high standard as long as the woman offers those qualities herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 06:41 AM
3

You seem fairly sure that the average body count is higher than 3, so you must think that these young women are underreporting. I don't think it's sensible to doubt self reported statistics just because they don't align with your world view. By that logic, we can all just dismiss the whole '30% of men haven't had sex in the last year' thing as that is also self reported so clearly those men are just lying and everybody's having sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 04:20 AM
2

Even if you assume that the true number is double what is deported, that's still only 6-7 over a lifetime.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 03:46 AM
2

Perhaps because these women who keep dating abusive men are our friends, sisters, mothers, and we understand why they do the things they do? We know they a lot better than you do, so maybe you should listen to us.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 03:31 AM
2

I think artificially wombs would go a fair way to increasing the birth rate and encouraging young women to have children (provided that it wasn't prohibitively expensive to access them). For men and women who want children, this would make it easier for them to pair up and achieve that aim together. Additionally, a lot of women resent the fact that the biological and social cost of having children is sky high for them in comparison to men. Leveling the playing field would help to reduce the rese…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 03:12 AM
11

I think the problem is that a lot of men on here think that they're normal when they're actually below average. Women have no problem marrying normal men in my experience. All my friends are either married or in LTRs with completely normal guys, as am I.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 03:06 AM
7

That's completely false, the average is 5 for men and 3 for women in the UK
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 03:04 AM
3

The only women who date dark triad men are women with pretty serious personal problems. They've almost always either: a) got very low confidence b) have been mistreated as a child or as a young woman c) got mental health issues such as anxiety or depression d) a combination of the above They would make poor partners for a normal man anyway, so why get upset that they won't date you? Just ignore them and focus on healthy women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 02:44 AM
6

Fertility is still so misunderstood. People are always looking for someone or something to blame for infertility. For the longest time, it was that God didn't want you to have a child and that's why you didn't have one. If only she'd have prayed more or given more tithes, then she'd have children. Now God is dead, and the new hot thing to blame is that the woman waited too long and that's why she has no children. If only she'd have married at 23, then she'd have a gaggle. In reality, fertility p…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 05:18 PM
5

Well if it is fertility problems, then that is very sad and I hope she can find something else to strive for in her life. what do you mean women should be warned of declining fertility? That shit is literally everywhere. It’s not a secret or a conspiracy I don't agree with the OP, I agree with you which is why it really confuses me that this lady is used in an example. It doesn't make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 11:39 AM
8

I didn't interpret the video that way, I thought she was saying her age was the problem and the IVF was only an attempted solution to that problem. If it's regular old fertility issues, then of course that's sad, I have fertility issues myself. But then in that case, the video doesn't gel with the point of this post, which is that we should warm women that if they wait too long to have children, their fertility might become too low.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 11:20 AM
15

I mean, the woman in the video clearly believes that the reason she can't conceive is because she is too old. If that's true, then it was her choice to wait too long. If it's fertility problems then obviously that's not her fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 10:50 AM
24

But surely she knew that this would happen, and chose to let it happen. She made many choices in her life to bring her where she is now.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 08:43 AM
12

All I see is a women grieving the fact that she has fertility problems. It's sad, but if she has fertility problems, she probably would have had problems conceiving in her youth as well. Youth is not a magical panacea. I have fertility problems and tried for 2.5 years to conceive my first at 22, and had god knows how many miscarriages. Up to 12% of women have PCOS which negatively affects your fertility. People are very ignorant on how difficult it can be to have a baby regardless of how old you…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 08:42 AM
6

I see your point. My comment was mostly in response to OPs reasoning of 'not being enough' or 'not being able to compete' which isn't really my problem with sex dolls. My issue with them stems from the fact that I think they're creepy and they suggest my husband isn't committed to me.. not that I think that I'm going to be dethroned by a silicon doll. Edit: do the people commenting below seriously not see the difference between a life size replica of a woman with a fake silicon vagina and a face…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 09:21 PM
6

Hmmm... No I wouldn't. On the basis that sex dolls look at least a little like real people, so I would feel that he was fantasising about someone else. Most sex toys don't look like a person, they are simply devices. Sex dolls are a step further.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 08:44 PM
22

Having a problem with your partner owning or using sex toys is basically you admitting that you value your own ego above your partner's pleasure, which is very self centred in my view, and a little childish. Both me and my husband use sex toys, whilst we are alone and also with each other. Sex toys provide sensations that it would be difficult to experience without them. I fail to see how this is a bad thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 08:17 PM
7

I'm not trying to deny anyone anything, I just find your wording interesting and I'm not a fan of society getting to decide what medical treatment is OK and for whom. It's dangerous. And by the way, we can't offer anyone an alternative that doesn't lower libido. Contraception simply doesn't work that way
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 06:39 PM
5

That's my point though. Why would it not be OK? And why does society need to have a say about it if it's an individual healthcare decision? There are no alternatives because female libido is closely tied to ovulation and the best way to not get pregnant is to not ovulate in the first place. Think of it this way: it only takes 1 sperm out of millions to fertilise an egg and cause a pregnancy. That means targeting the sperms leaves millions upon millions of opportunities for the contraception to f…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 06:17 PM
6

When I went on birth control at 14, the side effects were explained to me in detail. Maybe it's different in the US? Regardless, it's hard to imagine an effective contraception working any other way. Barrier methods will never be as reliable as hormonal, and not many women value having a libido higher than having control over their fertility.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 06:10 PM
3

Would you say the same thing about appetite suppressants? After all hunger is a natural feeling and eating is generally good. If a woman's libido is lowered, then she won't feel like she's missing out on sex anyway, so what's the issue? Can't miss what you don't want.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/23 05:55 PM
4

Oh I thought you were arguing that gender equality hadn't benefitted men because they want to be providers which confused me. My bad.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 10:16 AM
5

But a lot of men want to be the provider especially for the woman they love like myself That's fine and nobody is stopped you. But for men that feel differently, it's hugely liberating for that to not be your only pathway in life, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 09:58 AM
7

Being a dual income household also means your wife and child rely on you - most households couldn't survive without the 2nd income. So you're still a provider, it's just your wife is as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 09:56 AM
5

As far as I see it, the only men you see complaining about gender equality are the men who would have relied on their provider status to attract a partner because they have little else to offer. Everyone else has benefitted enormously from gender equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/23 09:54 AM
1

The only two things a couple has to be similar regarding is 1) values and 2) energy levels. A low energy woman dating a high energy man will only end in tears, as will trying to date if one of you is very family orientated and the other is a free spirit at heart. For everything else, the goal is to compliment your partner which often means polarity.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/23 02:56 PM
1

I'm not sure. Does it matter? Maybe the women in question are not in a relationship with the biological fathers and the biological father is not interested in parenting.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 09:13 AM
1

It could be like a commune - 2 or 3 working ladies team up to buy a large 5 or 6 bedroom house and help raise each other's children. The children could share a bedroom and be brought up like step siblings. One woman could stay at home to look after them all so that the others could work without paying for childcare - or they could stagger their work hours to make sure someone is always home. I can see it happening in the future for sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 02:51 AM
3

course that will not convince you to have children, lol, you will be too old for that anyway. The children will grow and see you as some redditor that made the stupid decision that other took and now you deserve it, or so they will probably think. Thanks, but I had my first child at 22 and am now pregnant with my 2nd. How many children do you have? I'm saying that whatever economic collapse happens as a result of a falling birthrate will happen regardless of anything we do. People will not have …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/23 02:48 AM
5

I've just had my first and I plan on raising her the same way I was raised - children are part of the family, not the centre of it. Parents are still people. Modern parenting is completely all encompassing and stifling for the child. No wonder so many people are put off.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/23 06:03 PM
7

There will have to be a period of significant economic and cultural adjustment. Eventually being single and childless will become so normal that the shaming stops. Maybe groups of young women partnering up to raise children together instead of in couples. The pension system will completely buckle and a generation of older people who didn't invest in a pension will die in poverty. But whatever threats are raised about how terrible society will be in the future, it won't convince people who don't …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/23 05:39 PM
4

massive consumer spending - and a lot of that spending comes fro men peacocking for women. IIRC, women are the primary consumer spenders in a household? They make most of the purchasing decisions. Maybe it's different in the US. Don't you think that that whole system is completely unsustainable and people should be discouraged from participating?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 03:08 PM
4

Despite decades of feminism and emancipation, there's still a small minority of women working blue-collar jobs. That's true, but at the moment women don't have to choose between having a nice comfortable desk job and keeping the lights on. If such a choice did have to be made, for example because there was a vast shortage of young men willing to do those jobs, then I wager that women would pull themselves up by the bootstraps. What would be the alternative? If this happens because nobody is will…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 03:01 PM
3

In this case, the men aren't guinea pigs, but rather forward thinkers adapting to the modern world.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 01:44 PM
2

Well there's nothing to be done then, surely. It's game over for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 01:36 PM
3

They will also react with disgust to the idea of giving up economic independence and having the lights not turn on. At the moment they don't have to choose. But if they do...
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 01:35 PM
4

So access to sex is more important than food, water, shelter and recreation, all of which need to be bought with the money earned from economic participation?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 12:25 PM
6

So the answer is to, what, give a small section of society when they want at the detriment of 50% of the population? As most western societies say, we don't negotiate with terrorists. I suggest instead that men find a reason to get out of bed in the morning and participate in society that doesn't involve chasing women like starving dogs, like everybody else.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 11:24 AM
9

Let me guess, young women will become construction workers, truck drivers, linemen, oil rig workers, fishermen, garbage collectors, factory workers etc Do you believe that women are incapable of doing those jobs? I certainly don't. With enough pay, women would do all manner of dirty, difficult jobs - even if it's begrudgingly - and certainly if it was a choice between doing those jobs and revoking their right to independence. Do you have any idea how many men contribute to your current standards…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 11:20 AM
5

American work culture is extremely unhealthy - maybe it's a good thing that people learn to live with less and leave rampant consumerism behind. Women would do well to follow.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 07:42 AM
1

I think she was referring to the 'if I don't get a wife then I'm not going to participate in society' mindset which is a very loser-like mentality.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 06:56 AM
–

I'm not sure what you mean? Do you mean you don't think the economic issues can be fixed?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 06:36 AM
9

Wouldn't reducing consumerist culture be better for everybody in the long run? We should be encouraging people to live more modest, more sustainable lifestyles and maybe modern men are the perfect people to model how to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 06:30 AM
–

That's a gross oversimplification of a complex issue. But even if it was caused by women's independence, there are ways to fix our economic problems that don't involve undoing women's independence. Thats the solution we should go for.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 06:27 AM
1

This is a fantastic comment and something I've always argued too. Unfortunately many men's natural skillet is wholly unsuited to modern ways of life. Edit: this isn't to say that men's skillset is inherently inferior, it's just not very helpful for most modern jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 05:56 AM
–

Both mandatory conscription and mandatory sexual relationships are fundamental abuses of human rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 05:51 AM
6

Unfortunately women are not prizes to be distributed to lazy feckless men for getting off the sofa. If young men don't have the motivation to go out and make a good life for themselves, then let them rot in their bedrooms. Young women seem to manage just fine. Of course, we need to address serious economic issues facing young people in the West. People need to feel like their hard work will actually earn them something of value, like a decent house and financial security for the future. That is …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/23 05:48 AM
2

Then strip clubs and escorts are indeed the answer to sexless men's woes. Problem solved.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/23 05:07 PM
6

Just unreasonably go out of your way, spend unreasonable amounts of money So not only do you want sex, you want it free and at the time/place that is convenient for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/23 05:04 PM
8

What you're failing to account for is the difference between positive rights/entitlements and negative rights/entitlements. A negative right is the right have something not happen to you - for example, the right to freedom of association is the right for government not to prohibit you from associating with certain people if you wish. A positive right is the right to something - for example, the right to healthcare in countries with universal free healthcare. Ethically speaking, positive rights a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/23 04:56 PM
1

Alright, I presumed you were living in a western country. My mistake - my comments don't really apply then.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 11:00 AM
1

For most of human history, there were not even enough people for serial monogamy to occur. I don't think this is true for most groups of humans. There was a significant amount of churn in populations due to high mortality rates from war, diseases, etc. If your husband died, which he frequently would, you move on to the next man. Serial monogamy. You might think of "submission" in the wrong context but most women actually like their men to be dominant and in charge, from what i have seen. I dont …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 10:41 AM
1

Capitalism can do the same to you. Working for the cartel is a job I don't know what kind of capitalist hellhole you come from but neither corporations nor capitalism as a whole can physically harm you or your children. Pointing out that having a traditional relationship is better than working for a cartel or as a sex slave really isn't selling traditional relationships as a benefit for women, given that for most women in 1st world countries the choice is between a traditional relationship and a…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 10:34 AM
1

I believe it is easier to find a man that cares for/about you than it is to find a boss/corporation that does. This might be true, but it is also easier to leave a bad job than a bad husband. Really? I guess all #metoo was a lie then and Weinstein was innocent. It wasn't the corporation itself that commit those acts, but then men - the very same men you're arguing are the perfect people to be taking care of women I might add. Legally they can't. In the same way legally your husband can't. If my …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 09:49 AM
1

I disagree. Human beings generally monogamous. Human beings are serial monogamists by nature, meaning a series of monogamous relationships over the course of one lifetime. The people i know who are in traditional relationships (most of my family members) are much happier than those who are not. The people I know who are in traditional relationships are the most miserable people I know. It depends on who you mix with, I suppose. Women dont even find their partners attractive over the course of an…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 09:45 AM
1

Well, I disagree with you on that. Traditional relationships benefit certain people in certain contexts, but most people prefer an egalitarian arrangement. If women as a whole saw the benefit of traditional relationships, they'd be making decisions in order to facilitate those relationships. Instead they're doing the exact opposite. Obviously they don't see the value. Women nowadays have been tricked by feminist and anti-male propaganda to not trust men by the government and corporations. A lot …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 07:50 AM
2

A cooperation can indiscriminately lay you off with no options. And my husband can decide that he doesn't want to look after me any more and there's nothing I can do about it. Or he can cheat on me and leave me for the other woman. A cooperation doesnt respect your feelings or care if you are sickly. A cooperation isnt going to care for your future. A nice husband will do this, sure, but not everybody is going to end up with a nice husband. I think it's quite disingenuous to equate "marriage" wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 06:36 AM
1

It depends on what you mean by traditional. If you're talking about absolute fidelity and cultivating a spirit of self sacrifice, then everybody benefits from a relationship with those things, men and women. But why the need to add on all this extra bullshit like the man being in charge and the woman not having economic power? Completely unnecessary and sours the deal for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 06:30 AM
2

My first sentence sort of sums it up. Because traditional relationships are just better. You seem pretty sure of that. If traditional relationships are so obviously superior: 1) why did women run away from them at the first opportunity 2) why are women still not clamouring to go back to a traditional relationships Could it be because traditional relationships are actually an incredibly flawed institution for lots of people?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 06:25 AM
4

Long story short. Your husband is going to treat you better than capitalism will. I don't understand how you arrived at this conclusion. A corporation can never beat me, rape me, financially abuse me or put me down. A corporation can't take away my ability to leave. And a corporation pays me for my labour. Even the very worst, most menial job in the world is better than being married to a bad man.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/23 06:16 AM
2

Pretty much every woman in my social circled who went from living the single, carefree, casual-sex lifestyle to building a life and home with one good man, is a demonstrably happier, more fulfilled (and empowered) person now. People are happier in healthy long term relationships, but why does that relationship need to have a captain/first mate arrangement? Women don't need to be 'submissive' to get all the benefits of marriage. There's such a lot of space in between being a terminally single car…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/23 06:23 PM
2

Why do work when others can work for you? I don't think making decisions about your own life can be considered 'work'. Why let anyone else make decisions you're perfectly capable of making yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/23 06:19 PM
1

someone wanted say 4 children and wanted them to be all healthy and well developed, you need at least 6 years to do so, and need to be finished before 30. Firstly, very few people actually want 4 children. Most people are happy with 1-3. We know this because of revealed preference. So if given the choice between getting an education and having 4 children, most people would take education without question. You are greatly exaggerating the effect maternal age has on the health of offspring. You on…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/23 06:08 PM
4

why are you choosing someone for a business deal based on attraction BEFORE practicality? family is business, not a movie , jesus christ It is possible to incentivise women to choose partners based on practicality whilst also acknowledging that the final decision must be theirs and not their family's. Of course women should not be getting with toxic deadbeat and psychopaths just because they're attractive and as a society we should heavily discourage people from doing this, but that doesn't mean…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/23 06:03 PM
2

I think the reason is because, by and large, it's not the men that need 'convincing' (and by that I mean shaming), it's young women who are most vocally child free. Most young men, or even middle aged men, will say something like 'I might like to have children in the future' or something equally non committal. Talk is cheap for men because they know that they won't be the ones doing the actual labour, both literally and metaphorically. Whereas women take a much firmer stance on being childfree b…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 05:49 PM
1

The comments in this thread have convinced me that many participants in this sub have serious 'mommy issues'.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 01:49 PM
–

Well at least you're consistent. I still disagree with your premise but I respect your logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 10:12 AM
–

I'm not boiling anything down. I'm saying that men's contributions could never have happened without women performing reproductive labour. I'm also saying that claiming women can't build civilisations is a profoundly idiotic position to take when one of the main components of a civilisation is people, and we all know who contributes those.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 10:00 AM
–

Btw tell me do women offer the world (that a man can't do better at) outside of sex and children? Why do you insist on trying to lump all men and all women together like this? Why can't people be judged on their merits and contributions as individuals? I wouldn't know what 'women' contribute as a group given that there are 4 billion of them. Although I disagree with your premise, I find it very interesting that you're minimising the contributions that you do acknowledge women make, which is sex …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 09:33 AM
–

It's not just the past though. It's largely men who care responsible for maintaining most if not all of the infrastructure in society. That is true, but statistically a small percentage of men work in jobs related to critical infrastructure. The majority of men work in tertiary sectors which are usually office based. Unless you yourself work in critical infrastructure, then your opinions matter no more than anyone else's by your own logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 09:25 AM
–

Do you want to make a woman's head explode? Ask her how she could keep her boyfriend if her vital sexual organ was broken for 6 months? By this logic, nobody's relationship would ever last through child rearing years. Dry spells of 6 months are common during this time. Yet people muddle through it. Usually because people value their partners above sexual gratification.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 07:10 AM
–

It's not anybody else's problem that you find unintelligent women the most sexually attractive. Maybe you should work on yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 07:07 AM
–

Generally it is understood that men are funny and interesting in order to attract/impress women. Have you considered that maybe the reason that women are not funny or interesting to you is because they are not trying to attract/impress you? They give you the bare minimum interaction because what would be the point in offering more?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 07:05 AM
–

Literally, women's capabilities for building a civilization is at the stone age right now. I doubt an army of women could mannage to build a grave. I don't know, I think that women ability to build a civilisation is pretty significant given that none of those great men would have existed in the first place without them.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 07:03 AM
–

Women do not need to develop interesting or charming personalities in order to attract men. Women do not need to develop interesting or charming personalities in order to attract men for casual sex, I think you mean. You very much do need to be interesting to have a successful long term partnership. What do you think couples are doing for the 98% of the time they're not having sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 06:52 AM
–

men are fully aware that women just have not contributed to the advancement of world civilization in the same way men have. Why do modern men insist on trying to take credit for the achievements of men in the past? Maybe it's because most modern men know that they themselves haven't created or contributed anything at all. The only similarity you have with those men who 'contributed to the advancement of the world' is that you share genitalia. Would it make any sense if I tried to take credit for…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/23 06:38 AM
8

When you say you dOn'T nEeD mEn what you're REALLY saying is that women can get away with having 0 obligation to the society that provides all the material needs via private contractors through the economy. But of course everybody in society relies on others to perform vital services. That's what societies are. I think what women actually mean is that they need men as a group, but they don't need a man. They can function as economically independent units - as individuals, living outside of a rom…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/23 12:12 PM
1

Huh, that's very reasonable. I've seen 'LL' defined as less than once a week which I think is ridiculous since once a week is average. I suppose I jumped to conclusions. I think some men would be OK with less than once a month but I wouldn't guess that was the norm unless the man was older. Edit: I still don't think that LL people are bad partners but I'm pretty biased being a low libido person who sought out a low libido guy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 08:47 PM
1

Just because you have relatively lower libido compared to your partner does not mean you are LL. What's the cut off from going from a lower libido partner to an LL? Seems pretty arbitrary. Sure if you're the kind if person that puts a lot of emphasis on sex then you'll not enjoy dating a lower libido woman. But she is not a terrible partner, I think that's pretty rude. 95% of men would not leave their partner over having less sex than he would ideally like.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 08:28 PM
2

Why would a low libido woman make a terrible partner? Multiple people have said this in this thread and it seems like a fairly gross generalisation. Plus statistically most woman are lower libido than their male partners so does that make most women terrible partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 08:19 PM
1

I don't think the OP did say that all men are creepy and disgusting. She finds their sexuality creepy and disgusting. Which I don't think is a personal attack but I'm guessing that you feel like it is? I'm guessing that's why you felt like it was appropriate to tell her that she's a shit partner and she shouldn't reproduce. I think what you're saying about low libido people is far more bigoted than what she's saying for the record (my experience with high libido men is that they make horrendous …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 08:10 PM
2

Hmmm. Saying anything negative about anyone is bigotry? You said that low libido women make shit partners, so are you a bigot too? Low libido women are a group and presumably you haven't met all of them, so you must be a bigot.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 07:57 PM
0

Alright maybe the wording was a bit harsh. Though some men do behave in a way that is disgusting and creepy and blame it on their libido. I would say most men manage not to do this but they're the people who give men a bad name. Maybe the OP had nothing but very negative experiences with men's sexuality? I've had a similar experience and it does colour your perception of men unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 07:34 PM
1

I'm low libido and I only masturbate to help me get to sleep at night. But I do agree with you that most women who are low libido simply don't find heterosexual sex that enjoyable but are perfectly capable of eroticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 03:10 PM
4

Why are you so upset by a low libido woman stating that she finds the average male libido really unsettling? I'm low libido and I agree with her. Its not a personal attack at you or men in general - a lot of men are decent people despite their libido. How is what she said any worst than you telling her she'd make a shit partner and shouldn't reproduce... just because she doesn't really like sex. Pot calls kettle black.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/23 03:08 PM
4

If Person A doesn't like Person B's behaviour and Person B doesn't want to change, this is what the category of 'irreconcilable differences' was made for.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 01:33 PM
5

I'm so sorry you had that experience and you shouldn't be embarrassed. Most people never bother to try and correct their own behaviour or even acknowledge it, they just go around pretending that it's normal. Just look at some of the people in this thread. So good on you frankly.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 01:03 PM
5

Why do you say that? I'm more than happy to address the actual issues, but I won't take being shouted at. We'll work together to address the actual issues, and feeling angry is normal and healthy, but violence has no place in a loving relationship and I won't accept it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 09:07 AM
6

I strongly disagree with that. Shouting may be natural but so is hitting someone that makes you angry, and we don't allow that. Self control is important. Also, crying and orgasming don't hurt other people. Sometimes I feel intimidated when someone shouts at me, and that's also natural but that's what the person shouting at me wants. They are trying to intimidate the other person into accepting their point of view.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 08:59 AM
6

There's lots of ways to express anger. You could try using your words to explain why you're angry and what you want to do about it. If the person you're angry at isn't receptive to words, you could physically remove yourself from the situation by taking a walk or going to a separate room. Counting to 10 or even 20 before you say anything in an argument is a good way to prevent shouting. Scream into a pillow, have an argument with yourself in a mirror, write an angry letter then burn it.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 08:52 AM
5

What's stupid about it exactly? Because lots of people do it, means it's OK?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 08:44 AM
6

Is it too much to believe that other people can feel angry without tantruming like a toddler? I have never ever in my life behaved violently or shouted in the presence of my family. There's no need.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 08:23 AM
9

Acting out violently even against non sentient objects like doors and walls is absolutely not OK. I don't care how angry someone is, my opinion of them immediately goes through the floor when they do this. Stop acting like a toddler. This type of violence is not only juvenile but also dangerous - it counts as domestic violence in some circumstances as its an intimidation tactic. There are lots of healthier ways to express anger. Go for a walk, scream into a pillow, count to 10, talk about it wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/23 08:13 AM
7

Traditionalism benefits men much more than women in the modern day so it's no surprise that they're attracted to it. Back in ye olden days, being a traditional man involved doing backbreaking labour with little leisure time, immense responsibility with absolutely no safety nets of any kind, sacrificing yourself at a drop of a hat to defend against enemy tribes or be shipped off to war with no promise of return. Yeah, I'll cook and clean and play house for a man who has to do all of that. It soun…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 06:51 PM
6

You must be an American living in a big city surely? Never in my life have I ever heard of a woman refer to men who don't make much money/are short as horrible. Horrible men means... horrible men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 06:43 PM
13

Horrible husbands absolutely doesn't refer to hardworking men who didn't make very much money, or short men or ugly men or whatever. That's ridiculous. It refers to men who were: - physically abusive (he beats her or is violent towards her) - verbally abusive (he screams at her or calls her names) - financially abusive (he doesn't spend his money on the family) - addicts (gambling and alcohol were the most common) - lazy (never lifts a finger around the house) - bad parents (any of the above but…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 06:32 PM
5

"burned hard"? How exactly were they burned? Because now they have to do their own laundry and they can't get little wifey to do it for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/23 06:25 PM
2

Ah, so as usual women are expected to put their own happiness aside for the benefit of everyone else. I don't think that's going to work this time.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 04:57 PM
1

Sure
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 03:29 PM
6

I got exactly what I wanted, which was an equal partnership. We both work 40 hours a week, do equal childcare and we do equal chores. My husband is the greatest man I've ever known, precisely because he is my partner in everything. I think you might be projecting. It sounds like you've had crap, freeloading partners. Edit: in case it matters, I earn more than him. But nobody cares because we work the same number of hours so it doesn't affect how many chores I should be doing. Edit edit: OK, to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 11:08 AM
8

The evidence that consistently shows that men spend less time with their children, perform less childcare and do fewer chores than their female counter parts even if they both work. Who said anything about women looking for you to provide for them? Women who are looking for a SAHM relationship would logically expect to do chores. Most people are not in that kind of relationship and aren't looking for that arrangement.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 10:55 AM
3

That's true, but unless you're arguing that more pro family policies will actively lower the birth rate in and of itself, it's better than locking people out of parenthood by giving them no support at all. How do we know that the rates wouldn't be even lower in Europe without those policies?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 10:41 AM
3

It may not fix the problem entirely but it will help somewhat. Especially in the US. It could be the different between someone having 1 and someone having 3.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 10:29 AM
4

Not by forcing women or shaming them into having children, but by analyzing WHY and trying to reduce the negatives of having children in order to let women, on their own, come to the conclusion that they want children. Free or subsidised childcare would go a long way to allowing women to keep their economic dependence. This puts many many women off of motherhood. Also getting rid of a lot of the rampant shaming around motherhood. This is down to women themselves unfortunately and can't be legisl…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 09:03 AM
5

But you're OK with women suffering by having children they don't want?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 08:53 AM
2

That's a very juvenile attitude. Let me get this straight. You don't want to look after children because its woman's work. You don't feel like you should need to pay for them either unless you get to have sex with the mother. So tell me, what exactly is the reason for someone like you to have children? For shits and giggles? Sounds like a colossal waste of everybody's time, no? Just stay childless.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 08:39 AM
13

I do agree with this. If you want children one day, why wouldn't you look for a man who will likely be a good father? Granted some people turn out not to be who we thought they were but selflessness, thoughtfulness, even temperedness, resilience and compassion should be high priorities if you want an involved father
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 07:56 AM
6

That's also one of the main reasons. The stars really have to align a lot of the time for child rearing to be worth it in the modern day. That starts with a good financial position and a great partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 07:33 AM
4

There are so many comments on this subject that just devolve into the appeal to nature fallacy. It's so intellectually lazy it's astounding.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 06:57 AM
1

And yet women pretend they WANT to choose work and that they WANT a career. That is my very point. Men would gladly not do what they don't HAVE TO do, yet women pretend that they do it because they WANT, which is how hypocritical they are I'm really not sure I understand your argument here. Many women and men do want to work, because they feel they are adequately compensated. If they didn't think that, then they would only work out of obligation. Some people genuinely enjoy their work and find i…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 06:50 AM
8

I can't imagine why western woman with agency aren't lining up to have children with men like you. It's a real head scratcher.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 05:13 AM
9

If you're a normal functioning human, you should have a natural innate desire to have babies around childbearing age. There is not a great deal of evidence for this. Why does this myth persist? There is a natural innate desire to have sex, but having babies was for most of history an accidental byproduct of having sex due to the lack of birth control. Children just... happened. Now they have to be brought into the world on purpose. Why do you expect that people will do that when they've never ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 05:09 AM
6

Women are so narcissistic that they don't realize that they need others to survive and have a good life and be supported. Do you think that men would go out to work if they weren't compensated for their efforts? Most men would choose not to work, or to work very little, if they didn't think working was worth their time and effort. Is that narcissistic? Basic human nature dictates that people will usually take the path of least resistance. Having children is an enormous sacrifice - physically dem…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 05:01 AM
1

I got married in my teens and had children in my early 20s, which is allegedly exactly what tradcons think women should be doing. But let me tell you that the only reason I felt able to do this is because I was able to buy a house at 20 have a well paying professional job 3 and most importantly) I have an incredible husband who is an equal parent to me and an amazing partner My husband and I share chores and childcare 50/50. He supports me in keeping my professional job even if his life would be…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 04:55 AM
12

Comparing raising children to working in a sewer really isn't a good way of encouraging women to have children... And besides, sewer operatives can be paid very good wages precisely because the work is unpleasant
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 04:42 AM
3

The only negative changes are largely from women, and stupid movements trying to mess with human nature A lot of the decisions women are making are directly in response to male behaviours. Young women saw men abandoning their children, doing nothing in the home, never spending time with their children or doing any actual parenting, etc and decided that that wasn't something they were interested in. So once women were able, they began to opt out en masse. In response to men's shitty behaviour. Wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/23 04:39 AM
4

Everyone has a level of stubbornness u/mrsmariekje That's why I said particularly. If you're saying that a relationship can only work it the woman follows the man's lead, presumably that's because it's your way or the high way and unless she does what you want, there'll be arguing. This is an unusual and IMO very unhealthy level of stubbornness that will make a relationship impossible unless you're with someone who is a complete and utter doormat. That's not a healthy dynamic.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/23 04:36 PM
8

Perhaps if you are a particularly stubborn and uncooperative person, which most people are not. Why would anybody be in a relationship with someone who absolutely cannot share and has to have their own way? It would be like dating a toddler.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/23 04:13 PM
7

You'd prefer your partner to not be confident? Do you realise how predatory and malicious that sounds? You might as well have just said "I'm looking for someone I can abuse". It's OK to want a women who isn't motivated by her career. But why would anyone want a partner with no backbone and no goals?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/23 04:11 PM
7

"Under your guidance" that might be the funniest thing I've heard all day. Who do you think you are, her high school professor? Is she your mischievous little charge in need of some discipline? If that's your kink then I suppose more power to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/23 04:06 PM
2

I really don't see how wanting to be respected and admired by your partner is a male specific thing at all. In my experience only women with some serious issues would ever be in a relationship where her partner doesn't respect and admire her. I'm sure men have fantasies of being fawned over by hoards of salivating women like rockstars and movie stars, but the reality is that most men are not impressive enough to garner that much attention and never would have been in all of history.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/23 02:40 AM
1

I did! We met in college on a trip down to London. He was in my class and I knew there was something about him that I was drawn to. We were asked to form groups of 6 so I asked if he wanted to be in my group. We stuck to each other like glue the entire day. I figured, if I didn't like me back, he would have at least tried to distance himself from me or given me 'back off' vibes but he never did. We rode the train together in the morning, went around London together and rode the train back. We ta…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/23 02:27 AM
1

Out of interest, how do you feel that women treat men badly with impunity? Are you referring to divorce/custody arrangements? Or misandry on the Internet?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/23 03:22 PM
4

I was really referring to a dependence on individual men. For example, you don't have to depend on your husband for money and protection. You are free to be independent of that particular man in favour of another. Or you can forgo relationships entirely. A woman can be independent now where previously they were unable to be for the most part. That's what I meant. Of course everybody in society relies indirectly on one another, but that's doesn't disprove my point. As a man, you don't have as muc…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/23 02:33 PM
4

You're right, career is the wrong word. Economic independence is what I really meant. The ability to survive and thrive without a male partner. It's hard to deny that women were artificially denied the opportunity to do this which is what is really meant when people say "women couldn't have jobs."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 05:38 PM
7

Because men were and still are very hesitant to give up the only leverage they have against women in the post industrial age - access to money. Most of the problems in gender dynamics today stem from this loss of leverage.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 05:37 PM
5

That's true, but the existence of female only colleges itself doesn't negate the fact that women were prevented from having careers, as the OP is suggesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 05:19 PM
6

IIRC Severn Sisters was essentially a charity founded by philanthropists. It wasn't really founded by ordinary women and attended mostly by the middle class. And it was a liberal arts/humanities college erected for the purposes of spreading cultural enrichment, it wouldn't have been very helpful at all for furthering women's economic independence which is what careers facilitated in the 1980s.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 04:32 PM
12

I'm not sure you've really thought this through. How were women supposed to have their own workplaces? To do so, they'd need a business idea. But women were not educated or allowed to become apprentices for most of history. What would they be making and selling? Second, they'd need a premises and those were very hard to come by. Even if they found a landlord willing to rent to a group of enterprising women, where would they get the capital to do this? Most women did not have jobs. Thirdly, they'…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 03:52 PM
1

(Apologies, I'm not sure how to reply in quotations and do the indent thing on Reddit.) It's really strange how people's sexual experiences vary. For me, sex is no different from any other bonding activity most of the time. I would be just as happy to go for a walk or watch a TV show with my husband, which would make me feel loved and appreciated. The only exception to this is when I am ovulating, and even then the desire to have sex is very closely tied to wanting to reproduce. I wouldn't bothe…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 02:57 PM
1

Huh. That's a really interesting way of looking at it and I appreciate you taking the time to write this. Honestly, neither of us consider ourselves asexual, but we don't consider each other very sexual people either. I guess we just aren't very motivated by sex? That's always been the way it was. I still think he's the most beautiful man I've ever met and he's my other half in every sense imaginable. I still can't really accept that sex is the most important thing in a relationship as per the O…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/23 05:34 AM
1

That's an interesting way to go about things
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:47 PM
1

I thought asexuality was about attraction and not libido. What if you are attracted to your partner and have a libido but don't do the deed that often? That sort of thing happens all time time and I don't think it's fair to make assumptions about the health of the relationship as a whole based on one of many factors. Besides, putting so much emphasis on sex would make sex more of a chore or a performance surely? Like "oh I must have sex with my partner x amount otherwise there must be something …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:47 PM
1

What if it's just not that important to them? If they don't mind then why wouldn't the relationship last? If one of them is making an issue out of it then that's different but is it still a bad relationship even if it's not a source of conflict? Sorry for all the questions I simply find this mindset difficult to understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:34 PM
2

What if both partners are simply too busy to invest time and energy into their sex lives? Is that supposed to say something about the relationship as a whole? It seems strange to take one aspect of a partnership and extrapolate from that to such a degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:16 PM
1

Can't you just masturbate if all you want is an orgasm? Or do you also crave the validation you get from this "annoying, unselfaware, narcissistic, using, soul-dead chick"?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:14 PM
1

I really don't think this is true. Strong marriages are built on principles, shared goals and healthy dependency. When times get tough, you need to remind each other why you need each other, what your goals are and how the marriage will help you achieve them together. Something as wishy washy as sexual desire is an extremely shaky foundation upon which to build a relationship. I have no sympathy for people who's marriages go up in flames due to this ideology. This is exactly why marriages are fa…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/23 03:06 PM
1

5'9" so 1 inch shorter than average. I'm only 5'4" so having a really tall guy wouldn't make sense logistically
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/23 08:04 AM
2

Even people who are prochoice know that a fetus is not just a clump of cells, nor are they a full person. They exist in the space between a clump of cells and a person which is a unique position to be in. This is why they aren't treated as equals under the law, but are also afforded more respect than medical waste. And even if it was just a clump of cells, they weren't his clump of cells to destroy and he put somebody through a miscarriage on purpose without their consent. That isn't murder but …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 02:47 PM
1

Then not only did he induce a medical event onto someone without their consent, he also took away that woman's future child who would have been born had he not deliberately sabotaged the pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 02:28 PM
1

Did the contraceptives cause her to miscarry?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 01:58 PM
2

It would be nice if it didn't happen, but the reality is it happens all the time. Dogs are given status over livestock because we think they're cute. Pigs are equally as intelligent as dogs and yet... the only difference is the value we assign them, just like a fetus. And I would add that the fetus doesn't gain personhood based on whether someone wants it or not, it gains value. Even if a pregnancy is wanted, very few places consider a first trimester fetus a person. Personhood is granted in mos…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 01:43 PM
3

Men are disinterested in fatherhood for exactly the same reason that many women are disinterested in motherhood - when it goes wrong, it can ruin your life. A man risks raising a child that isn't biologically his own, being denied access by a spiteful ex and paying child support for the rest of his working life. A woman risks lifelong injuries from birth and pregnancy, being left as a single mother by a man who promised to say and yet abandons you, and having your life be totally consumed by car…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 09:46 AM
3

Because the true value of a fetus is the value that other people asign it, aka the mother and to a lesser extent the father. If a woman is carrying a much wanted pregnancy and she had every intention of birthing that child, then to murder her is not only shortening her life but also the life of the fetus that would have been born had the murder not taken place. If men would like to assign value to a fetus, that's completely OK, but legally and morally what you are actually mourning is the future…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 09:42 AM
2

I'm not suggesting all women hate being married. I love my husband and have a very happy marriage. But I would not want to be put in a position where, if things changed in the future and he started to mistreat me, I wouldn't be able to survive without him. A choice made in a situation where there is only one real choice is not really a choice at all. In that situation I would have been coerced into staying with him because I wasn't allowed to operate in society as a single woman. Allowing people…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 04:09 AM
3

How is that bad? Maybe because it is wrong to coerce people into relationships they don't want to be in? Which is exactly what happened when society makes it impossible for women to survive without a man? What a bizarre thing to oppose.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/23 04:01 AM
4

I think a lot of young people both men and women lack confidence to actively pursue what they want... hopefully this will change in the coming decades
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 05:50 PM
8

The pedestalisation of the nuclear family by social conservatives is born out of a complete misunderstanding of how human beings naturally form families in favour of maintaining a social order that benefits them at the expense of others. Large multigenerational families are ideal for children, especially for families with more than 2 children where it is almost impossible for one woman to look after them all and not neglect herself. I'm talking aunties, uncles, grandparents, family friends, etc.…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 05:06 PM
2

Lol, he was a virgin when I met him so I had to make the first move on that as well. He was quite shy!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 02:43 PM
1

I'd be interested to know what you think could realistically be done to inflate the TFR? If there were no limits on legislative power?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 11:53 AM
2

I got married at 19 and have had my first child at 22, so I'm opting for a similar order of events in my life, but I think you'd be hard pressed to convince the majority of people to opt for such a system. For example, I am having to delay travel, holidays and higher education (to name a few) until my 30s and 40s when my children are older. How many people will be OK sacrificing their 20s and early 30s just to have children that a lot of people don't really want anyway? In ye olden days, there w…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 09:06 AM
1

By key life pieces, I presume you mean house, career and long term partner. The only problem is than none of those thing besides arguably career are actually necessary for childbearing. They're nice to haves. If nobody is getting married, everybody is poor and people live in rented accommodation/parents house, childbearing still can (and would, without contraceptives) still happen. Contraceptive use gives us the freedom to delay childbearing until we reach a certain (mostly arbitrary) standard o…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 06:50 AM
3

That would require a pretty radical 180° shift in our culture, which would surely take significant government intervention bordering on brainwashing. Do we want the government manipulating us to such a great extent?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 06:40 AM
31

I think young women need to take a more active role in their dating lives. Sitting back and waiting for someone else to make a move is such a passive position to put yourselves in. If you want something, go and get it yourself. Take charge of your own life. When I met my husband, I was super into him. So I gave him my number, asked for his, set up the first date, asked if he wanted to be exclusive. I even asked him if he wanted to marry me. Why not? If any of that intimidated him, then I would h…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/23 06:31 AM
3

Oh I apologise! You're exactly right. Young people are living in the moment because looking ahead is generally quite depressing! Easy to think about the future as conservatives want them to if the outlook is generally sunny
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 10:42 PM
10

Honestly, I feel like everybody already knows that the impact of falling population will be materially pretty significant. People simply don't care, because the economic outlook for young people today is poor regardless. I don't think it'll work to threaten people with promises of a dystopian future with no welfare systems or retirement, because a lot of young people already feel like there'll be no support for them in the future whether they have children or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 10:23 PM
4

Don't you feel like this view of pregnancy and childbirth is really unhealthy? How your body looks after having children is completely different for each individual. Childbirth does not 'blow out' one's pussy, that's for sure. The vagina is a muscle that can be stretched but ultimately retains its shape in the majority of circumstances. This kind of misinformation and fear mongering is really common amongst young women now and it's really worrisome. Also, if any man, much less the father of your…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 09:16 PM
8

True, but I think people would rather adapt than unwillingly reproduce just for the sake of keeping the current economic system going. Society has changed structure many times in history and will do so again and there's nothing we can do about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 08:30 PM
32

These debates about how to raise the birthrate always make me chuckle. The birthrate in places with access to contraception will never, ever rise (at least not significantly). Forget it. Most people, when given the choice, only want 2 children on average which still causes a population to plateau. The only reason people had 4, 5, 6+ kids in the past was because they didn't have the means to prevent pregnancy. That's it. Unless you want to go back in time and unmake contraception, these pointless…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/23 05:37 PM
11

Men don't keep society running just for women, they do it for everyone, themselves included. These men are being paid for their labour. Why do you expect that women should submit themselves to relationships as 'payment' for work that men are already being paid to do? Also, what social contract? You mean the one each individual signs with the government where they promise to pay taxes and follow the law?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 06:49 AM
3

The key there is that those women are not being compelled to stay at home. They have agency, which makes people happy. Plenty of women aren't choosing to stay at home in those countries. Maybe if society hadn't gone to such great length to confine women to the home, maybe there wouldn't have been such a huge reaction by women against the very thing that kept them confined - family, marriage and men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/23 06:27 AM
2

And I would add that the reasons for kids' poor health and development outcomes is really complicated. Social media, sedentary lifestyle, social atomisation, cultural maladaptation all play an enormous role. Nasty divorces are also terrible for a kid's health which is why we should educate people on how to co-parent maturely.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/23 09:05 AM
5

I would love to see a study that states that children that witness domestic violence aren't severely affected by it because every study I've read suggests otherwise. Can you link one? A child might not realise they are being affected because they're disassociated due to trauma, but it is undeniably trauma.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/23 09:01 AM
1

When I was 14 I stumbled across Roosh V's website back before he became a born again Christian. The stuff on there was so hateful and shocking to me that it (temporarily at least) soured my opinion of men as a group and pushed me toward radical feminism. Exteme red pill content often does that. Which is a bit of a self-own?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/23 08:10 AM
4

I'm a huge proponent of marriage but this is really concerning. Domestic violence is less harmful than being between two houses? Have you ever actually known someone whose parents were violent with each other? It causes attachment and trust issues for life.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/23 08:07 AM
5

It's so sad what's happened to the profession :( Nothing will change until government invests in it
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 09:04 PM
1

Well they may be hammered into them but they're not really sticking all that well by the looks of it... Maybe because actions speak louder than words and telling someone they should do X is a lot less compelling than actually doing or being X?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 08:30 PM
11

I think that's sad, don't you? How can we expect men to engage with and invest in the next generation if they're treated like perverts for doing so?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 08:28 PM
20

You make a great point, and I do believe that sometimes there is an agenda against men going into teaching especially in primary schools and elementary schools. Not a clue why since the more men the better. No better examples of a system shooting itself in the foot to shadow ban men from teaching and then complain that young men are modelling poor behaviours.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 08:09 PM
62

I think one of the forgotten tragedies of the teaching profession being totally dominated by women is that male teachers could be an excellent template for healthy masculine behaviors, but there are so few male teachers, and even fewer that are good. I knew male teachers in school who were great men- confident, passionate, organised and uplifting people. We need more of those in schools but a lot of men feel emasculated at even the thought of becoming a teacher since it's so female dominated. Fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 07:10 PM
2

Yes. I'm 22 now. Our 3rd anniversary is on 15th Feb! Why do you ask?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 06:42 PM
8

Neither of my partners were Chads. My first boyfriend was in secondary school, we were only 14. He was 5'5" like me, had amazing curly hair that came down to his shoulders, and really attractive toned forearms and hands (he played the guitar so that was probably why). I thought he was gorgeous and still do, but I mostly went for him because I respected the hell out of him for his musical talent. He was genuinely kind, quiet and intelligent. He had a great personality but a lot of demons (we both…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/23 05:20 PM
2

That's a great point and definitely not healthy at all. Maybe if intimacy was divorced from sex, the lower libido partner would feel more comfortable giving non physical intimacy to their partners without the fear of the expectation that all intimate touch must inevitably lead to sex - if you don't want sex, and sex is being treated as synonymous with intimacy, then you'd have no choice with to withdraw all intimacy in order to avoid unwanted sex, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/11/22 03:50 AM
7

I think it's probably more accurate to say I have a dark view of sexuality in general, it's not limited to male sexuality. I've seen lots of relationships that were otherwise really positive completely ruined by the sexual element and I think it's really sad. If people could learn to satisfy themselves in other ways and compartmentalise their desire for the high of sex, then I think people could live much happier, more stable lives. That's why I encourage people to think clinically ane objective…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 09:48 PM
2

I definetly think mine is a minority view. That's why I find these questions so interesting! It's difficult for me to empathise but your dessert at a fancy meal analogy is an interesting one. If you're somebody with a sweet tooth (who desires sex) then a craving for sugar (sex) wouldn't be satisfied by more savoury(other aspects of a relationship) or an extra starter. All the savoury in the world wouldn't be as satisfying to that sugar-craving person as a triple chocolate sundae because what the…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 08:45 PM
2

I wouldn't call anyone who values sex highly a sex fiend, that's insulting. I can't lie though - although I understand everything you've said, it still feels like a lot of these lines of thinking boil down to insecurity. "I think there'd be plenty of women who'd ask "what's wrong?" if a man said "I don't want to have sex with you", despite having partaken of the rest of the things an intimate relationship involves." Those women clearly have their self worth wrapped up in being desirable to men. …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 08:03 PM
2

That's a very fair comment, thanks for taking the time to make it. But I'm caught on something you said. When you say that you would question the extent of your closeness with a person if you never had sex, doesn't that sound like you're wanting that person's validation? It sounds like you'd feel insecure about yourself and about that person's feelings for you without sex. That's almost the textbook definition of being emotionally dependant on somebody's approval of you. What you're wanting is f…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 07:22 PM
3

So in your view, it's a form of socialising and that's what makes it different from masturbation? Would you be OK receiving only cuddles and massages from your partner indefinitely, since they're both intimate experiences that involve another person? Can you articulate what about sex makes it definetly not the same thing as a hobby? A hobby is defined as something 'done regularly in one's leisure time for pleasure' so it seems like a completely apt description to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 06:54 PM
5

I also find it really frustrating when people use the word 'sex' and 'intimacy' interchangeably. A lot of people use sex to self-soothe because they're hugely insecure. What they're actually seeking is the validation of their partner that they're special. It's normal to want to feel special, but the problem arises when people pretend that the only way to get what they want from sex is through sex itself. It isn't. If you want the feeling of loving skin to skin contact with another person, you co…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/22 05:32 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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