TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

nvkr_ Archive

View 6 posts and 713 comments by nvkr_ on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Amen
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/22 05:41 AM
1

But you pretend as if you couldn’t find it out better by just getting to know someone
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/22 02:34 PM
1

That’s not how to interpret these stats. It’s rather like: If you have ten promiscuous people in front of you, two of them are cheaters. The other eight won’t ever cheat on you, even though they’re promiscuous. It’s not like every individual one of them has a certain probability for cheating, it’s rather that a certain percentage will cheat with a probability of 100 percent and the other ones with 0 percent. Problem is, you don’t know who is who in that scenario. That’s why you get a certain pro…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/22 04:58 AM
1

You were talking about research linking promiscuity and infidelity, not me. So you should have these numbers and thus be able to compare. Additionally, you should check for factors that happen within a relationship, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 02:45 PM
1

You're not only paranoid, but also ignorant, if you assume there's an "information vacuum" on that topic. I encourage you to just google "infidelity correlations" and go from there. To make it even easier for you: Here's one study. The topic is wildly researched.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 01:29 PM
1

You know what's the most surefire way to avoid getting cheated on? Just refrain from pursuing a relationship. I am acknowledging that your method might not get you into problems, because your options are abundant, but it's still not the most rational and efficient way to achieve your goal. But really, I've elaborated enough on that, you and anybody else are free to do whatever you like. You may achieve your goal that way, but it's not the best way to achieve your goal. I don't know how to make i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 11:51 AM
1

It depends on what it costs you. And in this case, that’s just not a desirable ratio of losses and reducing risk. At least, if you’re not a paranoid idiot.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 11:28 AM
1

The desired result is to filter out potentially cheating partners. You can’t do that by just looking at promiscuity, because non-promiscuous people cheat, too. That’s premise one, and you said you shared it. Premise two is that neither a majority of promiscuous people nor a majority of non-promiscuous people cheat. You said, you shared that premise. If you share these two premises, it’s quite obvious why promiscuity is a stupid filter for cheating. If you don’t share these premises, show me any …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 11:10 AM
1

I did. Most promiscuous people do not cheat. That’s about it. I think I’m done arguing with you here, if you keep on insisting it’s a good idea to use a filter that’s very unreliable and, additionally, doesn’t get you better results if you use also available, more reliable filters, I really can’t help you. But anyone who reads this discussion will probably see it as it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 10:52 AM
1

If you could prevent getting cheated on by a higher level than you actually can, because for example it’s 1 percent of non-promiscuous people who are cheating and 50 percent of promiscuous people, you might be right. But these are not the ratios we’re talking about. Yes, you can filter for promiscuity and then add more filters that indicate faithfulness. But you can also just refrain from using promiscuity and rely on your other filters and get even better results, because that way you’d filter …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 10:41 AM
1

It is a symmetric payoff, if you genuinely don’t care about promiscuity itself. If you do, no need to call it a proxy - it’s just a justified preference, even though it’s not rational. I don’t understand the urge to hide personal preferences behind sloppy math, just because some people might think the preference isn’t justified if it’s only a feeling. You don’t need to rationalize it, you can filter for any feature you like, but don’t abuse statistical reasoning for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 10:30 AM
1

But you don’t necessarily want a non-promiscuous person, but rather a faithful one. What use would it be to exclude promiscuous people on this basis, if you’re just looking for someone who doesn’t cheat? Are you coming from a position of abundance where the number of people is large enough to not need to care about preventable losses? If so, good for you, your method might work for you, but it’s by no means the most rational and efficient way to get to your goal. Again, I am not arguing against …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 10:14 AM
1

You really don’t want to get it, do you? If an indicator is wrong 80 percent of the times, it is a shitty indicator and shouldn’t be installed in any screening as a deal-breaker, because you lose too much potential. That’s just a logical fact. These statistics don’t tell you anything about the individual that’s in front of you. Yes, you should apply a number of indicators to filter out potential candidates, if that’s your personal way of dating. And there are a lot of indicators that might work …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 10:03 AM
1

But if societal standards were otherwise, you’d see this as a wise decision? I am not only arguing that it is an immoral, but also an idiotic decision in both cases, because there’s no causal relationship between the two features. You do you, but your math doesn’t add up, and if you argue with math, I can tell you you’re blatantly wrong in your assumptions. I said earlier, I can’t think of a reason why anyone would choose an indicator that’s so unreliable. That wasn’t really right, I can think o…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:44 AM
2

That’s a complete twist of what these studies tell you. By analogy, let’s assume you’re an employer and there’s a certain demographic in your area that’s more likely to commit crimes, even though the majority of this demographic doesn’t commit crimes. Would you refrain from employing a worker from said demographic and call this a great risk minimizer?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:33 AM
1

As the majority of promiscuous people is faithful, it is indeed wrong most of the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:27 AM
1

No, but you’re picking an indicator that’s wrong the majority of times. I can’t really think of a reason to do that. It’s not even wrong just sometimes, it’s wrong most of the time
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:24 AM
1

There are far more reliable indicators of future faithfulness - such as college education, age gap, sexual compatibility, morals, the age the partners have met each other… But you really want to insist on relying on an indicator that’s wrong the majority of times?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:21 AM
0

Yeah, but that would be like refraining from crossing a street without a traffic light for safety reasons. Yeah, you can minimize your risk by only crossing streets with traffic lights, but you will make your life far more complicated and people are totally reasonable to call you a paranoid idiot for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:11 AM
6

Read these studies carefully, because what they usually tell you is that neither a majority of promiscuous nor a majority of non-promiscuous people cheat. For illustration, if 15 percent of non-promiscuous people cheat and 20 percent of promiscuous people, then promiscuous people are by a third more likely to cheat. But in either case it’s quite unlikely that you get cheated on.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 09:07 AM
8

That’s a straw man. No one cares about your dating preferences. But if you say, you use promiscuity as some proxy for potential unfaithful behavior, people are allowed to say that your reasoning is bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 08:47 AM
1

I’m curious, what’s your n count?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/22 05:42 AM
1

If 20 percent of promiscuous people cheat and only 15 percent of non-promiscuous people, then promiscuous people are more likely to cheat. But the overall risk is quite low, whatever person you choose.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 04:47 PM
1

Yeah, but then stats also show that most people - promiscuous or not - do not cheat.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 04:44 PM
1

Which is why cheating is much more tempting to people who don’t have a high n count
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/22 03:19 PM
2

Just wow
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/22 11:50 AM
1

So, what did your studies view as promiscuous? One defined it as having had more than four partners, I think. So that would include the majority of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 02:07 PM
4

If you want to argue against another concept that’s basically scientifically canonical since more than a 100 years, yeah, maybe
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 12:58 PM
1

„The National Health and Social Life Survey found that 4% of married men, 16% of cohabiting men, and 37% of dating men engaged in acts of sexual infidelity in the previous year compared to 1% of married women, 8% of cohabiting women, and 17% of women in dating relationships.“
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 12:55 PM
1

Your statistics strongly suggest that there is no causal relationship, as - again - most people, promiscuous or not, don’t cheat. Period. So the most probable assumption you can make when meeting someone who is promiscuous is that they won’t cheat on you. Because most promiscuous people won’t cheat. Most people who cheat might be promiscuous. But that doesn’t tell you anything about promiscuous people.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 11:52 AM
4

You don’t know the term naturalistic fallacy, do you? While you’re at it, look up moralistic fallacy, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 11:21 AM
1

Would you approve this kind of reasoning? Because it’s structurally exactly the same as the one you’ve presented
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 10:54 AM
0

You are making various claims that you don’t and can’t prove, such as "It’s in mens best interest to filter for promiscuous women". Again, most people, promiscuous or not, don’t cheat. That’s another statistical truth that lies in the studies you have presented. I have argued that promiscuous people don’t necessarily cheat, because there’s no causal relation between the two. That’s why it isn’t in a man’s best interest to filter for non-promiscuous women, if he doesn’t care about promiscuity for…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 10:53 AM
1

I didn’t say the study was pointless, I said it’s not very efficient and accurate to apply these findings in your dating strategy. If you wanna go statistical, try to think about the statistical fact that most people, promiscuous or not, don’t cheat. That puts these findings into the relevant perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 10:24 AM
0

You’re right, I don’t have an idea how to do that, but at least I’m interested in improving my understanding of how things are really intertwined with one another. Whereas the people here arguing based on correlations just seem content with all the shortcomings this kind of reasoning has. I don’t want to police anyone out of that reasoning, as it might get you what you want, at least to a certain degree. But I’m always baffled at all the people who are saying that they aren’t really interested i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 08:23 AM
4

They’re not meant to be anything, what you’re doing here is called a naturalistic fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 07:06 AM
2

"All I’m saying is there’s a strong correlation between immigrant status and criminal behavior and not as strong of one in the general population"
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 06:02 AM
4

It doesn’t affect these rates, as OP can’t prove and therefore doesn’t suggest a causal relationship between the two. It’s merely a statistical probability that could be explained with a variety of reasons. So you can go for that kind of screening, but it’s not very accurate compared to looking at actual reasons why people cheat and what kind of people cheat, which will have a correlation coefficient of 1, as you’re looking at causalities, not just probabilities
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 06:00 AM
0

It is hard of a leap to suggest that. Promiscuous behavior can have its root in several reasons, and it is not necessarily damaging. You can be a honest, nice and decent person with integrity and still responsibly sleep around. And these people aren’t unicorns, they’re plenty. The reason for that is, there’s no causal relation between cheating and promiscuity (or at least none that has been proven in the past). So it’s a stretch to assume that every promiscuous woman is a cheater - just as it’s …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 05:53 AM
0

Last time I checked, it was on the one making a claim to prove said claim, but what do I know. Why did you exclude specifically a causal relationship between promiscuity and cheating in your OP? Most probably because you know you don’t have a proof for that, as the correlation isn’t strong enough. So lol, if you’re not arguing in bad faith, I don’t know who is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/22 05:23 AM
5

You can have whatever preference you like, I’m just arguing that this correlation isn’t strong enough to reasonably make a prediction on that basis. If you just look at statistics, you should get a college educated woman and get college educated yourself and get married in your LTR 20s to early 30s, these marriages have the lowest probability for a divorce
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 04:34 PM
3

So you wouldn’t date an immigrant because of the higher risk of getting entangled into some criminal activity?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:59 PM
-1

Promiscuous doesn’t mean cheating
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:58 PM
6

Yeah, because every impulse of your lizard brain is to be followed immediately, as nature has perfectly prepared you for living in modern society and therefore shouldn’t be questioned, lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:54 PM
4

As I said before, you personally don’t even need this calculation, as you don’t want to date a promiscuous woman in the first place, so it’s kind of pointless to argue about the downsides with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:49 PM
8

But you don’t even get 100 percent in your example. It’s not like every woman who cheats has had a promiscuous past. (Edit: Same goes for green food, by the way. It doesn’t have to be green to be spoiled)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:45 PM
5

No, you’re equaling promiscuity and being unfaithful in your comparison. OP explicitly said that he doesn’t make a claim about the causal relation between the two, just as in my example with the immigrant status and prediction of criminal behavior. You are saying, don’t date women who have cheated in the past, and there’s a lot more reason to believe in a causal relationship here, which is why this advice is much more solid.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:44 PM
9

Lol
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:27 PM
3

I didn’t shame anyone for his preference here, I am shaming this kind of correlational based thinking. It’s just the same as saying, I won’t hire immigrants because they’re more likely to commit crimes. Yeah, on a statistical level you’re maybe right, but that’s a total oversimplification of reality to a degree that just makes it plainly wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:22 PM
5

The study is not saying that promiscuous women are more likely to cheat. It’s rather saying that cheating women are likely promiscuous. So that’s a big difference. On why taking the risk: I’ve never been burned by dating a promiscuous woman, so I think the risk is quite low. Additionally, there are non-promiscuous women who cheat, so it’s not even that you get a 100 percent chance to avoid infidelity as a trade-off. I don’t argue against having said preference, do as you please. To just avoid ge…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:20 PM
8

Yeah, but with spoiled food the cause and the effect are causally related, which is why the coefficient of the correlation will be 1. In your example, the advice would be, don’t date cheating women, or you’ll get cheated on. We’re talking about how to identify if food is spoiled, eg what women will cheat on you. If you’re saying, avoid promiscuous women, that’s like saying, avoid green food, because a lot of food gets green when spoiled. I, personally, wouldn’t want to avoid peas, for example, a…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:14 PM
12

That’s right, but we were not talking about women who cheated in the past, we were just talking about promiscuous women. If I for example meet a virgin that is known for making very short sighted decisions and just living in the moment, I’d rather not date her, because she might cheat on me, regardless of how many men she had sex with before. There are several causes that lead to infidelity, and looking at them is a much more reliable predictor than looking at promiscuity. I don’t understand why…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:11 PM
7

It’s labor intensive for you, I for myself have dated promiscuous women that didn’t cheat on me without any effort, so I guess it comes down to your personal capacity to read people
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:07 PM
1

I was talking about him specifically, so we’re both right here - in this case, it doesn’t matter, and the cases where you rightfully admit that it does matter weren’t part of our discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:05 PM
0

You can’t, if you could, you’d have a causality, not a correlation.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 02:04 PM
-1

It does so only statistically. You don’t know the reason for that, so you can’t really make a claim about gendered explanations.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 01:00 PM
5

It is. The theory is: u/LaloTwins does not want to date promiscuous women. The explanation is: Because he has a personal preference that prevents him from doing that. No need for additional explanations here, so they can be spared.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:55 PM
8

Okay, let me phrase it another way. What was the point of your argument exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:53 PM
8

Basically Ockhams razor. If you are not willing to date promiscuous women, it doesn’t matter if they’re more prone to cheat on you, because you wouldn’t date them anyway, even if they had a zero percent chance of cheating on you statistically.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:52 PM
9

Let me know, why do you feel the need to disguise your personal preference behind some loose rationale that you don’t even need to have said preference?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:47 PM
6

I guess there is psychological research about what makes people cheat, maybe look at that
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:46 PM
13

Then it’s a personal preference, not a tool to filter out cheating women. So your argument doesn’t really make sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:44 PM
6

The downside is potentially on both sides, as you might miss out on former promiscuous women who won’t cheat on you and might be a good catch.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:41 PM
38

You can decide for yourself whether it’s smart to filter for non-promiscuous women in order to avoid infidelity. I’d personally advise you to rather look out for the underlying causality, that way you will make vastly more accurate predictions. But I know, that’s hard work, so I can understand your approach. As long as you’re aware that this filtering is far from ideal.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/22 12:36 PM
1

Gosh, you’re just throwing words around at this point, aren’t you? I don’t know, what is the conclusion here? I just can guess: With the primary purpose of ejaculation you probably mean procreation. So now you’re asking, if it’s desirable something is interfering with said purpose. I’d say, that depends on the circumstances. I wouldn’t say procreation is desirable in any case. So it’s not necessarily not desirable if something interferes with an ejaculation. Is that where you were trying to get …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/22 06:23 AM
1

And I say, you are not able to tell if you’re discussing with someone open minded or not. The way you phrase it, everyone on the internet is arguing in bad faith. If that was the case, you could just stop partaking in online discussions, as it would be meaningless to engage in such a conversation. The mistrust you are portraying here is exactly the reason why societies get more and more polarized on certain topics. You won’t ever find a middle ground with someone you don’t trust.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 01:19 PM
1

Not all women and not all men. You can’t tell if the person you’re debating with has double standards just because you can tell their gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 11:36 AM
1

Accusations are still accusations when they’re justified, so I’d still say that you accuse people of something - namely, some behavior that you’ve witnessed with other people and just assume that everyone who shares that gender behaves the same. If you do this, you won’t be able to productively discuss any topic. Because you’ve already got your mind set on how women are - and if you have, why even discuss dating problems with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 09:50 AM
1

Logical reasoning is a proof in itself. I would really like you to elaborate what a proof is to you. Your claim is automatically not logical if every man has said hormone, but not everyone shares said sexual preference. In that case the existence of the latter PROVES that it can’t have something to do with said hormone, because not everyone who has it has said preference. There automatically has to be another feature that either leads to said preference or prevents people from having said prefer…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 07:45 AM
0

But you can’t have a productive discussion with someone whom you don’t trust. If you as a default accuse the other party of simply lying when it suits them, you will never be open enough to different perspectives to get your mind changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 07:28 AM
2

The reason why men and women don’t really have productive discussions around dating on this sub might be found in your statement: If you accuse the other party of hypocrisy, double standards and unreal expectations right away, this won’t build the trust needed to just take for granted what the other party says. Do you trust people on here when the say something or do you just secretly assume that all women are lying, like in the statement: Don’t look at what they say, look at what they do? If so…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 06:29 AM
1

Lol, don’t want to get all philosophical, but when „If A equals B and B doesn’t equal C, then A doesn’t equal C“ is not a fact to you, then I don’t know what is. Is logic just an opinion for you?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/09/22 05:04 AM
1

What I said is totally conclusive. If A equals B and B doesn’t equal C, then A doesn’t equal C. There’s really nothing opinionated about that. It’s even called a 'conclusion'. I have made a plausible and comprehensive claim here: If men in general biologically feel disgust towards promiscuous women, and a sufficient number of men does not, then either these men suffer from a biologically explainable disease (which is unlikely given their share in the population) or the disgust cannot be explaine…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/22 11:22 AM
1

Well, you cared enough to disagree. Wish you a happy start of your day!
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/22 06:26 AM
1

Yeah, you might disagree, but you don’t really seem to even try arguing against this reasoning.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/22 05:13 AM
1

Well, if said preference is forged through socialization, I have absolutely no problem with explaining how it comes that a lot of people don’t care, without calling them pathological. It’s not even a question then. That’s why it’s far more plausible to reject a biological explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/22 04:29 AM
1

Please show me how this rationale is applicable to the biological imperative theory. If said preference is forged through the environment, it’s rather quite easy to explain how a lot of people don’t care about it, while the majority still believes it is important.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/22 04:27 AM
1

Well if caring about n count is a trait that derived from male biology, there shouldn’t be any outliers that cannot be explained through pathological deviance. If there is a sufficiently large enough population of men who don’t care about n count, it can’t be a biological imperative. It’s quite easy, comprehensible and plausible.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 11:54 AM
1

Well, you may well have the opinion that it doesn’t matter where said preference comes from. But then I don’t really understand why you’re engaging in a discussion that is centered around this very question.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 10:19 AM
1

Why is it inborn with some and not unborn with others? Not every rule has an exception. Especially in the field of natural sciences like biology, we’re talking about universally applicable laws. If they’re not universally replicable, they’re not scientific.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 10:17 AM
2

I don’t really get what you’re talking about. I am specifically arguing AGAINST the notion that the preference of a certain n count has a evolutionary explanation. I am saying, I am a man that doesn’t care about n counts, which is why I’m under the impression there might be a sociological explanation for said phenomenon. And yes, I believe that caring about n count is NOT an inherently male trait. It’s RPers claiming this and I want to argue against that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 08:04 AM
1

Sorry, logical arguments aren’t just a lovely story, they’re the basis of all science. No scientific law contradicts logical premises. If you’re a man and it is an inherent quality of a man to feel disgust towards high n count women, and you don’t feel that disgust, you either don’t qualify as a man or the disgust isn’t an inherently male quality. There’s really no way to argue against that and I don’t really see any basis to label this argument as unscientific. But, go ahead and enlighten me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 07:15 AM
1

Are you an astrologist or what
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 07:09 AM
1

This, this, this. I couldn’t explain it better since I have less competence on the subject, but this was the feeling I was trying to express already a lot of times
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 06:59 AM
0

You are talking about an informed decision, OP is stating that it’s a biological instinct. These are very different from each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 06:52 AM
1

That’s absolutely correct, which is why I was looking for people to change my view in this thread, which is based on the observation that a sufficient number of men doesn’t instinctively care about n count, so it’s reasonable to reject the notion that said preference can be explained biologically. It’s a logical argument based on, if A equals B and B doesn’t equal C, that means that A doesn’t equal C. It’s a very basic argument, though no one really was able to defeat it yet. (Except for one per…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 06:39 AM
0

Ahem, Israel, ahem…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 06:08 AM
1

I think he refers to RPers as a minority, not men who prefer low n count women in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 06:07 AM
1

So what does it tell about me if I don’t have said instinct? If I wouldn’t have the instinct to avoid touching fire, we would probably be talking about a disease. Why is it different with the preference for low n count?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:49 AM
2

I am basically making the argument in the first paragraph, the second paragraph isn’t really integral to the argument. It’s still wrong to hold your fellow men hostage to your beliefs, but more importantly it’s factually wrong because of the argument you’ve outlined in your first paragraph.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:47 AM
1

So you’d even say a majority of men doesn’t care about n count?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:43 AM
1

Look at that, even this seems to not be explainable by biology. I wonder if we should abandon explaining human behavior with evolution in general, at least when we’re talking about something more complex than alarm colors and fear of spiders.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:38 AM
1

I don’t argue against people that have said preference, I only argue against people who say that men are biologically hardwired to feel disgust towards promiscuous women, while women are biologically hardwired to not care about a man’s n count. What you are talking about is an intellectual decision based on statistics, that’s not really what I’m addressing here
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:34 AM
1

I am making a logical argument. Many RPers claim that disgust for promiscuous women is a quality that men have acquired through an evolutionary process, such as disgust for spiders. I am saying that a sufficient number of men, including myself, many of my peers and a lot of people on this sub, don’t share this preference, so it’s doubtful that it has a biological explanation - or you wouldn’t have so many outliers. I don’t really see where I need any stat to make this argument. You on the other …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:22 AM
1

You clearly didn’t understand my post. I’m not trying to prevent a dating preference from spreading, but rather the idea that this dating preference has something to do with biology or evolution. Everyone is free to prefer low n count women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/22 05:14 AM
1

I honestly don’t care really what other people think if I’m manly enough or not; I’m way too old for that. I just used this as a tool to make a point, which is, it can’t be really biological if a certain percentage of men rather shares my view than that of the supposed majority or men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 04:44 PM
1

To be completely honest, I kinda like arguing sometimes as a form of self regulation
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 04:39 PM
1

So I’m pathological in your view? Some kind of psychological deviant? Or am I just a very feminine man to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 04:12 PM
1

That’s right. So I guess we should abandon that label. But that’s already the next step after accepting that biological explanations shouldn’t fall short of covering 100 percent of the non-pathological population of a society, otherwise they’re not really biological explanations.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 04:11 PM
2

No, I’m saying yes, a majority of men cares, but that majority is not large enough to account for a biological explanation of the phenomenon
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 04:07 PM
1

If evolutionary psychologists merely look at cross cultural tendencies, it appears to me as if their science isn’t proven very well. If I were to explain the prevalence of low n count preference with men being physically stronger on average, this would still be the case cross culturally, but it wouldn’t be rooted in evolution. (I’m not really explaining it that way, I just wanted to illustrate the shortcomings of this sort of explanation. Just because evolutionary psychology says something, does…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 03:11 PM
3

I hope so, really. But the comments on this thread indicate otherwise (though I wouldn’t refrain from calling a lot of people here stupid)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:54 PM
2

Where do you get the impression from that your preference or disgust is shared by every man on earth? You’re in fact debating with one who doesn’t share your disgust. And I’d even argue, there might be a majority of men like you. But it’s not nearly large enough to account for a biological explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:51 PM
2

Almost universal… undeniable… You just keep writing buzzwords that ring as an alarm that you can’t really back up your claim
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:50 PM
2

Yeah, I fully agree with you when it comes to things like possessiveness or tendency to obedience. In this light, it makes sense that men have developed a preference for low n count women, based on their evolutionary tendency to be possessive. But the preference itself cannot be explained biologically, it’s just too abstract as a concept. And 100 per cent yes to the notion that humans have the wonderful ability to grow past their biological instincts (and should do so every time they have the po…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:47 PM
1

Very close to 100 per cent. After all, we’re talking about a biological law. Humans evolved to have lower thumbs, that way they can use tools. How large is the percentage of people that don’t have lower thumbs? That should be a somewhat equal percentage.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:43 PM
1

Last time I checked, this was a debate sub. I am making an argument that preference of low n count women cannot be biologically explained, because it is not prevalent enough and excludes males that are male in every other sense. So the biological explanation falls short if it isn’t able to include these men (of which I happen to be one). I personally don’t really care if a RPer thinks that I’m a man. I am just making a logical argument here.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:27 PM
3

I have not argued against most men preferring low n counts. So I don’t really see the checkmate here.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:22 PM
1

In what way am I policing other peoples thoughts here?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:19 PM
1

You obviously knew where I was getting at. That you supposedly didn’t take the bait won’t prevent fellow readers from recognizing the implications you have made in your statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:15 PM
5

The problem to me is mainly that they try to explain their preference as a biological imperative - and thus automatically declare everyone that doesn’t share it as a pathological deviant that acts against evolution. I don’t really care about the preferences of other people, what I do care about is when they set their morality as an absolute standard that everyone in their sane mind has to follow. As a byproduct, they often also want to persuade women to refrain from a promiscuous lifestyle by in…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:11 PM
3

The fear of spiders is far more universal than the preference of a low n count women. In fact, these instincts were developed in a time where humans couldn’t even count. How exactly should the abstract concept of a woman who’ve slept around be passed throughout generations as a biological instinct? And how do you explain the large amount of men who don’t care? I don’t have an exact number of how large that percentage really is, but neither do you. So let’s just say, even if 80 per cent of men ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:05 PM
3

When people say: sth. can be well observed, sth. is obviously, … I can’t help but read: I don’t have any real data points to make my argument, but my anecdotal observation should be enough to support my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 02:00 PM
2

That’s really about it. I fully share your view. I wouldn’t mind anyone talking about their personal preferences as, yeah, personal preferences. But people here always pretend as if we are all dictated by biology and evolution and thus treat everyone that has different preferences as a pathological deviant that doesn’t need to be talked about. They’re simply trying to avoid accountancy for what they personally believe in by masking it as an anthropological constant.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 01:57 PM
1

So you’re basically saying that cultural differences can be explained by differences in biology?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 12:09 PM
1

Yes, I agree with you. You could apply this notion any time someone describes something as naturally masculine or feminine. Both are societal roles that can be negotiated as any society pleases. There is no natural state of mankind. It’s all negotiable.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 11:54 AM
4

And where do you observe this widespread preference and how exactly do you prove it to be a product of evolution? Because that was exactly the point I’ve tried to argue against.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 11:53 AM
1

I agree with you that probably most men would prefer a woman with a low n count. I absolutely don’t agree with you that this can be explained through biology and evolution. It’s socialization.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 11:50 AM
1

You obviously didn’t understand my comment. I don’t want to stop the low n count preference from spreading. I want to argue against the impression that every man has this preference and that it is inherently male to think that way. I don’t care how you explain your preferences, as long as you don’t use an explanation that logical has to include me, even though I don’t share your preference
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 10:34 AM
1

Well, to me that sounds like having five fingers on each hand isn’t really what makes a human, isn’t it? So it’s wrong to just assume that every human has that feature, and it’s wrong to say humans have five fingers on each hand. Actually it sounds like the wrong focus: Quite a lot of mammals usually have five digits on each extremity, why should you try to describe humans that way?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 10:00 AM
1

Ok Mr. manly ultra masculine super man
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 09:34 AM
9

They’re not less valid just because they’re not inherently male, they’re still as valid as personal preferences. But by saying, they’re a male quality, you’re saying, everyone who doesn’t have said quality isn’t really a man. It’s harmful to spread this line of thought because men might feel they have to have said preference, when in reality, they’re entitled to any preference without diminishing their status as a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 08:46 AM
9

Well, why do we, as a society, care what a minority of racists says? To prevent it from spreading
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 08:38 AM
1

I am not denying that there might be a majority of men who prefer low n count women. I am denying that this is an inherently male quality. It’s a personal preference, nothing more. There are insults for all sorts of people, that doesn’t prove anything. I am not gaslighting you, I am just saying, you shouldn’t cover up the personal element of your individual preference with supposed biological preferences of your gender. Again, I am a man in the whole meaning of the word and I don’t share your pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 07:00 AM
1

Where do you get this impression from?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 06:49 AM
0

You’re fine with your preferences. What I don’t like, though, is when people inflate their personal preferences to biological imperatives of a whole gender, in order to not be held accountable to them. I’m a man and I don’t prefer low n count women, in fact I couldn’t care less how many men a women has been with when I trust her in our relationship. It’s your preference, own up to it, and don’t take your fellow men hostage to your beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/22 06:37 AM
1

Well in that sense that you think progressives are pathological deviants, you fit the description very well. What defines conservatism in general is the unwillingness to improve society.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/22 06:38 AM
1

It was another user who tried to explain obesity rates in the US with peoples supposed biological inability to refrain from sugar in their diet.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/22 06:36 AM
3

Yeah, most probably because you obviously decided to stop learning in life - like all conservatives do
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 06:25 PM
1

I am pretty slim and certainly not overweight, so there’s that
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 06:22 PM
0

Well, there are some humans that want to evolve society past that. If you want to stick to your ape brain and feel too hopeless to put your intellect above what the basic functions of your brain tell you, then that is still very sad. Most modern people are able to go on a diet and abandon sugar. If you’re not on the same evolutionary level when it comes to sex, you should probably refrain from explaining the world to people who’d like to use the higher functions of their brain.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 12:50 PM
4

You mean like all primates run around naked and eat raw food, except for humans? Or like all primates are living in the jungle on trees, except for humans who are able to build houses? Do you think you are on the same intellectual level as most primates? If so, that sounds very sad
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 12:41 PM
1

Yes, you’re right. But to get into nuances, you’d have to abandon biological or evolutionary explanations for the dating behavior of people. And that’s something most red pillers, MGTOW and such simply are not able to do. Because then they’d have to ask themselves whether it’s justified to stick to societal expectations from the 50s when the world around has changed drastically.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 11:43 AM
1

If we can socialize men to not care about it, there’s a social explanation for said behavior. You can’t socialize people out of instincts. If you can’t see that less men care about it, think about the fact that virtually no man in Western society would’ve knowingly married a non-virgin just a few decades ago, while now society has become a lot more liberated (and for the good, if you ask me). Yes, there’s still slut shaming, and talking about wanting a low n count woman as a biological imperativ…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 07:41 AM
2

You didn’t really address the fact that I said that it is not prevalent enough to be considered a biological imperative. Thinking of someone’s n count is a very high function of your brain that therefore cannot be rooted in instincts (such as fear from spiders). I’m not arguing against the notion that there might be biological differences between men and women, I’m saying that specifically the want for low n count women isn’t rooted in biology, because it’s subject to a short term change right n…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 07:17 AM
1

I am not saying that the majority of men wouldn’t think that way. I’m just saying, the explanation is nowhere near biological or evolutional - it’s socialization. If it was biological or evolutional, there wouldn’t be so many men who don’t value low n count.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/22 07:01 AM
11

Sorry, if we’re talking about biological instincts, these should not only apply to the average person, but to near to every one. We’re talking about things like hunger, lust, the urge to avoid pain, disgust, empathy. There will be a minority not experiencing these things, but there will always be a pathological explanation for that. While thinking about someone’s n count is such a higher function of your brain that there will always be a psychological explanation for that. It’s individual. And i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 06:42 PM
9

Well, you were talking about biological reasons why men prefer virgins. If it’s biological it has to be universal, doesn’t it? I feel misrepresented by that notion.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 05:39 PM
11

I am a man and I couldn’t care less how many partners my girlfriend had before me. In fact, I once left a girl with an n count of one for a girl with an n count of probably 30 plus (never discussed this with her). So what now about male preferences, huh?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 05:28 PM
1

How is this a specific female trait? Many people behave like that. Men do that, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 01:17 PM
1

You said, women find vulnerable men unattractive. I said, I am vulnerable to my girlfriend and she finds me attractive. You said, that specific case was an exception. How many of these exceptions exist in your view?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 11:15 AM
1

So, I am curious: How many exceptions do you have in mind where your rule doesn’t apply?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 11:11 AM
0

It wasn’t death and it wasn’t a few seconds. It was an emotional outburst during an argument where I expressed fear that our relationship might end.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 09:29 AM
0

Does this matter? You were extremely generalizing in your OP, so it does feel kind of like cheating if you want to go into nuances now.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 09:18 AM
3

And where did you pull that theory from? Out of your ass? Because all I can read is „women do this, women like that, therefore men must not…“ without any evidence to your claims. But okay, I’ll prove your claim wrong: My girlfriend has seen me crying and still craves me physically. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 09:05 AM
1

The reason that you can’t tell the difference between discussing male problems and spreading misogynistic bs, like Andrew Tate does, might be part of the reason for our misunderstanding here.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/22 04:34 AM
20

In my view, you are using a straw man argument here. The way I observe it, no one really has a problem in acknowledging that there are male specific problems per se. It‘s rather the explanations and fixes for said problems that are criticized. If you’re saying, male loneliness comes from feminism keeping women from fulfilling their natural and traditional role and thus feminism should be reversed - then you’ll get criticized (and rightfully so). If you strip RP from all the misogynistic bs that …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/22 04:15 PM
1

Look, you’re advocating for a filter here that you neither applied nor needed to apply to get 100 per cent the result you wanted. I don’t know what we’re talking about anymore, except for maybe applying correlation based filters in general. I would never advocate for that, as I would always want to know why something is the case and not just that something is the case. If you manage to do that properly, your success rate at everything will be 100 per cent.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 06:35 PM
1

The way you describe it, life would just be gambling. I’m more interested in understanding the underlying mechanisms than what’s just observable on the surface. To you, it wouldn’t make a difference to believe that it rains because of demons in the sky or because of condensation and pressure differences. Either way you take an umbrella with you and stay dry. That’s not the way I would want to navigate my life. And I doubt that you always get what you want that way. If you really try to assess pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 06:02 PM
1

The standard of wanting a virgin or an attractive man is not irrational in itself, it’s only irrational if you expect a certain outcome out of this that’s not causally related to your standard. If a study would find that people who wear red caps are more likely to commit crimes and you would avoid people who wear red caps because of this, your behavior would classify as irrational. That’s the point. And it would be also irrational to expect your partner to not wear a red cap. Regarding your stan…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 04:34 PM
1

You are conflating things. Yes, women can control if they are virgins or not (let’s keep things like rape out of the discussion here to not further complicate it). But you said, it’s not the point whether they’re virgin or not. To you, it’s the correlation. And that’s something that you can’t control, as you don’t have control over the behavior of other people. If I take you for your word, you don‘t necessarily expect your girlfriend to be virgin, but to be mentally stable, right? So if staying …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 03:56 PM
1

If you don’t employ someone who is black because of some loose correlation between skin color and probability to commit crimes, you’re at a risk of not giving someone a chance who would’ve deserved it. If everyone behaved that way, what you get is a racist society where people are excluded because of their skin color, regardless whether you think the relation is correlated or causal. It doesn’t apply in the same way for relationships, because no one strictly deserves to get into a relationship w…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 02:30 PM
1

You intentionally risk doing people wrong, just to make your life more convenient by not needing to get to know them in the first place. That’s just plain evil. You indeed make the decision because of a specific trait, but you say also, well, I know that there’s no real reason to believe this person behaves a certain way, but I don’t care, because I just intend to improve my life based on loose correlations. Just. Plain. Evil.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 11:13 AM
3

I am a man and I don’t care if my woman is virgin. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:44 AM
4

Actually there are women here who are low n-count or virgins saying they want a low n-count or virgin man. You just choose to ignore them because they don’t fit into your sexist world view.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:39 AM
1

But you are willing to decide on that basis. It’s like saying, I won’t employ a black person because they’re more likely to commit crimes. There’s a correlation, but to do so is still racist.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:38 AM
3

As I said, sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:37 AM
2

Well she wasn’t your wife when she did.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:36 AM
5

That’s sexist double standards
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:26 AM
3

You’re talking only for yourself. You’re part of a minority with that view. Most men don’t care if their partner has been with someone else in the past, because most men have been with someone else, too. It’s just people that feel left out who care about past relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:25 AM
1

Well if you say, virgins are less likely to cheat, you do in fact attribute this trait to their vagina. If you’re able to pair bond, in this view, is decided by the state of your vagina.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:18 AM
2

Found the sexism! It always comes down to sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/22 08:15 AM
5

If you’ve got a domination kink as a man, should I assume that you’re a dick outside of the bedroom? Or is it only impossible for women to make a difference between social and sexual behavior?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/22 02:21 PM
2

Because he’s a hypocrite. He’s not a low-n count man and thus is hypocritical to expect this from a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/22 07:56 AM
2

If you make people feel better, they usually have better lives. Who would feel better when their sitation got worse? That's completely counterintuitive. The fact that trans people are more suicidal can be explained with a variety of reasons. You don't really have provided a proof for the connection to be causal. I say, they are suicidal because of how society treats them for being trans. What now?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/22 03:52 PM
1

So you’re basically saying, there is some sort of fixed human nature and a functioning society has to mirror that, in form of the principles it is founded on? Otherwise society will collapse in dysfunctional chaos?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/22 02:46 PM
2

How so? How is freedom of choices making people dissatisfied? If people do get dissatisfied with other peoples freedom of choice, what does this tell you about these people?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/22 06:20 AM
1

Yeah, what’s wrong with wanting everyone to feel better? And how do trans people cause your misery, exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/22 06:09 AM
1

Equality of choice and personal freedom, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/22 06:08 AM
5

As I said, you obviously believe that a society that is funded on liberal principles, like equality of choices or personal freedom, cannot exist. And you probably argue that this is due to male and female nature, which cannot be changed - while I argue that there is no such thing as a human nature in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 01:12 PM
6

Thanks! I’d like to add that this sentiment, in my opinion, has a lot in common with another dichotomy that can be observed in society. I think there are two kinds of people in the world: Those who believe, because they had it hard in life, everyone should have it hard in life. Opposed to that are the people that say, because they had it hard in life, they wouldn’t want to wish this hardship onto others. I don’t really know yet how to connect these dots specifically, but I have the strong feelin…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 07:52 AM
11

They both share the assumption that there is some sort of fixed human nature and that any regulation that goes against it should be abandoned, as it leads to the decline of society. They’re both opposed to liberal principles, because in the end, they both believe that personal behavior always influences society and thus should only happen accordingly to the supposed human nature. That’s also why TRP and the alt-right are both rooted in anti-modernism and are both anti-progressive. They just can’…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/22 06:28 AM
1

The problem with the idea of a high value man is that it’s oftentimes depicted as one-dimensional: You are of high value or you are not. The concept is many times not able to encompass the fact that high value means different things to different people. That’s why it’s somewhat counterintuitive to me to take a room of 100 men and say, only one of them can be at the top. It mostly depends on who’s looking at these 100 men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/22 03:02 PM
2

Because obviously, it’s the same misogynistic bullshit that I suspect from the red pill. I don’t want to hold the guys in the video accountable for what the guy who posted the video says, but in this case the video is just a sort of fig leaf to cover up his classic TRP views.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/22 08:50 AM
2

I’ve got a problem with your framing - and I want to add, just because a statement is harsh, it doesn’t have to be true, and just because something’s true, it doesn’t have to be harsh. I don’t doubt what modern feminism is fighting for, but I doubt that it’s a bad thing. Except from the supposed demonization of men, every thing you have listed is certainly desirable for Western society. Additionally, often these things have a very moral reasoning behind them - whereas your right wing talking poi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/22 08:42 AM
4

When I watched the video you posted, I was really surprised how mature the speakers were presenting their points and how they were discussing in a non-misogynistic way about typical problems in heterosexual relationships. I’m straight myself and surely had to learn some of these things along my way - though I don’t really share the view that these are problems that arise from their gender, specifically. It’s just that men and women in Western society are still raised differently and that’s why t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/22 02:08 AM
1

No, hypergamy in its actual sense means that women look to find a partner with a higher status than themselves, nothing else.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 01:18 PM
4

Well, in many threads here TRP is certainly presented as a coherent social theory based on large scale observation and evolutionary psychology (I agree with you that it’s not)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 12:15 PM
0

I’d rather say every human being is inherently valuable.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 11:57 AM
2

Don’t frame your personal desires and beliefs as something all men would agree on.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 11:54 AM
1

I don’t know what kind of understanding of love you have, but I don’t think that love has to last a lifetime to be called love.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 07:45 AM
2

In my opinion, it doesn’t matter who is abused how often. Abuse is wrong, whether it comes from a man or a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/22 07:44 AM
2

Yeah, that was a really bad analogy as having one arm is clearly better than having no arm. Didn’t really think this through. Maybe this one’s fitting: Asking if you want your son to be a fuckboy or a beta hubby is like asking if you want to have your right or your left arm cut off - without knowing if you’re right or left handed. It certainly depends on your son and his personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:55 PM
1

Yeah, but that’s like saying people with one arm have it better than people without any arms.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:45 PM
2

I was thinking about an engineer who has problems meeting women because he studied and works in a male dominated field - or someone who has mainly married friends that don’t go out that much and thus seldom meets new people. I wasn’t thinking in economic categories. None of this is really in your control, so nothing is wrong with you. Same goes for your physical appearance, if you have a severely deformed face, that’s not really your fault - but it will affect your dating prospects, doesn’t matt…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:44 PM
5

I specifically listed things that most people wouldn’t consider to be a you problem, but a problem of the slice of society you happen to live in?!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:29 PM
8

If you struggle with it, there can be a shit load of reasons for that - but I can tell you, it’s surely not because women have formed a secret conspiracy against men in which they control the sex market based on looks and money. It may be because of the area you live in, because of the social circles you find yourself in, because of your professional surroundings, whatever. Yes, it can even be because of your looks (like, if you suffer from a severe visible deformation of your face or something)…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:22 PM
5

I deleted my comment because you elaborated further. But your first response wasn’t really indicating that you were doing something else than trolling, to be honest.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:06 PM
6

Again, that’s not what most blue pillers would say. There are indeed situations where some womens behavior is the problem, as there are situations where mens behavior is the problem. In most cases, it’s red pillers who frame situations as gender problems, when the real problem is just a persons behavior. I don’t really get the point that you’re trying to get at. No one is doubting that women can engage in problematic behavior on an individual level. Any person can.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:05 PM
1

I see, you aren’t interested in an honest discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 05:00 PM
5

No, it’s not. There are female abusers and there are male abusers and there are abusers that assign themselves to a different gender. All of this is totally incorporated in most blue pill beliefs. In fact, most blue pillers will even say that you can’t draw any conclusions about someone’s character by just looking at their gender. It’s mainly red pillers who will say that men and women are two different kind of creatures that will never understand each other and are in a constant war where no on…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 04:59 PM
2

I personally perceive the blue pill as a theory that mainly consists in opposition to the red pill. And when I talk about the blue pill, I normally refer to people on this sub that would call themselves blue pill (just like me). For me, blue pill is the belief that true love indeed does exist (even though there certainly are people who never find it) and that women in general have the same motives to look for a partner as men. The differences between genders can mainly be explained by different …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 04:23 PM
5

Yeah, maybe by your relatives or friends or people who didn’t want to hurt your feelings. But the blue pill in general fully acknowledges that there are people who are definitely not ready to date the way they are. I call straw man.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 04:11 PM
11

The blue pill is capable to include every observation that TRP makes and can explain it (though with different explanations than those of TRP) - while TRP has to always doubt many observations that can be made with a blue pill lens as lies or misconceptions or outliers. They outright deny even the existence of love - while blue pill can fully acknowledge the existence of relationships that are not built on love, but on money, looks or status. This line of thinking is far more plausible than deny…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 04:09 PM
3

No one tells that you just have to wait. On the other hand, there are women that love kind, sensitive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 03:43 PM
3

He is trying to prove that, while women are promoting the supposed beta lifestyle to other men as something worth achieving, in reality, they acknowledge that being a fuckboy would be preferable to men themselves. And he asked specifically about their sons, as he thinks that they would choose a lifestyle for their sons that benefits their sons, not themselves (which would be the beta option). In the end, it’s a gotcha question, even if OP states otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 08:44 AM
2

And sometimes men and women find someone to be really in love with each other. As someone who has experienced this several times, the chances outweigh the risks.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/22 08:21 AM
3

Yeah, they are looking for an explanation why they weren’t able to get into this kind of an 'honest' relationship - and they explain it by saying, it just doesn’t exist. I sometimes ask myself in what kind of social environments these people are living. Could certainly be that they really live in rather traditional communities with traditional relationship styles, who now got rather suddenly confronted with the rather new possibilities of online dating, due to Tinder et cetera. So they bloat up …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 07:30 AM
3

This is exactly how I’ve observed it to be in my own relationships. And I guess it’s the norm. But it will sound like Chinese to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 07:17 AM
2

Just 100 per cent on point. This can be applied to all red or black pill beliefs. They bloat up the antiquated mindset of some minorities to be an evolutional truth for all women and try to explain all their problems with that. By doing this, they just ignore the vast majority of people who have adapted their relationships styles to the present, because that’s not explainable with their theory, because, you know, fake evolutional psychology. Everyone that behaves different is an exception at bes…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/22 07:07 AM
1

The question is ridiculous. What should a woman answer who got proposed to several times by the partners she loves, but just doesn’t want to get married? Zero? Or the number of proposals? Genuine question.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/22 08:41 AM
2

I don’t think that 70 per cent of women have similar interests to mine. Of course I have compatibility requirements, too, for example regarding sex and humour. I have never met any women that has a 6 6 6 requirement. I don’t meet it, and I never had problems getting women. Where’s your statistic that women have these ridiculous requirements?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/22 08:12 AM
5

Well, first of all, I need her to have somewhat similar interests to mine, as I would like to spend a lot of time with her and I’d prefer to not always have to choose between my hobbies and my partner. Another requirement is that she has a job and can pay for herself, as I’d want to rule out the possibility of only being used for my money. Additionally, she should have some academic education and should care about what’s discussed in media, because I like to talk about that stuff. My current gir…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 11:28 AM
6

I don’t know about you, but I, as a man, have much higher standards than these minimum qualities you have listed. Wow, just being nice and not obese is certainly not enough for me to enter a relationship with a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/22 09:30 AM
8

Why do you think they had to not care about her? Why isn’t it possible that they offered a relationship, but the woman didn’t care?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/22 06:46 AM
7

What would you gain if she did? What’s the point in playing the victim?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/22 10:14 AM
8

Socio-economic standard my ass, large parts of the US look like a third world country when you look at them from a European perspective
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/22 03:47 PM
1

I am a man and I don’t feel the way you do. So it wouldn’t only be pointless to tell women that all men feel that way, it would also be blatantly wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/22 06:54 AM
1

Well he doesn’t sound really as if he would care whether he loses them or not. Additionally, if they’re just FWB, he could just go back to them after the relationship ends.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/22 01:34 PM
14

That’s really a ridiculous question. You don’t sign a contract, you don’t move in together, there’s literally no risk for you to just start a relationship. So why the hell are you so keen on vetting her for something that doesn’t cost you anything?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/22 08:56 AM
2

Can confirm
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/22 09:54 PM
1

So your advice is not trying to have a good time and getting slowly traumatized instead? Just kidding. But I guess it really depends on the person and their learning structure. I easily get frustrated if don’t get any positive reinforcement while learning.
/r/seduction30/07/22 09:10 PM
1

You lose your anxiety if you make positive experiences when approaching. Approaching random people probably won’t be such a positive experience. It’s therefore better to approach people that you at least expect to have a chance with, so you don’t get frustrated
/r/seduction30/07/22 06:42 AM
-16

That’s right, I’m not saying he shouldn’t approach. He just shouldn’t approach women randomly, as this is, in general, a sure way to get rejected, which will only confirm your fears. But thanks for totally not understanding where I was going with this.
/r/seduction29/07/22 03:05 PM
-21

That is a very bad advice. If you do that 50 times and get rejected 50 times, your social anxiety will only increase. You have to make 50 reasonable approaches where you have at least some chances of not getting rejected.
/r/seduction29/07/22 03:00 PM
1

That’s what people say who aren’t able to clarify their position, as they haven’t thought it through. Wish you the best!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 07:38 AM
1

You successfully avoided arguing about the topic, congrats. I’m more and more inclined to think that you didn’t really think through your own arguments. If it’s biological, how do you explain outliers?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 07:37 AM
1

Well either there is a causality between being female and having certain preferences or there isn’t such a simple causality. If it’s not a biological causality, it’s more of a culturally explainable probability.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 07:34 AM
2

It’s not the women I know, it’s the women I like to attract. I surely know women who are different and more like the type you’re describing. But there’s no sexual nature, everyone’s different. And by acknowledging that my experience is very different from yours, you should at least question how objective your claims are and what can just be ascribed to living in a different social setting and culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 07:29 AM
2

What does this explain? Sounds like an ad-hominem-attack since you’ve run out of arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 07:00 AM
1

I am in my mid-thirties and from my experience, you’re wrong. There are all kinds of women out there. The ones I like to attract are definitely the ones that prefer Tom Hanks over Christian Grey and Sheldon over Don Draper. My point is: If a women really wants you to kiss her, she usually won’t change her mind just because you’ve asked beforehand. What kind of mindset is this?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 06:55 AM
1

No, actually I’m with you, most of the signals I’ve received from women have been nonverbal. But the times I actually have asked for consent, for example by asking „may I kiss you“, it hasn’t been a problem really. The answer was just yes and we just went along. I’m not saying that you have to ask for consent every time before holding hands, but if you do ask in cases where you’re unsure, I don’t really think it has a negative effect (except for the times where someone is asking way too often)
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 06:43 AM
2

You said something about women becoming dry as a Sahara when asked for consent and you specifically told people to ask you how you know. So how do you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 06:35 AM
1

It’s quite baffling how you can say, well there’s room to grow in terms of sociability and likability, but right after that, you directly head back over to physique. It’s a pattern you can see a lot of times here. My advice always would be, fix your personality first, as physique is only interesting in terms of initial attraction. If you can’t keep up with your personality, probably the fittest body won’t help you in the long run.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 06:10 AM
1

How do you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/22 05:46 AM
1

You said earlier, these electro chemical reactions are subject to change and thus secondary to the body. I just wanted to point out: I normally fall in love with the way somebody’s brain works. How that brain works can be observed by looking at the decisions that brain makes under given circumstances that lead to certain outcomes. You could just say, I observe how that person handles different situations. I don’t really understand how you could argue against that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 03:56 PM
1

I don’t really get what a body is for you. Do you see a difference between a dead body and a living body or are both the same to you basically? And someone who loves you has to love your dead body, too?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 02:37 PM
1

No, but if you look at the circumstances someone is in and at the actions they take in that circumstances and at how they react if they don’t get the result the desire, you can get to know a person. I don’t really understand what’s so hard tu understand about that. You are not your circumstances, your actions or your results, but if someone takes a look at all at once, they can get to know you as a person. The whole thing is more than just the sum of its parts, so to speak.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 01:37 PM
1

You take the actions AND the results, it’s not an isolated observation
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 12:23 PM
2

The very reason you can name these examples is because you know that there are different examples where it’s totally possibly to make a conclusion. It depends on the context. Of course I can’t look into someone’s bank account and tell what kind of person they are. But if I know how they got their wealth and what they do with it, I can make a very educated guess about them as a person. You totally miss the fact that this is a multidimensional approach, you don’t just take one data point and then …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 12:01 PM
2

You can indeed expand the base of your guess to the results from past actions, that’s where I was trying to get at. It’s actually the way the vast majority of people try to get to know a person. But I remember arguing with you before, I guess I just have to accept that you’re some kind of alien refusing to try to understand how most humans see this world.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 11:44 AM
2

But the electrical chemical patterns you are talking about, they are, in the end, what makes you do what you do, don’t they? So from looking at someone’s actions you can make a reasonable guess about what they are as a person, which means which kind of electrical chemical reactions happen in their brain - and if you like them or not
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 11:19 AM
2

What else makes you you if not your actions? If someone’s in love with what you do, I’d argue they’re in love with you
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 10:30 AM
1

On 3, we can agree that physical beauty is one deciding factor. But it won’t be the most deciding factor in most cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 07:34 AM
5

Why would I dismiss a partner that would’ve rejected me in the past but doesn’t so now? Why would anyone try to improve themselves then? What’s the point?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/22 06:01 AM
3

I can’t tell you anything about the nature of most other peoples relationships, whether they are genuinely happy or just settling. But I can tell you that I’ve been on both ends in relationships and it didn’t feel like settling, as far as I can tell on both sides. I’m sad that you deprive yourself from feeling something like love by just saying that it doesn’t exist, but that’s on you in the end. You won’t be able to talk me out of something I’ve experienced first hand.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/22 01:48 PM
7

Well either it is hardwired into every womens brain or it isn’t
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/22 12:17 PM
2

That’s totally right, it’s just a matter of niceness to say: Look, this won’t go anywhere, have a good life - instead of just leaving someone hanging who might wonder what has happened. I’m just saying, ghosting isn’t nice and if you feel you HAVE to ghost someone and not be nice, that’s up to you, not up to the mechanics of OLD
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/22 03:01 PM
2

I just wanted to point out that if you have to ghost someone because you get too much messages, you shouldn’t start that many conversations in the first place. Of course you’re not obligated to, but I feel as if you would be on the higher ground morally. Ghosting someone might be easy, but it’s never nice. If you don’t care about being nice to people, that’s your right. But don’t blame your ghosting on OLD when the person who controls the number of your conversations is solely yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/22 02:39 PM
1

Well actually it’s not technically impossible, as you decide for yourself how many people you want to match with (by restricting the number of profiles that you swipe)
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/22 09:39 PM
1

Well you can count one vote for „no struggle“ out, as that’s the answer I chose, just to see the results.
/r/ExRedPill12/07/22 06:43 PM
2

You should add an option for those who only want to see the results, so you don’t end up counting all the votes from people who’ve been just curious
/r/ExRedPill12/07/22 06:30 PM
2

I’d describe myself successful in dating and therefore consider TRP to be bullshit, as I never needed any tactics or unnatural behavior for that. I always perceived women as normal human beings with the same flaws and ambitions as men. And I’ve never really been disappointed, if a relationship failed, I could quite always tell the reason for that and if it was on me, I tried to work on it. Got better everytime - it was mostly just growing up
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/22 09:32 AM
3

Some women do. But not all of them. So do some men, probably to a lesser extent, though. But since you still haven’t noticed that I’m not a woman, but a man, I have to assume you’re just not really able to mentally process what I am saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 06:10 PM
3

They pursued such men because they were economically dependent on a man, since they couldn’t work themselves. Now that they can, they don’t have to rely on a man. That you can’t fathom the idea of attracting a women with something else than money tells more about you than it does about women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 11:00 AM
3

I am a man, so I have to laugh a bit. I was offering you a male perspective on that topic. And yes, to say all men want only sex is wrong for just the same reason. I am a man, I want sex, but I want a whole lot more out of a relationship. I just wanted to point out that I never had the feeling a woman wanted me for money. First of all, most of my life I didn’t have any money, but still got women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 10:37 AM
7

I think you vastly overestimate the need to talk beforehand about what you are going to do when you hook up with someone. In many cases, there won’t be any word about relationships, fucking, commitment or whatever. In most cases, it’s just two people having a good time who are not talking about their expectations. So it’s hard to speak about manipulation in that case. People don’t define their relationships at such an early stage.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 10:22 AM
7

Well, I personally have never met a gold digging woman, all women I’ve been with happily spent their own money when we were dating. It’s rather the other way round, most women were very careful not to present themselves as gold diggers and profusely offered to pay. I have absolutely no problem believing a woman that says she’s not a gold digger, as I know they exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 10:09 AM
5

You’re making a whole lot of assumptions that you don’t talk about. Let me point out some of them. For your statement to be true, a) there has to be a fixed set of characteristics that make a man either alpha or beta. It’s not possible for a man to be one woman’s alpha and another woman’s beta at the same time. So SMV has to be an objective value, not a relative one (as common sense would assume). b) relationships have to be defined primarily as financial relationships. That means, the man has t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 07:18 AM
6

Love when someone explains to other people what specifically goes on in their head lol
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/22 06:46 AM
3

He is just looking for casual sex and rejects women that want relationships. I don’t think your advice fits here.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 09:11 AM
1

Honestly, if you’re talking about dating to have casual sex, then yes, the effort isn’t worth the result. If you’re talking about dating to have a relationship, the result you can expect is very much worth the effort you’re describing. From your comments I can see you mean the former, so I’d suggest to just go to escorts at that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/22 08:30 AM
3

Well we don’t need veterinarians for sure
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/22 07:27 PM
7

Yeah, basically. I just wanted to point out, even if you have a social circle, it only increases your chances for romances if it has a certain fluctuation. If it doesn’t have any fluctuation, it may appear as if a majority of men are struggling with dating, when in fact, it’s just the majority of your social circle.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/22 07:33 AM
13

I think it's a problem of social preselection. I never really had a serious problem getting into romances. In the same way, none of the men in my closer friend group ever had problems in that regard, except from one or two outliers maybe. But I totally can imagine a friend group where it's the other way round. So you can't really extrapolate from your personal experiences, as your friend group most probably won't be representative of the male demographic in your country. I guess if the dynamic o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/22 06:08 AM
-1

What the... Some women are strong and independent, some are not. Such as some men are strong and independent, while some are not. Neither men nor women are a hive mind in that sense that they don't universally share some specific character traits, such as strength or independence. That's why your initial comment made absolutely no sense. In regards to the state: He would carry the financial burden only if the mother or the father isn't able to provide for their child. My proposal was: If a man d…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 02:39 PM
1

As I already said, I would be in favor of changing the regulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 01:57 PM
1

Last time I checked, according to blue pill, women are not a hive mind
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 01:56 PM
3

Where I am from, if you give your child to a foster home, you have to pay for that child until it gets adopted. Which is pretty much not taking the burden from mothers who want to "financially abort" their child. It's not possible for women, too. ​ Edit to clarify: You have to pay for your child if you are able to, of course.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 12:00 PM
28

That surely depends on the social system of the state you're living in. Where I'm from, no one has to starve to death, be it a man, a woman, a baby or an elder person. In practice, most women won't be able to take care of themselves and a baby without any form of support. That's where the state comes into play. I wouldn't want to live in a society that lets babies die because of whatever wrong choices their parents made. If the mother is able to pay for herself and the baby, the state has nothin…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 11:23 AM
79

I guess it would be reasonable to grant men the right to bail out financially from a child they didn’t want to have, at least if they decide so before the child was born. The problem is that states don’t want to carry the financial burden, too, which is what probably would happen in most cases. So it’s actually the tax payer who is protected here. But as a male tax payer, I’d personally be supportive of a change in that regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/22 10:35 AM
3

Just go to r/TheRedPill ffs
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/22 06:16 AM
3

That’s completely bullshit. I know men who refrained from dating a women they liked because they were afraid of what their friends would think of her in terms of attractiveness. Every guy loves his friends complimenting his woman, as the status of your partner always influences your status, regardless of gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/22 07:37 AM
1

Do you value the same quality in women? Because I can see where you’re coming from, but I value people that put themselves after the ones they love regardless of their gender, and I don’t see it as a male quality in itself.
/r/ExRedPill04/05/22 06:16 AM
2

I just don’t understand: In what way would that be a surplus of information to what you get when you just communicate with someone?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/22 07:25 AM
21

That sounds like a very autistic way of doing something most people do on-the-fly when they meet someone.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/22 05:41 AM
1

I‘m a 33 year old man who has struggled with love and relationships during his life, but I’ve never been lonely. I’ve had several LTR and some hookups and have been on both ends of a breakup. At the moment, I’m in the beginning of a new relationship. I discovered this sub when I was on a work trip for a couple of months where I had some time alone on the evenings. I’ve always been baffled by some screenshots of men approaching women that are frequently posted on Instagram, so I followed pages li…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/22 09:08 AM
1

Then you have a very bad impression of human beings. Instead, it’s the other way round: Not the promise of punishment incentivizes good behavior, positive re-enforcement does. At least that’s what science says.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 09:21 AM
3

No, you said specifically that the stats are saying that HE as a person is not doing fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/22 07:47 AM
1

Woah, that's a lot to unpack here. But I'll start with this and keep it briefly: All vaginas are formed differently, such as all penises are. So the ideal size for one woman won't be the ideal size for the other one. Just go through a lot of comments here on this exact thread where women will tell you that their biggest partner caused them pain and, in some cases, they even ended it because of that. Second thing: Of course something like technique does exist. But, again, not all women are the sa…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/22 01:33 PM
2

You had me in the first half, not gonna lie. It’s totally reasonable to break up if your sexual energy doesn’t match your partner’s, for whatever reason. But to say giving anal to someone or just being sexually experimental equals giving your best to someone is indeed a judgement. There’s just no quality to it. You don’t even need to argue if she’s done it in the past, if she doesn’t do it now and it’s a need of yours you can’t overcome, you should probably break up, no matter what.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/22 08:04 AM
2

That’s because women are shockingly used to not getting off during sex. They learn from the very beginning that sex isn’t necessarily about their own, but the man’s pleasure, as most of their first partner won’t be able to make them orgasm (because young inexperienced men don’t have that ability usually right from the start). So sex especially for young women often is about pleasing the man than themselves. That’s why they would have sex with someone without wanting to, really.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/22 08:21 AM
2

The problem is not vetting itself, it’s drawing false conclusions from sociological studies. For example, if a study finds that high n-count women are on average more inclined to cheat in a relationship, that doesn’t mean that one woman with a high n-count that sits in front of you will cheat on you. If you approach dating like this, you neglect the individuality of a person. It’s like saying you won’t date a dark skinned person because statistically they’re more likely to be criminals. The stat…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/22 08:59 AM
2

Oh, he sure did. In what other way was it necessary for his comment to limit the people who say stupid stuff here to only the women?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/22 09:32 AM
0

He has framed it in a way as if the stupid stuff here was solely said by women. That’s indeed misogynistic- and that’s what I was trying to point out.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/22 07:58 AM
2

Ah I get it. Yes, I totally agree, only a minority of men would accept a taller girlfriend as a partner
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/22 07:06 AM
0

Stupid women amirite
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/22 06:38 AM
2

23 percent of something is very much a minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/22 06:36 AM
11

Honestly I like the feeling to be needed by someone. I enjoy being someone’s first person to talk to and to care for somebody. It somehow raises my self-esteem, I guess. It’s kind of reassuring to experience your own uniqueness in that way, as ideally your partner gives you the feeling that only you and no one else can fill that position for them. Besides that, it’s of course nice to know that someone cares for you the same way. You just don’t feel that alone in the world, as ideally you create …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/22 10:30 AM
2

The west didn’t care enough, that is the reason. It didn’t seem to be worth sending young people there to die. That is definitely not a proof of Afghan superiority. They’re not a threat.
/r/ExRedPill07/02/22 07:12 AM
3

He asked how to reverse his behavior, not how to find a romantic relationship. Starting to see women as just normal people again will help him in that case - so does not seeing friendships with women as being friendzoned.
/r/ExRedPill07/02/22 07:11 AM
3

Dude, the only reason Afghanistan still exists is because Western societies wouldn’t accept bombing them into agony for moral reasons. Its definitely not because of the superiority of Afghan culture.
/r/ExRedPill07/02/22 06:43 AM
9

Start interacting with people again, especially with women in a nonsexual way
/r/ExRedPill06/02/22 01:57 PM
–

No, I guess I rather see it like you, as I don’t see premarital sex as an issue. I just wanted to explain why you don’t see anti-abortion people protest or condemn the men that get women pregnant. It’s because if you follow their rules, you can’t get pregnant or impregnate someone without being married to that person. Otherwise, you’ll be condemned anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 03:01 AM
–

There have been laws for that, at least in Germany. It has been forbidden to sleep with each other while not being married. These laws were abandoned long ago, but most anti-abortion people are very religious and thus are totally against sex outside of a marriage. That’s why impregnating a woman who doesn’t want to get a baby is a problem that doesn’t really occur in that constellation, it’s rather having sex before marriage which is the problem here.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 01:33 AM
–

Not trying to help someone in danger or need is kind of sociopathic, regardless if it’s a man or a woman or a grown-up or a teen.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/22 01:29 AM
1

Gal Gadot, Olivia Munn, Scarlett Johansson in that meme where she looks surprised
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/22 04:20 PM
8

I consider myself a feminist, too, but I would never talk unprompted about feminism with a woman I’m romantically interested in. Can’t really explain why, but it feels like a conflict of interest to me. That doesn’t mean that I don’t behave like a feminist, I just don’t talk about it.
/r/ExRedPill30/01/22 06:40 PM
1

Many times these people started something like that when they are young and it starts getting bad later in life, when they get into a bad situation. So sometimes they made that decision when they weren’t really able to show responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/22 06:41 AM
7

There are plenty of women with very good introspection. With red pill tactics, you’ll weed THEM out
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/22 06:44 AM
24

It’s the same with racism. It’s a lack of diversity in people’s everyday lives that leads to othering of certain social groups, which then leads to some form of xenophobia. You fear what you don’t know.
/r/ExRedPill28/01/22 03:32 PM
2

That’s right, but that’s not tied to gender. In today’s Western societies, men and women have potentially the same to offer. It’s not uncommon that a woman just wants sex out of a relationship while a man wants commitment. RP theory is not able to cover these cases, thus not able to describe reality properly.
/r/ExRedPill28/01/22 01:58 PM
4

That’s why I said that’s an asymmetric situation which makes this line of thinking somewhat sexist. In reality, the man and the woman both offer sex and a relationship, to equal parts. To test that hypothesis, just ask people who just had sex if they had sex. If both answer yes, the hypothesis is confirmed.
/r/ExRedPill28/01/22 01:45 PM
1

If they’re both buyer and seller, it’s more like the trade situation that I’ve described in my edit. In that sense, your value is defined by what you can offer and by what you expect, which can differ from trade partner to trade partner. Depending on who’s in front of you, you might be willing to make different compromises from partner to partner. If you want to objectify how good someone is at that, you should look at his trade balance and number of content trade partners.
/r/ExRedPill28/01/22 03:54 AM
5

The main big difference between SMV and a market price in an economical sense is that the latter puts buyers and sellers in an asymmetrical situation while dating is rather a symmetrical situation. So the concept of an SMV is somewhat idiotic. Men and women have potentially the same to offer and want the same out of a transaction. A buyer and a seller will always be different in their quality. (Which is why I perceive the whole concept as somewhat sexist, at least in its implications.) Edit, to …
/r/ExRedPill28/01/22 02:35 AM
4

No, cognitive dissonance would be created if they’d be convinced that their misogyny would get them laid, when it does in fact not. They try to resolve that with even more misogyny, labeling the majority of women as defective, in order to avoid experiencing that cognitive dissonance
/r/ExRedPill27/01/22 06:23 PM
1

Why would anyone want to have a date with someone they’re not potentially planning to have sex with? That sounds ridiculous
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/22 04:54 AM
4

Yeah, and if you don’t like someone, you don’t go on a date with them. But who would do that anyway and why?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 11:45 PM
8

Going on a date with a person neither implies sex nor getting into a relationship. It just implies in most cases that someone sees the possibility that this could happen, under certain circumstances. If a woman said, I will sleep with you on the fifth date, and doesn’t do that after five dates and instead suggests a sixth, that would be misleading. If a women with that rule decides after three dates that she doesn’t want to continue, that’s not misleading. If you tell her on the first date that …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 11:07 PM
3

I have yet to meet the woman that is not attracted to somebody and will go on several dates with that person without the intent of ever having sex, though
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 11:00 PM
6

That’s fine, as long as you don’t pretend that you want to get into a relationship along the way
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 10:54 PM
15

A date is not an agreement to have sex afterwards, so it’s not misleading if someone decides to make you wait. But it’s certainly misleading to lie about wanting a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/22 10:50 PM
2

Well, to be fair, if it’s not heartbreaking and messy, chances could be that you’re doing a lot of stuff right, too
/r/ExRedPill25/01/22 07:49 PM
2

If I say yes, will my comment be auto-moderated?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 07:01 PM
3

It doesn’t work like that, because different people will be attracted by different things and willing to overlook different things in their partner. The participants in the market are pretty diverse. Instead of thinking of unified goods like bread, think of many countries trading with each other. What kind of trades they make will very much differ based on what goods each country has to offer and in what quality and quantity. This accounts for the multipolar complexities that come with dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 06:12 PM
1

It’s one thing to treat people as things, but you could still make the effort and recognize at least that they’re more than that, even if you refuse to draw any consequences from that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 01:55 AM
2

What exactly prevents you from calling sentient things something else than things? The lack of edginess?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 01:26 AM
2

Ok the first one might be debatable, though he specifically talks about a first date, but I see room for interpretation. But count me in on the 99.9 percent
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 01:19 AM
-2

You can certainly try to rationalize it like that, but I wouldn’t speak it out loudly - though personally I’d rather try to frame it another way mentally, as the qualities you named are certainly a sufficient justification to open a new category besides things.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 01:17 AM
2

I found two examples just on this thread: This and this
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 01:14 AM
3

Oh there are a lot of guys here complaining that they don’t get sex on the first date when the women did hookups before.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/22 12:45 AM
-3

People are just things? You listen to yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 11:40 PM
1

I think it’s a question of the timeframe. If we’re talking about letting a guy wait three dates before it comes to sex, that’s reasonable, even if the woman had casual sex before. 12 months sounds a little extreme though.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/22 11:30 PM
13

Drugs can lead you to a pretty wild lifestyle, though it may play out not so pretty at all for some folks
/r/seduction21/01/22 09:08 PM
3

It’s not universal, as can be shown if you look into different times and cultures. Additionally, different women find different things attractive. But if you refuse to accept this reality, I surely can see where your frustration comes from if someone rejects you.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/22 08:49 PM
6

Yeah, but your genetics, if you want to put it like that, don’t appeal only to them. It’s not a universal judgment about you that every woman shares. So it’s not really invalidation, it’s a single opinion on you as a person that shouldn’t affect you, if you’re not helplessly insecure. If a millionaire women would tell me I don’t make enough money, I still feel that I make enough money if it’s sufficient for living my life. My worth isn’t defined by what she thinks of me.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/22 08:46 PM
8

Adam Sandler
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/22 07:31 PM
5

No, they’re saying that they as an individual don’t like you as an individual, the rest is only made up in your mind
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/22 07:20 PM
1

No, I think again, you misconceive what's happening there. Take strategies of pick up artists for example: They might work for a sufficient number of people to be perceived as successful, but in my view, they do so for another reason than pick up artists claim. I think, they work in cases where the cultural background of a heterosexual women is congruent with what TRP perceives as evolutional and biological traits of women in general. If you say, women are like that and there are a few outliers,…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/22 06:04 PM
2

Yeah, but I somehow always thought that you’ll only get blackpilled if you belong to those that view themselves as not attractive enough for that
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/22 01:49 AM
1

Never saw a blackpill guy saying it was easy to get sex after a couple of low effort hangouts, but on the other hand - why not
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/22 01:09 AM
2

I think you have some sort of misconception of what happens when people appeal to your conscience when they are arguing (3). They are not trying to destroy the credibility of the speaker, they are really concerned about the moral implications of the things that some people say. Like in the sense: Is this the society we want to live in? I can understand that someone who thinks that human behavior is deterministic and inevitable will feel somehow as if he’s being moralized when he merely describes…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 10:27 PM
1

The problem is that you didn’t communicate at all. At one point, you just said, everything about a post was wrong, without ANY further explanation. Then you quoted one word from my post. Then you quoted a sentence from my answer to that wrongly and added two words and an abbreviation as input from yourself. And when I made fun of that, you said you were talking the truth the whole time and presumably that I live in Bizarro world. Can’t make that up, really.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 08:49 PM
0

„Lalala“…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 07:57 PM
1

Okay, then let’s examine: Do a lot of swingers and poly people and folks in open relationships have kids? I think the answer is yes, though I’ll demand some flexibility on the term "a lot" here. Does your sex life need to impact your kids? Well I hope it doesn’t need to, as the poster is implying. I for sure can say I don’t know anything about the sex life of my parents and I’m glad that it is like this. Plus, they’re monogamous, so I can approve the last sentence of the poster, too. Literally e…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 07:44 PM
3

You’re obviously one of those guys who puts his fingers in his ear and hums lalala if he hears something he doesn’t like 😄
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/22 07:31 PM
1

That’s why I added the word gathering as additional category, but even then sometimes these gatherings can soon turn into parties. But my definition of party or gathering would include bonfires and barbecue or any activity where it wouldn’t be uncommon to meet someone with a glass of wine in their hands
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 11:46 PM
3

That is exactly what I meant, thank you
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 11:44 PM
0

What do you do when you celebrate someone’s birthday or wedding or engagement or whatever? I think I know enough people to visit a birthday party at least once a month, before the pandemic. Sometimes people celebrate new jobs or the expectation of a baby. So it’s totally not uncommon to get invited to a lot of parties or at least gatherings at any age.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 09:13 PM
1

Well that depends on your definition of relationship. To me, the term includes the relationship to my barber or my tailor, for example. In the same sense there could be people who rely on meaningless relationships for sex, while focusing on a lot of very meaningful friendships, for example. Though, in that case, you have to take care to form meaningful friendships with younger people over time, to ensure that you’re not the last one left when all your same age friends have already died. But ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 07:53 PM
2

Yeah, I know trans people myself and I haven’t met one that would call this kind of behavior trans phobic, but I also didn’t want to exclude the possibility that there might be a few who think like that. That grey area you’re talking about is what I mean with your preferences can be rooted in transphobic beliefs. If you fall in love with someone who’s trans and love to sleep with them and you suddenly get furious and lose all your attraction when they tell you they are actually trans, that’s whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 07:32 PM
1

Well you can have a lot of meaningful relationships and still form additional relationships that are less meaningful to you. Don’t think one excludes the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 07:21 PM
6

I don’t think that’s transphobic, and a few trans people who are frustrated about not finding a partner they desire won’t convince me otherwise. It’s totally fine to have preferences and not wanting to abandon them. Though, sometimes, these preferences surely can root in x-phobic tendencies, which then might be a separate issue to discuss, without regard to someone’s dating behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 05:28 PM
20

Does your uncle have an active social life, gets invited to parties or gatherings and goes frequently out with his friends? Does he have some sort of passion, like any activity he’s exceptionally good at and enjoys doing?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 05:10 PM
2

It is possible, but due to the lack of education in the working class and the rather strong separation between classes in many societies, it’s rather unlikely. In addition, people who are toxic often experienced themselves being in a hostile world, which is, too, more likely for people who are working class.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/01/22 04:42 PM
1

And I lost you. When I ask you how you know that a lot of these women could’ve known better, you say you know that from life experience, which is anecdotal experience. When I say, there are other people who have other anecdotal experience, namely that men can be kind and nice in the beginning and turn violent and abusive after their partner gets pregnant, you’re saying it doesn’t count, as it’s anecdotal evidence. But actually that’s no problem, as the purpose of my anecdotal evidence is solely …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 01:45 AM
1

I don’t understand where all of you guys get this clear impression about the relationships these women were in have looked like. You’re saying, odds are they were dodgy guys - why? What brings you to that conclusion? When I hear about murderers, it’s totally not uncommon to hear something like that nobody in their social circle would have thought about that. In this very thread you can find women saying that there are men who start being abusive exactly when their partners get pregnant, because …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 12:37 AM
18

He’s right, run
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/22 12:04 AM
1

You can exactly expect that from law and your government, as maintaining the monopoly on violence and thus protecting citizens is one of the core reasons states exist. And you should be able to expect your fellow people to obey that law, otherwise something is wrong with them, not with you. I really don’t know how you can say a strategy that doesn’t solve the problem is the best and most efficient strategy. In my view, that’s a shit strategy. I don’t really get the analogies that you and others …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 11:51 PM
2

Whoah that’s a tough one. I don’t really think I have goals except that I don’t want to be alone at any point in my life, so I try to keep all my friends and family throughout my whole life, if possible. So far, this went pretty well, I have like eight friends I know since we were early teenagers and we’re all still pretty close. Additionally I have acquired some newer social circles, like at work or when I was at university. I’ve once seen a TED talk about a study where they followed a big grou…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 09:21 PM
2

I agree with you in that regard. That’s why I don’t understand how peoples initial reaction is to tell the victims to be more careful. There’s a whole lot of things that could be done already before we start putting pressure on the victims. So it’s not really out of the world to assume bad faith if someone’s first answer to violence is, well maybe the victims just should’ve known better. It indicates that this someone maybe really isn’t interested in talking about the problem itself, but rather …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 06:26 PM
2

I hope I made clear to you, while this is an appropriate advice for anyone, this won’t solve the problem. And so I ask you: Are you interested in solving the problem or do you think that society already has done enough to prevent murder and the ones that are left are partly to blame on the victims, so that they were the only ones that could’ve done something about them?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:45 PM
1

If you don’t see a structural problem, that might be also an adequate answer. All I’m saying is, if your initial answer to a problem is looking into the behavior of the victims of said problem, that has a very strange touch. I don’t think the majority of men are ticking time bombs, I’m just saying if you have a ticking time bomb in front of you, you might not be aware of that in that particular situation. So telling people to be more careful won’t solve the problem, although it might of course p…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:31 PM
1

Yes, the thug from the ghetto might be more likely to commit a crime than the nerd. Yes, there are women who are attracted to violent people. Yes, you should advise these women to be careful. But if someone is saying that we have a structural problem with men killing their pregnant partners and your answer is, well maybe women should be more careful who they’re sleeping with, your totally obliged to prove how that is connected to the problem. If you say: Well I don’t really know how many of thes…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:53 PM
1

I don’t know where all of you take that knowledge from. But as we’re here: Where in the study that OP cited is it saying something about signs these women have ignored or about how many of these murders could’ve prevented if women were more careful? „It is like this because it is like this and if you think otherwise you’ve got a shitty common sense“ is not a very good answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:35 PM
1

That’s totally not shocking to me and I’d say not everyone who engages in these practices has to be a violent person necessarily.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 06:54 AM
2

Ok now I get it, you’re just like some nice guy that thinks every man that attracts women has to be violent, because you’ve tailored your definitions accordingly. No wonder you don’t get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:50 AM
1

And sometimes you just get behavior without having rewarded anything in the first place. Don’t know what’s so hard to understand about that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:22 AM
2

I agree with you that an athletic, fit woman is the beauty standard most men in Western societies would share today. But it’s not set in stone and there are a lot of men out there who prefer overweight women. If more women decide to get fat, they’ll only lessen dating options maybe for the majority of men, but to call that ruining the dating marketplace is a vast exaggeration.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:21 AM
3

Look into beauty standards during the Renaissance if you need an example that’s focused on white populations. Beauty standards evolve and change, just like fashion standards. Edit: And Mauretania is a country in Africa, it’s not a tribe or city.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:10 AM
1

Look, if I said to you that there are people secretly hiding violent behavior, and you’d object: Well every violent person I’ve met didn’t hide their behavior - would you agree that this is not a good answer to the question? You can’t disprove the existence of something by just saying you’ve never seen it. I’ve never seen the pyramids in Cairo, still I acknowledge that they’re there, because people told me about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 05:05 AM
3

I’d advise you to look up beauty standards in countries like Mauretania, where women are forcibly fed by their families to get fat, so they’ll have better chances finding a husband. Beauty standards are mostly culturally motivated.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 04:43 AM
1

Well, what does it tell you then that you had a lot of experience with violent people? Did you make a lot of bad decisions in your life?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 04:20 AM
7

„I have never experienced xy“ is not a good answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:57 AM
1

It’s totally reasonable to warn people and make them alert for certain phenomenons. All I am trying to say is that this cannot be your answer when someone is saying, we have a structural problem. And if it is your answer, you either are saying the right thing in the wrong situation, which would be then easy to admit if someone points you to it, or you really aren’t interested in solving the problem - in which case you’re not arguing in good faith, you’re just victim blaming.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:55 AM
5

My common sense tells me different
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:42 AM
5

So what exactly makes you so sure that everyone who you didn’t perceive as violent and aggressive wasn’t just hiding it very well? Especially when you’re not really a people person?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:41 AM
0

Look, if I was wearing a gold chain with diamonds around my neck and was about to go to a bad neighborhood, and you would advise me to maybe leave my necklace at home, that would be a very good advice. If your daughter was dating a gang member and you find that out and advise her to stay away from that guy, that would be a very good and reasonable advice. If someone is saying, we have a structural problem with men being violent towards their pregnant partner, and your answer is, well maybe women…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:37 AM
7

I don’t know where you live, but where I’m from something like a criminal record is confidential. You won’t be able to get that information in Germany.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:28 AM
2

I don’t know when they turned violent and have no indication towards any direction whether it was before or during the pregnancy, but surely both is possible. Do you have any additional information?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 02:26 AM
1

„I have no idea“ Could’ve just left it with that
/r/PurplePillDebate17/01/22 12:13 AM
0

The analogy with the crocodiles has the problem that you are talking about, you know, crocodiles, who can’t control their behavior - like men can an should do, when they are violent and overly aggressive. And still, if you go swimming in a crocodile lake and your leg gets bitten off, I hope the guy that finds you helps you and tries to comfort you instead of letting you lay and rot there as an example for others to not try the same. Concerning the gang members: Is it really the woman who is the …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 11:50 PM
3

That women are attracted to violent men is a myth. Most women I know are repulsed by overly aggressive behavior. And yes, it is victim blaming, if you want to turn it on the woman when such a thing happens, and you’d be rightly accused of it. A victim is in need of help, not criticism. I don’t know why you are so obsessed with the victims behavior in such a case. If your daughter would come home and say she’s been attacked by her boyfriend who was very loving to her in the past, would you say: Y…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 11:18 PM
2

I think what is important to me is that social conditioning can overwrite natural motives, and does so frequently and thoroughly. We can disagree on the extent this happens, but I won’t take any offense in you believing in a bigger or lesser influence than me. What I take offense in, though, is the type of RP that will talk about women like they’re a species from a different planet whose thinking is solely a product of evolution (and frankly, I have the feeling this is a belief the vast majority…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 11:06 PM
2

How do you avoid dangerous men? I’ve never met any, what the hell should I tell her?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:54 PM
5

It’s insanely impressive that you obviously are not able see how twisted that sentence is. It’s like saying: People shouldn’t get robbed, no one should. Instead of saying, no one should rob.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:42 PM
1

Maybe off topic, but due to the fact that the Pacific Ocean largely consists of international waters, it is not particularly dangerous to move cocaine across it. You’ll only run into problems when you’re getting near the shores.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:36 PM
7

That sounds like a wholesome approach, but still it’s inappropriate and ineffective to tell victims of household violence that they just should have known better. You didn’t really answer the question how the women could know that her partner is violent when he hasn’t been prior to the pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:32 PM
11

What brings you to that conclusion?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:21 PM
3

I could show you dozens and dozens of examples where people say that hypergamy is inevitable, will affect a relationship definitely and women can’t escape it. So, the way the term is used on PPD most of the times does certainly exclude societal factors.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:20 PM
15

You still didn’t ask men to stop being aggressive and violent, you instead hold their mothers and lovers accountable. Here, look: Men, stop murdering your pregnant partners. Not hard, is it?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:16 PM
44

Oh, so you invented a dangerous-men-detector? How convenient
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:08 PM
21

In the same way you could ask men to stop being overly aggressive and violent, but what do I know
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 10:06 PM
3

Well the whole hypergamy thing is based on an evolutionary explanation - and mostly backed up by some PR study from OKCupid. It may be a problem that people criticizing RP are not really into the different nuances, but you should have a look at my profile to see what kind of stuff I am talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 09:51 PM
2

The thing is that, if you start explaining these phenomenons with biology, you’ll inevitably run into people who want to (and can) prove that theory wrong by just saying: It doesn’t apply all the time. And you say, it doesn’t. So maybe cultural factors and upbringing should play a bigger role in RP theory instead of evolution and biology.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 09:37 PM
1

But isn’t there a good possibility that people sometimes really need some time to figure it out?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 08:52 PM
1

It’s absolutely stupid to think that having a lot of relationships or casual sex or dates would damage your ability to pair bond. It may well be that people who can’t bond are more likely to have a lot of partners. But that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily the other way round. I see that statement often, mostly it’s men accusing women, so it’s somewhat refreshing to see the argument framed in the way you did. I’d agree with you that the commitment of relationships usually entails the prospects of m…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/22 07:59 PM
-12

Maybe you can find like-minded people here:[https://www.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/](r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates)
/r/AntiFeminists16/01/22 01:27 AM
2

Dear Rockstars of PPD, what do you do if you fall in love during a tour and have to leave with your bus after the show and are thus not able to escalate with the girl that threw her panties on stage?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 09:46 PM
–

No, they like that because there is no universally applicable measurement system for the quality of people. The Red Pill may, MAY (!), be applicable to a sufficient amount of women for it to be perceived as valid. But my take is, the standards they promote probably are applicable to maybe 40-50 percent of women (I pulled that number out of my ass). The rest consists of women who have very different standards for men. So it’s not at all unlikely for you to find a partner, even if you don’t remote…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 06:44 PM
–

That’s a really good advice. Everyone should find something they have passion for and just do it, and a whole lot of problems will solve themselves. I think that’s my recipe for happiness, too.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 06:40 PM
2

Well the study suggests that there is a correlation between being unpopular, bullied, ostracized, isolated, rejected and low status on the one side and virginity on the other side. You can now argue that either unpopular people don’t find a sex partner or that people are unpopular due to not finding a sex partner. Or what are you implying?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/22 03:53 PM
1

That’s totally unfair to you and I don’t think that you individually could have done something about it. It’s like someone getting into an accident without being their own fault, who then has to deal with the consequences. It won’t help you individually, but one way to deal with these situations on a societal level is free education, like in the country where I’m from. If you don’t have to worry about fees or whatever you’re definitely a lot more independent from your parents in that regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 11:33 PM
1

Yes, I acknowledge that there are people that probably almost no woman will find attractive. But the percentage is in the low single digits. You were the one saying basically the majority of men won’t be found attractive by any woman. And if you’re telling the truth and you really have eyes and go out from time to time, you’ll see that there are couples of almost all attractiveness levels. Saying women only like 20 percent of men is just rubbish, and even if it was right, it wouldn’t be the same…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 08:50 PM
0

Well all of my friends are in relationships and never had trouble dating. So what do we do now?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 08:31 PM
1

So you’re considering yourself to be part of the top ten percent instead? Thinking your friends are not is a nice touch though
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 07:27 PM
2

They aren’t outcasts from the socially popular, they’re outcasts from the average person. But if you feel better with the feeling that a majority of men is not able to be desired by women, keep telling that to yourself. The actual majority of men will keep dating and having fun with women and keep not understanding your problem, because you’re inflating it to a societal level that has nothing to do with reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 05:50 PM
5

If these guys would make up for 90 percent of men, they wouldn’t be OUTCASTS
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 05:38 PM
5

Looks like women just aren’t attracted to the bottom 10 percent of men and 90 percent of men are fine without fearing to become a BB ever in their life. Hmmmmm…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 05:07 PM
1

How should social media be able to prevent people from behaving shitty in the real world? It’s the other way round? Maybe I didn’t understand the sentence properly, as English isn’t my first language. Edit to clarify: I read it like, they suggest a role for social media in monitoring, and they suggest mitigating the factors that … I don’t know if that’s a possible interpretation
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 04:04 AM
1

Yeah, but they’re saying mitigating factors that lead young men to antisocial behavior in real-world societies. To me, it sounds like they’re talking about male-biased sex ratios, few single women, high income equality, and small gender gaps in income, which are the factors that lead young men yada yada
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 03:58 AM
0

Well I think the solution is not that bad, as monitoring entails keeping an eye on where the problem arises. I’d guess it has something to do with urbanization and a lot of young people who get educated leaving their hometowns. And because women are more likely to enter college and often not wanting to date someone who has not, this may lead to an imbalance in certain areas. But just a guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/01/22 03:38 AM
3

I think the job market is a very good analogy. Because it extends to the online world: Most people who have no trouble finding a job in many cases do so by personal recommendations and being visible and well-known in their field. And probably none of them ever introduced themselves on a online job offer. Most good positions aren’t even advertised online.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 11:08 PM
2

Yeah, your location surely has a big influence on your dating life. I often wonder if the people complaining about problems in that regard keep that in mind when they complain. It’s not biology and evolution, it’s rather culture and upbringing what motivates people when they’re looking for a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 09:21 PM
4

I think this mostly has to do with the individuality of certain fetishes, meaning it may be easy to get just sex, but it still may be difficult for you to find someone to fulfill your somewhat special needs. And another thing is anonymity: Many gay men are secretly gay and thus rely on prostitutes not telling on them because of financial interests. Take these things aside, and I think prostitution would be far less common.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 07:17 PM
0

Well then go on and meet these women and don’t care for those who don’t work on themselves, such as most self-improving men do. But from my observation the majority of women will fit this criterion, if you’re not from some country with very traditional societal values.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 07:13 PM
1

Well I don’t know where you live, but where I live, the world is full of women who are on career paths which are no less ambitious than mine. In fact, I met my current girlfriend when we were both in a training position for my current job. So I guess there are a whole lot of women who work on themselves and try to become a better person. And if some of them don’t, they should be encouraged to do the same, such as men should be encouraged, too. And having a wild phase doesn’t prevent you from ach…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 06:53 PM
5

If you phrase it like that, yes, it’s a hoax. Should everyone try to become their best version of themselves anyway, regardless whether it increases sexual attractiveness? Yes. A byproduct of that will be, at least for some people, that their sexual attractiveness will indeed increase, though not for all of them in a sufficient way. But the advice is still valid, though, as it won’t harm anyone to become a better person.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 06:31 PM
2

I think it’s a misconception to think that your odds get better the bigger your pool is. Because you have to take into account the time it takes to sort people out. It’s way better to invest more effort into finding the right person than just meeting many people more or less arbitrarily.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 03:03 PM
1

It very certainly does matter how people should act, because otherwise you wouldn’t know which behavior to punish and which to reward. And yes, not punishing stealing leads to more people stealing. I live in SF right now so I know very well about the situation here. Still, do you say to these people: It’s okay to steal if you don’t get punished? Of course not. Why? Because stealing is wrong and wrong behavior should be outcalled (which is one sort of punishing it, too).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/22 02:04 PM
2

No, the reason is because a world in which there would be no assholes, everyone would be better off. It is clearly possible for people to not be assholes. So for the sake of making all our lives at least a little bit more convenient, don’t be an asshole. Because you are a part of that environment that you’re describing as full of bad people. The paradox you’re talking about exists only when you have a very narrow understanding of what’s rational and best for an individual. If you look at the bro…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 11:38 PM
1

Yeah, saying that you should be a good person doesn’t mean that you don’t acknowledge that there are bad people. It just means that you shouldn’t be another bad person to add to the already more than sufficient amount of people that are assholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 10:18 PM
-1

You shouldn’t be a good person because it grants you success, you should be a person just to do the right thing. People who steal are probably better at acquiring certain resources. Does that justify stealing? Should everyone steal now?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 10:10 PM
1

That’s quite funny, because I am a guy in my mid-30s and I’ve never seen erotic advertisements or anything on Instagram. Would you mind sending me screenshots via PM? I am really curious what the look like
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/22 08:50 PM
3

I disagree. One recent example: In an all male setting a couple of weeks ago (all good friends), one of us started talking about how he didn’t had sex with his partner recently due to being not really aroused by her anymore, which he thought might have something to do with his increasing consumption of porn, since he built himself some sort of gaming room in the cellar of their building where he spends more time alone now. He was really upset about this and we tried to comfort him and talked abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 05:57 PM
1

I don’t think so. There are things that will be probably be unattractive to virtually anyone, like physical features that indicate sickness, for example a pink eye or something. But what you perceive as attractive depends, as there are a vast amount of different ways to style that appeal in varying degrees to different people. Additionally, in a world where everyone wears clothes and styles their hair and face, natural features become less and less important. Being attractive is rather a task of…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 04:10 PM
10

I am a guy and with my friends it’s the same. We offer emotional support all of the time when needed (or asked for). Couldn’t imagine being friends with someone who wouldn’t do this.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 03:54 PM
1

The problem with your thought is that, even if women on average MIGHT be only attracted to ten percent of men, these ten percent are not the same with every woman. There is no man on earth who is able to make every woman sleep with him, there will always be a percentage that’s not attracted to him. Because women, such as all people, differ from one another regarding what they’re attracted to. There are no universal criteria that make you objectively attractive to everybody.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 03:15 PM
3

It two people at some point in their life decide to stay together forever, marriage mostly has legal benefits, such as tax reduction or some sort of security in case one of them dies. Which is probably no surprise, as marriage is mostly a legal institution to promote a certain behavior of the members of a society.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 06:19 AM
1

What kind of tactic that OP has named do you think will increase your chances with women? They’re just desperate and will more likely lead to failures than if they’d just behaved like a decent person, though I will admit that OLD is heavily skewed towards attractiveness, at least compared getting to know people in person. But not every attractive guy is an asshole, so it’s not a very reliable indicator and thus it makes no difference if a woman preselects their dates in terms of attractiveness. …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 05:11 AM
1

I feel it’s rather the opposite in terms of money. Relationships help you save money in the long run, while increasing quality of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/22 02:39 AM
1

Well there have been situations where I’ve thought „oh that would be a fit“ and it didn’t materialize, either because I was under the impression that this attraction wouldn’t be reciprocated and therefore didn’t try to pursue or because I did and got rejected. But those girls who I’ve dated with practically all became my girlfriend at some point and it worked out pretty well, at least a couple of years. When it didn’t work out, there were a variety of reasons for that, but the problem was not th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 11:18 PM
2

I'm not saying that OLD should be banned or whatever, all I’m saying is when I look at my personal preferences, I’d think it would be frustrating for a lot of people if it became the only way to date someone. That’s why skyrocketing OLD numbers would concern me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 11:11 PM
1

If I look back, most of the time I met my former partners and my current one through random social settings, like at school, at university or at work. I think a lot of us meet many new people everyday, be it through shared social circles or job events or whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 11:06 PM
1

Given one random women, I’d surely bet my money on Brad Pitt, just because the odds just are in favor of him. There are much more people, male or female, who will want to date someone based rather on their physical appearance than on character traits. But if you took 100 random women and everyone’s goal would be to find a lifetime partner, I am very sure pre-famous Danny would have a fair chance. But, very important: This chance would be almost eliminated if he wasn’t confident, meaning his conf…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 07:18 PM
1

Now that he is famous, I pretty much think so, though I can’t really say anything about the time before he got famous, as I don’t really know about that. But if I had to guess, I’d say that someone who is not afraid of making fun of himself in front of the whole world will probably not be afraid to get rejected by a women. So yes, I could imagine Danny DeVito approaching women as confident as Brad Pitt.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 07:10 PM
1

But the question was solely if he is or was confident, because this discussion began with a commenter who said only Chad be confident because only Chad gets approval. I am saying: Danny DeVito is not a Chad, but still very confident, socially active, even famous, and I imagine him having a fulfilling love life, even if it is due to his popularity. Disproving that you necessarily have to be physically attractive to be confident in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 07:05 PM
1

The question was whether he had confidence despite being not conventionally sexy, which I feel is necessary to become an exceptional actor
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 07:01 PM
0

Yeah, but it is inefficient. If I meet someone in person, I’ll know immediately if it fits. Of course I will have less options because it is impossible for me to have the same frequency of potential partners to choose from. All I am saying is that your success rate will be higher if you meet someone in person initially, because you don’t even have to date someone to know if they’re worthy. If you do the same with OLD, first of all you will limit yourself to people that not only have to be appeal…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 07:00 PM
0

Well, I don’t have any trouble imagining Danny DeVito having a fulfilling love life, actually. But my point was rather that this guy probably had confidence before he was famous, so that he was able to become famous. Proving that you don’t have to be physically attractive to be confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 06:51 PM
1

Sorry, jumping on a grenade and getting a date are completely different things. Getting a date and acting in front of a mixed-gendered audience, though, is FAR more similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 06:49 PM
0

Do you think someone who’s not confident will take part as a leading role in a TV show?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:47 PM
1

Sounds like a good reason to start learning it IMO
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:46 PM
-1

Yeah, but you have to be confident to play those roles and put yourself on a movie screen in the first place. If you’re not confident, you’ll probably won’t become an actor. So they had to be confident before they started their career and before they got professional approval.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:43 PM
1

You’ll get the problem if you ever tried online shopping for clothes. It’s always a gamble if the clothes will fit and the only criterion for a purchase is whether the clothes look good. A lot of people will send non-fitting clothes back. It’s a whole lot less efficient than just going to the store, try the clothes on and decide then whether to buy it or not, though of course the inventory is smaller than in e-commerce. I think this analogy fits very well to OLD.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:39 PM
-1

How can people like Danny DeVito become so popular then? Where does their initial confidence come from before they started their career?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:34 PM
-1

Yeah, to every question there’s a simple answer. Problem is, most of the time it’s the wrong answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 05:32 PM
1

Women should call other women out for that, yes. And no, they shouldn’t employ these tactics, as they’re wrong. Many wrong things are very efficient in order to reach a certain goal, still people shouldn’t do them and call other people out for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 02:27 PM
2

That’s quite a tough question and I’m glad no one will ever have to face it in reality, but… I think I’d rather be dateless if I’d then be able to buy fake intimacy, I guess. It’s not that I don’t value my relationship, but given the possibility that I could have some surrogate for that, even if it’s the shallowest and least fulfilling version of it, I’d think losing the financial freedom and reputation that comes from a job would be slightly harder for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/22 04:50 AM
0

I really don’t know how it’s insane to expect people to call out abhorrent behavior from other people, regardless of the surrounding conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 10:35 PM
1

As your goal can potentially achieved with both women, it heavily depends on what person you are and what you are looking for in a partner besides having kids and staying together with her. If you choose a woman that is not compatible with you, that will have a much bigger influence on your family than just what your partner is like as a single person. Which is not very surprising, as a relationship puts people into an interdependent situation in which everyone influences the other one all the t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 08:53 PM
1

Dude, we are talking about online dating. She literally said, some people are caring and fun to date. She didn’t say almost all men are like that. She just said the ones who are overrun her online dating experience. I explained to you how this can happen, for example because these people are engaging far more actively in OLD than the normal relationship seeking person who maybe has meaningful chats with one or two persons at once instead of swiping every woman right and sending them the same que…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 08:45 PM
1

No, neither are all men that engage in online second hand shopping. But in both cases the problematic people just stand out, because they’re engaging a whole lot more in these online activities, timewise and in terms of the number of people they try to pursue. All I am saying is, it’s not someone’s own fault if they get harassed online, it’s always the fault of the harasser.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 07:56 PM
0

I don’t know, but I’d be thrilled to hear your answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 07:50 PM
0

I agree with you when you look into the relationships people choose to form. But saying someone is making poor decisions based on the kinds of OLD messages they receive is just plain ridiculous. Anyone can write you a message there. Are the women that are harassed on online second hand shopping sites at fault themselves because they offer the wrong clothes?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 07:48 PM
0

I think this kind of behavior is mostly correlated with a shocking inexperience when it comes to interacting with women. Just like racism is far more common in areas where there is almost no racial diversity. The inexperience leads to heavy othering and thus is reinforcing itself. So what society as a whole could do is enforcing gender diversity experiences for all children and young adults. That would solve a lot of problems in general, repairing online dating would only be the cherry on top of…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 07:14 PM
2

He is implying that you are visually attracted only to bad boys (because you are a woman) and that you’re only matching with guys you’re visually attracted to. Thus making it your fault if you only get these kinds of messages, because you’re not mature enough to put visual attraction aside. I can’t stress how much I disagree with him, because I think even the premises this reasoning is built one are just ridiculous and sexist. But it’s a very common trope I come across quite often on this subred…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 07:05 PM
2

I would highly doubt that most OLD profiles are an adequate representation of the people that made them. You may probably get a clear picture, but still it’s filtered in so many ways. Nothing beats meeting in person to really get an image of how somebody’s like.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 05:43 PM
1

You said you can’t say it in a social setting, unless your social setting is all guys. I said I am frequently in these kinds of settings, still no one did complain. How does that prove YOUR point?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 04:43 PM
1

They do. Take any team sport.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 04:34 PM
1

I am frequently in settings with only male friends, most of them I know since teenage years. So I’ve been able to watch their dating life (and I know mine). Almost all of them were consistently able to find women to date or have sex with them, though literally all of them are in LTR now, so I didn’t get to hear any dating stories in the last two or three years or so.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 04:19 PM
0

Naaaahh only on Reddit, I have yet to meet the person in my life that says dating is hard because women are hypergamous. Most people in reality complain about meeting a lot of people, but not the right person
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/22 12:01 AM
1

It’s okay not wanting to take the risk. But more often then not people that are preferring sexual inexperienced women are not that refined in their reasoning. Mostly it’s explanations like „women loose ability to pair bond“ or „promiscuous women are cheaters“ or „women with high n count are alpha widowed“ or whatever. And that’s just rubbish.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 11:18 PM
0

Yes, it increases the risk under certain circumstances. But it is by no means necessary that someone who is promiscuous checks these boxes. So you could say it may be a warning sign that needs further investigation. But saying I don’t date promiscuous women because of risking STDs is like saying I wouldn’t employ a foreigner because they statistically are more likely to commit crimes. You should instead probably become a safer sex advocate if you’re really concerned about the risk of STDs. And m…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 11:00 PM
1

I’ll agree with you to some extent and say online dating is broken and needs to be fixed. With dating in general, everything’s as fine as it has always been.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 06:54 PM
5

I know this is rather anecdotal evidence, but none of the men I know have or had struggle dating, at least in the sense that they weren’t able to meet women whom found them attractive. And as far as I know, most men end up in relationships during their lives. It’s rather a minority that complains. Edit: And I’d like to add that most of the times people really don’t complain about dating in general - if you ask them more closely, almost all the time they’re complaining specifically about online d…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 06:48 PM
7

But not all of them are attracted to the same men, which is dating for most men isn’t a struggle at all
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 06:33 PM
1

There are no looksmatches because everyone has a different idea of what makes a person attractive. There is no universal rating system for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 06:20 PM
4

I don’t know if it’s for men only, but there is a sub called r/TheRedPill
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 05:45 PM
7

Aaaaaand that makes you a sexist, bravo 👏
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 05:39 PM
8

So by your definition anyone who is in a relationship with someone who has children from someone else is a beta? That’s really convenient, because in that case every patchwork family proves your point.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 05:24 PM
6

Go to the Redpill forum, there is one on Reddit
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 05:21 PM
14

How is being tall making her husband a beta male? She was specifically describing a situation in which a person who is normally perceived as beta male passed his genes, while a person who is normally perceived as alpha won’t. The level of twisted mental gymnastics needed to make this a proof of YOUR argument is really impressive here.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 05:13 PM
2

I don’t really get where you’re coming from here. It is totally okay if a man doesn’t want to have a partner that has been promiscuous in the past, just to be clear. And it’s fine for a woman to want a partner that has ambitions in his life. That is a question of personal values. For example: I prefer women that are smokers as girlfriends, because I am a smoker myself. Do I think non-smokers are terrible people that made wrong decisions in their life? No, it’s just a question of convenience for …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 04:34 PM
3

I think a high body count can certainly be an indicator of mental problems. But you have to take other indicators into account to be sure, as there are a hell lot of healthy people who just prefer a promiscuous lifestyle for some time.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 04:17 PM
3

People always say that they read a lot about this, but when I ask them where they read it, they mostly point to one specific reddit thread where someone describes how they found a video of their partner doing a gang bang. Just one. I’m curious, do you have any other examples?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 04:10 PM
2

I thought the emotional damage of excessive partners were clear? Are there no consequences here from promiscuity? Or is the correlation of promiscuity and damage not as strong as you stated in your initial comment? If so, wouldn’t you say that the number of sexual partners probably isn’t a reliable indicator of whether someone is incapable of a stable relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 04:04 PM
5

But sociology and psychology do so, in form of research papers and scientific studies - you should have a look at it
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 03:57 PM
2

People don’t get infuriated by the idea. What infuriates them is the equalization of promiscuity with bad character traits. It’s okay to have preferences when it comes to your partners past and it’s okay to value a strong sexual selectivity in a partner. What’s not okay is to say that people who are promiscuous are automatically mentally damaged and are spreading STDs. What is basically what you’re saying when you say you don’t want a promiscuous partner because they’re risky per se.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 03:41 PM
6

Oh did the international council of women sign a new resolution on how terrible ugly men are? Didn’t get the memo
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 03:38 PM
3

The difference is that a woman who has had a lot of sex in the past doesn’t have to suffer from STDs or crazy exes. If you’d say, I don’t want my partner to have STDs or kids, no one would think you’re insecure. But framing it as if the promiscuity would be the problem here and not the risks that come from it offends people that have a lot of safer sex with mentally healthy people.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 03:26 PM
-2

I don’t want to argue in favor or against anything, just let me point out a logical flaw in your argument: You won’t spend time with your partner in their past, but you will certainly spend time with them in the future, which makes it reasonable to care for someone’s future
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/22 03:12 PM
3

I didn’t mean an actual offer, I just wanted to say that it’s not just women who control the dating market, it’s men, too. Because they choose which women to pursue in the first place. As opposed to many other people here saying that women are always the ones making the decision. Edit: Wait, what, you would actually sleep with any women who wants to sleep with you? Is that really what you meant?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 09:47 PM
2

But in the end, that’s an offer, too. Or would you sleep with any woman who just sticks around, regardless of what you’re doing?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 09:34 PM
-1

Then he can just go and do that, but OP was specifically talking about dating and mate selection
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 09:27 PM
2

Just don’t do online dating. It is like you write: Real men know how and where to meet and date women without going online. None of the women I had something going on with I’ve met through OLD
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 08:30 PM
5

In most heterosexual encounters it is the man who makes the offer and the woman who decides to take it or not. But the man has to decide to make the offer. He selects women whom to offer himself to. How does that not make him a selector, too?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 08:06 PM
0

No, it’s just OLD. I‘m with you that physical attractiveness is immensely important as a heterosexual male on OLD. But most people don’t meet their partners there.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 06:48 PM
4

If I got a dollar for every time that someone pulls that ridiculous OKCupid statistic out of their ass to explain human behavior, I’d be a billionaire by now. Leave OLD, go outside, look at couples. It is so fucking ridiculous how influential that stupid PR study got, with all its obvious design flaws. Anyone citing it should be ashamed of their intellectual dishonesty
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 06:41 PM
4

I usually agree with most things you’re saying, but I don’t think that all groups that suffer discrimination should push for change solely by themselves. They should be supported by everyone else in that, even if that means that some social groups have to give up on their privileges by themselves. It’s wrong to justify injustice just because you profit from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/22 02:53 PM
1

Yeah right, I don’t really get why these kinds of biological explanations always imply that there has been a point in history when evolution stopped and was at an ideal point we need to get back to. Why should I want to go back to prehistoric times when it comes to dating while I absolutely don’t want to go back in time when it comes to science, medicine and education in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 04:00 PM
-1

You sound like a guy who doesn’t complain very much and who is fun to be around (not)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 03:04 AM
2

PPD should introduce a new flag named „Biological Bullshit Bingo“ for every post where someone tries to explain human behavior solely with evolution or biology
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 03:02 AM
0

Thank you. Thank you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 02:57 AM
1

Well if that happens I will have a strong incentive to lose weight, because if one pair of pants doesn’t fit anymore, none of my pants will. And it will take weeks to replace my wardrobe 😄
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 12:11 AM
2

I can say that my weight couldn’t have changed dramatically during the past years, as I only wear tailor-made clothes whose measures haven’t changed in that time. Saying, all my clothes have the exact same size and they were always perfectly fitting. I don’t need to weigh myself, I just have to look at myself to determine if I should eat more or less. At least that has been my philosophy until now. But I know that I’m probably part of a very small minority in that regard, haha
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/22 12:05 AM
2

Yeah, that’s right, I have a problem with the question. I just came here because I knew I would find funny answers here. Because anyone saying you can answer this question in a right way has to do serious mental gymnastics. Love to read that, just for amusement.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 10:48 PM
1

It‘s just utter nonsense. You could’ve just said: I can’t tell how many times he will be successful, because I don’t know anything about the 100 women he will ask. And I’ll add, as a bonus: You couldn’t even tell if you knew the parameters of these women. Because made-up numbers that are representing looks, money, height, intelligence, personality and charisma are not sufficient to determine if two people are compatible to each other and thus will date. You need a SHITLOAD more information than …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 10:43 PM
1

So, what do you know about the 100 women? Do you think it doesn’t matter which women we’re talking about here?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 10:30 PM
1

I love how you imply that there is a right answer to this question one could overestimate 😄
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 10:17 PM
2

Guess we have a hypothesis we can test on now with this very thread
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 10:15 PM
2

Haha yeah. I have a question, too: If an average man asks 100 Redditors one question that is so random that it’s completely impossible to answer in a definite way, how many Redditors will try to do it anyway (and give truly valuable answers)?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 09:55 PM
2

I can say for sure that I couldn’t tell, will be something between 70 and 80 kilograms, I guess. But it’s been literally years since I’ve been on a scale. Same goes for her, though I can’t ask right now as she isn’t around. But I’d consider both our weight pretty average, definitely not overweight, so we don’t really care about the exact number as long as the body feeling is fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 09:44 PM
7

Repeat after me: You 👏 cannot 👏 answer 👏 those 👏 questions 👏 because 👏 there 👏 is 👏 no 👏 universal 👏 measure 👏 for 👏 the 👏 quality 👏 of 👏 people
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 09:38 PM
4

Some women don’t know their weight. My girlfriend and I don’t have a scale, so none of us can weigh themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 09:11 PM
2

Oh so they don’t need water, air and food? Or don’t humans use the toilet and are not able to walk on both feet? Don’t humans in general like pleasure and dislike pain? Enlighten me what part of human life I depicted wrong here lol Edit: You realized that I just mimicked your argumentation to show that you can’t just put unproven simplistic observations about biology together to explain peoples behavior, didn’t you?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 08:11 PM
1

You mean in the same depth like you did? No problem! Men and women are biologically the same because they both are human and need water and air and food to survive. They both use the toilet and are able to walk on both feet. They both like pleasure and dislike pain. These are just a few examples of why men and women are biologically, physiologically, psychologically, hormonal and sexually the same. We were made to resemble each other, not to go against or try to alienate from one another.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 08:03 PM
2

Basically you’re saying: it is like this because it is like this. People starting their argument with „it’s clear as day“ mostly don’t have anything to backup their claims. Just like you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 07:51 PM
1

It is not completely crazy and surely natural to want to give your partner the best sexual experience they can get. I say that specifically because you’ve clarified that this includes becoming their best sexual partner over time. What I see as a problem are guys saying that they need a woman with a low n-count because of that. It’s just utter nonsense to think that women who experienced good sex once can’t be satisfied by certain men anymore after that who are not so good at sex. Because there i…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 07:43 PM
1

It is not completely crazy and surely natural to want to give your partner the best sexual experience they can get. I say that specifically because you’ve clarified that this includes becoming their best sexual partner over time. What I see as a problem are guys saying that they need a woman with a low n-count because of that. It’s just utter nonsense to think that women who experienced good sex once can’t be satisfied by certain men anymore after that who are not so good at sex. Because there i…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 07:43 PM
1

It is not completely crazy and surely natural to want to give your partner the best sexual experience they can get. I say that specifically because you’ve clarified that this includes becoming their best sexual partner over time. What I see as a problem are guys saying that they need a woman with a low n-count because of that. It’s just utter nonsense to think that women who experienced good sex once can’t be satisfied by certain men anymore after that who are not so good at sex. Because there i…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 07:42 PM
1

It is not completely crazy and surely natural to want to give your partner the best sexual experience they can get. I say that specifically because you’ve clarified that this includes becoming their best sexual partner over time. What I see as a problem are guys saying that they need a woman with a low n-count because of that. It’s just utter nonsense to think that women who experienced good sex once can’t be satisfied by certain men anymore after that who are not so good at sex. Because there i…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 07:42 PM
3

Well you should ask your friends if they know someone or meet people at parties they invite you to.
/r/seduction05/01/22 05:27 AM
-1

I don’t think that the problem is that it’s not rewarded. It’s rewarded to work hard and it’s rewarded to be nice, still people don’t do it. Because they lack the will to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/22 03:54 AM
1

What is it now? Does no one know what the results will be or are the results devastating?
/r/AntiFeminists04/01/22 10:13 PM
-1

The problem is that you tie sexual preferences to gender, although there’s no causation between these two. There may be some statistical significances, but that’s it. Women do not desire something else than men solely due to their gender. That’s the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/22 05:01 PM
3

If they agreed to marry you: Yes, you have
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/21 05:19 PM
1

Where did you read that?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/21 01:10 AM
1

I remember one incident quite well, because the whole town knew about it. It was a music teacher from my school who had an awkwardly close relationship to one girl. After she finished school, he left his wife and married the girl and started a family with her. He had to leave to another school after that, but was still allowed to work as a teacher. Everyone cringed. Edit: He was 60 when their relationship started.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/21 04:01 PM
2

I think there is a correlation and how strong it is depends on how visible you are as a person in the social settings you act in. For example, if you are an introverted person and you excel at some visible activity in your job, people might approach you despite your introversion, so it’s more likely that you’re able to expand your social circle. Same goes for introverted people that accidentally make friends with extroverted folks early in their childhood or if you’re a successful athlete or wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 10:53 PM
1

I don’t think the upper class has bought less into the free sex movement, instead the upper class always practiced free sex behind closets and is just way more experienced in keeping up an image of something, like a marriage. There may be less divorces, but there will be a lot more secret affairs.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 10:46 PM
1

I guess that plays a role, too, but I don’t know really to what extent. But I added the socioeconomic background question because a lot of people already took that into account in their answers by themselves already
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 10:33 PM
3

Yeah, you get to decide
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 09:47 PM
3

I didn’t tell you to shut the fuck up, I asked you to be less judgy on this specific thread for the sake of people feeling better when opening up. Interpreting it as anything other than that is, indeed, mental gymnastics.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 09:04 PM
4

Didn’t mean you with that, I just thought he was referring to some comments I made fun of in the past. Of course you weren’t crossing any lines here, I just found your attitude counter productive for encouraging people to participate in this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 08:32 PM
7

Well some people just cross certain lines with their takes that go far beyond just describing an experience, I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 07:42 PM
11

I’d like to ask you to not judge on other people’s experiences in such a harsh way on this thread, just based on one or two loose sentences where someone described the people in their life. They will most probably know them better than you, as their knowledge is based on many million more pieces of information than yours. I have the feeling some people might be afraid of telling their background if they have to fear that someone’s going to devalue their experiences in their first comment. I’d ad…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 07:02 PM
1

I tried to make a new thread out of this here
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 05:31 PM
1

What sidebar?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 03:19 PM
2

I‘m not necessarily saying our minds haven’t been formed by evolution, as they clearly have, let it be the way we interpret colors or sounds or whatever, just to name a few examples. It also extends to the way we link the appearance of someone to some sort of perceived health status. There will probably be a lot of things in our mind that are influenced by some subconscious force that forms our desires in some way. But when I read something from redpillers, it often sounds as if that would mean …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 06:11 AM
1

I was specifically aiming at red and black pillers, because as you say, in my view most of them have a very cartoonish and undercomplex view of what evolution means and how the human mind works. That’s why I was curious whether they experience themselves as these cartoonish versions of a human. To illustrate how far away these concepts are from reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 05:55 AM
1

I think you make a very valuable point here with people that get brought up in different environments may experience it as if they were living in completely different worlds. Maybe that’s the point where my experience ends, as me and almost everyone I know comes from parents that were married at least until their children were grown up already for a long time. I think maybe I have even preselected my social environment subconsciously in that regard. Because it’s literally everyone I am close wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 05:22 AM
2

Isn’t that exactly what many redpillers say what you as a woman want from a man anyways, due to evolution? And if you don’t really need a man to provide for you: What kind of qualities are you looking for, that come with the ability to provide?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 03:10 AM
0

Do you mean like in times of having sex? Or like, there are 20 percent of men that have sex with 80 percent of women? The difference between black pill and red pill, to me, was mainly that one side was saying you can do something about it and the other side was saying that some people just can’t. But in general, their diagnostic tools are largely the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:51 AM
2

So you would say, every woman is only attracted to the top 20 percent of men because of her hypergamous nature - which prevents women in general to bond with the other 80 percent of men which have to live with being a provider that has to fear that his wife will cheat all the time?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:41 AM
3

What are your instincts tied to, if not emotions and chemical responses?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:20 AM
1

But often red and black pill seem to assume that this is a one way street and doesn’t apply to women - as if women inherently weren’t able to acknowledge their instincts and work with them
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:18 AM
1

Well I don’t really know if the majority of the RP community would say that last statement about women, too. As I often get the feeling that people are merely reproduction machines developed by evolution, when I read something from that space.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:10 AM
1

But would you say, with all the changes we’ve seen technologically and are likely to see in the future, would it be better to maintain certain gender roles with reference to our biological past, or should we rather develop and adopt new gender roles that will fit better to our environment?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 02:08 AM
2

Why wouldn’t you recommend that? And why wouldn’t women be able to overcome that irrational urge as good as men can? I’m not even doubting that what you say here is not the case; I’m just saying you didn’t provide any answer why it should matter in any way, as we all - men and women - are rational beings that act against our instincts all the time. Why would it be so strange if we were acting rational when it comes to relationships, too? Or does is it only strange for women?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 01:45 AM
3

I am interested in that because the way people behave to each other is what defines the environment that I live in - so I like to know what drives people in the end, especially when I disagree with them
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 01:04 AM
1

And if I came to surround myself mostly with other people who also can easily be exploited, but won’t do that because they’re good souls - including a partner who also can easily be exploited but with whom I won’t do that to each other - would that mean I can have a happy life without being cautious all the time to the benefit of everyone involved (at least theoretically)?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:55 AM
4

No one forced you to click on this thread and give an answer, for god’s sake
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:53 AM
1

But I am not! Do I lie? Am I mentally sick? Do I deceive myself? How do I experience myself as a moral human being who doesn’t put his self interest above anything else when you say such people don’t exist?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:48 AM
2

Why do you see such a fundamental difference between men and women?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:45 AM
2

Could you change to only RP in the title? thanks (and sorry for the misunderstanding, will consider that in the future!)
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:43 AM
2

Well I can say for myself, I do not experience myself as a utility maximizing actor - which goes for most people I’ve encountered, at least to the extend I can know of. Do you think there are women that think like me? Or do I just judge poorly? Or was I just lucky most of my life?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:41 AM
1

Do you think a women’s brain is functioning fundamentally different than a men’s brain? If so, why?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:38 AM
1

I get the feeling that you’re one of the commenters that confused my Q4BP as blue pill, as your statements neither sound very red nor black pilled. No offense btw, I really liked reading your comment and feel more informed now.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:22 AM
1

Would you lie to a woman in order to get sex from her?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:19 AM
2

I learned some weeks ago that the Ancient Greek had several concepts for love, in which sexual attraction was one of them. Another one was focused on building a life and achieving goals together, which would fit the concept of building a deep love over time in a marriage together. I think a lot of problems when it comes to infidelity and such arise when people think of those two concepts as a necessary combination. In most cases, the erotic love fades, while the building love is meant to last a …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:09 AM
2

Agreed! Another thing: Most people appear the most attractive when they’re doing something they’re good at. So if you’re good at a valuable activity that is observable to others, you’re almost guaranteed to find a partner, in my view.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/21 12:02 AM
1

Well in the end, I guess we all don’t really know what’s real and what not, maybe apart from few scientists whose findings are hard to understand and interpret for a layman. So it’s okay to just make a reasonable guess at some point, in my view. Though I’m always up to challenge mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:58 PM
1

And why do you think women aren’t like that?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:51 PM
3

I would certainly doubt that men don’t lose attraction to their partner. Of course they will still use them for sexual relief, but they surely lose desire. If a woman with a strong will consciously decides to settle for a man because she values stability and thinks her husband may not be sexually desirable anymore, but still is the best she can get: would you say the man should or shouldn’t stay together with his wife, given he in general wants to have a relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:47 PM
1

Well if you believe in red or black pill ideas, you’d say that all women are hypergamous and will go after the top 20 percent of men and that men want to fuck almost every woman, but can’t because women won’t let them - because of evolution and their ape brain.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:38 PM
1

I feel that’s a very reasonable standpoint. I also think generalizations are fine, to some extent. But when it comes to dating, that’s a very individual thing that many times can’t be boiled down to some social markers like gender to make conclusions if someone behaves like this or like that in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:36 PM
1

But wouldn’t you say that this complex abstraction layer that links your instincts with the real world is in the end your personality? Is it something you can influence?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:33 PM
2

Why can we prevent ourselves from cheating and women cannot?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:31 PM
1

That’s a very interesting last sentence: In what way does the concept of love has to be experienced as something beyond rationality to really work as a bond between two people? Do you believe in true love, like in Disney movies?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:29 PM
1

Do you believe in any red or black pill ideas, like female hypergamy?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:28 PM
1

How would you say does this manifest in dating and forming relationships? Do you see that as a more or rather less conscious decision?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:26 PM
4

There are two things you bring into Girards theory that you don’t explain at all. First, it is certainly not an incontrovertible fact what you say in your first sentence - neither the conceived explanation nor the one you present in quoting Girard are sufficient for that. Second, you say women are the ones allowing sex in all human encounters (which is a necessity for the conclusion you want to draw). I would hardly doubt that this is necessarily the case. In addition, for your theory to work, y…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:25 PM
4

It‘s like an unsolvable riddle to me that people can experience themselves as conscious agents of their own fate - and at the same time think of everyone else as mindless reproduction machines that act on clearly defined evolutional triggers
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:10 PM
1

That’s completely right, I just tried to challenge the notion that the majority of people mostly rely on their ape brain when making decisions
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:06 PM
2

Wanting to have a stable and loving relationship to me sounds like a pretty big motivator to adjust your ape brain standards of a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:04 PM
2

Could be that this was a conscious decision. Reasoning doesn’t prevent people from being assholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 11:02 PM
1

Doesn’t the existence of civilization prove otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:58 PM
1

But you say, women are typically valued by their reproductive value and seek out men who are leaders instinctively. If people aren’t slaves to their instincts, what prevents women from deciding not to go after a leader type, but more after a cooperative type that matches her desire to participate in couples decision making? What prevents men from not going after the woman that looks good to pursue the one that fits their intellect?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:56 PM
2

Yeah, I found something that does work. Just being myself and treating others decent, most of the time. But the question was not if it works, the question was if you impose your view of how a man or a woman is on yourself, too, and what this makes with your view of yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:53 PM
1

But in the end, for many people, it’s reasoning that decides, even if my ape brain told my penis to form a boner, isn’t it?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:51 PM
1

Do you think wanting a relationship is a natural instinct? Or is it just society telling you that it makes you valuable your whole life? Totally with you when you say there are a lot of irrational people of every gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:49 PM
3

I never felt that I have problems with dating, so it’s not about if it works for me. It’s rather the other way round: I experience myself quite successful in dating doing the complete opposite of what pill ideology tells you to. Hence my confusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:46 PM
1

I totally understand that, as I’m the same - it’s not about putting my peepee anywhere, it’s about feeling validated because someone thinks I’m perfect to them. But I don’t think that this is some instinct, I would ascribe that desire to a higher state of consciousness.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:44 PM
1

That leads me to some additional questions: What makes you believe that you feel miserable if you get too distant to your nature? You could also say, you evolve from lower stages of consciousness to higher ones, as some philosophers assume. Second question: What makes you believe women are more emotion driven than men?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:12 PM
2

I know that Schopenhauer quote well - it could also be interpreted the other way round, as you are able to do what you actually not want to, because you’re actually not a slave to your wants. So you don't experience your behavior as restricted by social norms that are more forceful than your instincts in many ways? Why are you not in jail yet lol
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 10:03 PM
1

But in the end, you resist, don’t you? Because you think you’re better than that (and most people are). So it doesn’t really matter what your instincts say, because if you’re a fully morally developed human, they will not dictate your behavior
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 09:20 PM
6

It’s so funny when people think humans are just like animals when it comes to acting on their instincts. We are more developed creatures that have already left the cage of blindly following our instincts long ago, and this development will continue further. It’s just stupid to argue with nature, instincts and evolution when trying to explain human behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/12/21 07:46 PM
2

I’m afraid the rising consumption of these kinds of media outlets will cause more damage to the boys consuming it than to any girl.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/21 06:28 PM
0

M, 33, 15, ONS
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/21 02:37 AM
1

Is it the same type of creepiness men usually engage in or do you see some sort of special kind of female creepiness that gets overlooked mostly?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/21 04:10 PM
2

She literally said that you should judge a sexual partner by his level of trying
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/21 03:39 PM
5

Sorry, but to be honest, I’m just on this subreddit lurking for creepy questions from creepy people lol Edit: the advice was honest though
/r/seduction16/12/21 04:22 AM
34

You have to make good, meaningful and genuine connections to almost anyone you meet, if possible. Nothing will get you further in life than that.
/r/seduction16/12/21 02:32 AM
5

Of course it’s more desirable to be number two on someone’s list when their number one is never going to be available, in comparison to not being desired at all. I guess a lot of couples out there actually started as each other’s number two or three, but have settled for one another - because they found it more attractive to actually share their lives with someone than to hang on to a possible relationship that’s probably never going to materialize. They just decided to be each other’s first and…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/21 12:03 AM
1

If that fascination is somewhat life defining and the reason why you pursued your career or whatever, and these two guys were the ones that fascinated you in the beginning and made you start that kind of lifestyle, it would be justified in my view to tattoo them without glorifying them at the same time. But I can totally understand if someone would stop dating her because of that, I wouldn’t like that on my girlfriend, too. But I don’t think it’s necessarily glorifying.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 11:12 PM
0

You got the part where I said it isn’t about glorifying and thus it doesn’t really matter whether horror and serial killers are comparable or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 10:45 PM
0

Getting a tattoo of something doesn’t necessarily mean glorifying it. The whole horror subculture isn’t glorifying zombies, vampires and such and acknowledges very well that these characters cause harm to people and society. It’s just that they’re fascinated by it in some way.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 08:42 PM
1

She’s a forensic and chases criminals, I think you can forgive her on this one
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 08:14 PM
2

I think one fundamental problem a lot of people have with hypergamy as it’s proposed by TRP/BP/incels is not that it doesn’t exist, but the sharp distinction what men and women want when they engage in the dating market. Because a lot of people experience it as if both parties want the same in general: someone to share their lives with. It always sounds ridiculous to me when people want to explain social structures with evolution, as we’ve seen an absurd amount of different social structures ove…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 07:01 PM
0

Okay, then he’ll see my friends as above average as well. Maybe one or two people whose face can be seen in this picture would fit that description, in my view. The rest: Average or below.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 01:58 PM
0

Yeah, of course they’re not happy all the time, but I can tell what they’re struggling with as we talk about this stuff usually. It’s not like they’re struggling all of the time and they surely have bonding moments that provide happiness and stability, guess that’s all you can ask from most relationships in the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 02:10 AM
2

That’s a tough request - how do I find someone looking like my friends without relying on famous people whose appearance they somewhat resemble, because celebrities would be kind of better looking probably in any case. Guess you have to trust me here.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/21 12:05 AM
6

Not necessarily, though there probably will be an awful amount of couples whose enthusiasm faded over time. It’s up to both parties to prevent that.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/21 07:22 PM
4

I don’t think they’d be comfortable if I shared their pictures with strangers on the internet saying that they’re average looking. But you can’t really assume that all friends I made during my life are all above average. I’d even consider myself average.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/21 07:20 PM
8

I see average men hooking up and getting in relationships all the time. All of my friends in school and college are happily in relationships at the moment, not one is single actually. Regarding options: I’d like to add that I don’t see any value in options per se, as most people aren’t interested in any options anymore as soon as they enter a relationship. Furthermore it’s a quite abstract concept: Is an option only an option if you know of it? Or is an option theoretically any person on the pla…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/21 06:40 PM
2

Yeah, the theory also falls short in terms of different qualities of cheating and cooperating, as it’s designed to cover only one type of outcome setting (which certainly isn’t the case in reality). If my girlfriend slept with someone else, I surely wouldn’t file that under miscommunication to see if it happens again.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 10:09 PM
1

Well I would say that both parties should benefit from a relationship - and that it's totally fine to end a relationship you’re not benefiting from in any way. That’s why both parties have to make the relationship beneficiary for each other. What’s the point otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 10:05 PM
1

Yeah, I hoped to get into some discussions what parameters might be best to represent the current dating market and then draw conclusions from that. But of course you’re totally right in saying the simulation isn’t adequate in some aspects, as people over time would choose some people to interact with based on their individual experiences with them. To not knowing what the pool really looks like: Yeah, you can’t really do that. But you surely can influence what it looks like by the way you’re tr…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 09:54 PM
1

But still, most people that are dating are meeting each other usually more than once and many even more than five times, as they start a relationship at some point. That’s why they are dating: To meet someone more than once.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 09:47 PM
2

Yeah, but normally you’d be both interested in not moving on and having multiple games. If one party doesn’t get the desired outcome and moves on, that doesn’t affect the nature of dating being inherently iterative. Edit: But I totally get that for people who experience dating as a series of one-time-encounters, the dominant strategy will be cheating. That is totally the case. I think you need at least five encounters on average for that to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 09:34 PM
1

Yeah, totally agree with you. The representation isn’t really adequate in some senses, as over time in reality you would choose some people to share encounters all life long or at least for some period of time, for example. Social groups and encounters surely aren’t as arbitrarily as portrayed here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 09:23 PM
1

I failed to ask in my first comment: What makes you think that? Dating is a repeated interaction in itself, at least as I think of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 09:15 PM
2

Yeah, that’s where I was trying to get to with my post. I studied game theory and rational choice theory back in college and in the beginning, I was really stoked how it has shaken my rather simplistic view of rationality, which I feel a lot of people without this kind of education still have. It’s really a field worth looking into for everybody, though most of it isn’t really presented in such an appealing way as it is the case here 😄
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:51 PM
1

I’m glad you liked it! What were the parameters that made the Grudger the dominant strategy for your experiment?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:46 PM
1

Most of these strategies take past interactions into account. That’s why it highly matters how many rounds you play and how the population is put together. Many cheaters and few rounds produce a lot of cheaters in the end. I’m sorry if I don’t get your point really.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:23 PM
1

Actually it does, if you mean this: „Grudger: Starts with cooperate and keeps cooperating until you cheat it even once. Afterward, it always plays cheat.“ it’s the one with the cowboy hat.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:11 PM
2

I’m glad you enjoyed it! You’re right in saying that that is a big thing. But that theory doesn’t mean of course that you should just arbitrarily start trusting anyone just because they haven’t proven you otherwise, of course things like reputation and common sense still play a big role in that. To me, the point is rather that it’s not rational for you to mistrust everybody and always fear the worst, because it’s not only emotionally damaging in the long run, it’s also not very rational if you’r…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:09 PM
1

It’s not the same person necessarily, it can be any person. If you say, every time I meet someone new, I give them the benefit of the doubt, then that’s your strategy. If someone got hurt and says they won’t trust anyone anymore without deep vetting, that’s another strategy. Depending on the structure of the population these encounters happen in, one strategy can lead to better outcomes for you than the other. In another setting it can totally be the other way round with the same strategies. I’m…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 08:03 PM
1

If there would be no iterations, yes. If you play the game five times in row, you can adjust your behavior based on previous experiences and expected outcomes, which can differ. Then you have a strategy. If you just look at the prisoners dilemma as a one-time-encounter, then you are right, as there is only one dominant strategy.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:59 PM
1

That’s right, nonetheless there still are people who are like that and adapt that as a strategy, because being hurt once prevents them from trusting anyone. It’s not a smart strategy, it’s just one strategy out of others
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:55 PM
1

They are symmetric in their options and their outcomes, not necessarily in their strategy to deal with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:41 PM
1

Yeah, that is another finding of the simulator - one strategy is cooperating until anybody cheats on you. After that you’ll cheat on everybody else. If you’ve tried it in the simulation, you’ve seen the bad outcomes for that strategy
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:41 PM
1

That's not right actually. And the possible strategies are more complex, as you can cheat in one iteration and cooperate in the next - and you can base your decision on how you have been treated in the past. There are actually four or five different strategies possible in the simulator
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:38 PM
1

No, it just presumes that both sides have the same options, they don't have to act the same in reality
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:36 PM
2

You should really try the simulator 😄
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:30 PM
1

I guess the word cheating here misleads you - it’s a theoretical term here that just means not cooperating, it’s not cheating as in infidelity
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:27 PM
3

That’s actually exactly what this theory states, just less technically put. Have trust in one another and don’t expect the other party to go in advance, just go in advance yourself. Most of the time you’ll meet people that are worth it - and don’t let the ones who aren’t guide you to mistrust everybody. The theory is just the mathematical explanation of why that is the rational thing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:25 PM
1

It’s actually not just dating, for me it applies to every symmetrical encounter with people. If you want it to sound less technical, you could say it’s rational to trust people and think they have good intentions as long as they don’t prove you otherwise - and therefore be kind and forgiving to them, even if they make mistakes sometimes. Don’t know what’s wrong with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:20 PM
5

I was using the term "cheat" in the game theory sense, which just means to not cooperate.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:13 PM
2

Take for example the situation where a woman cancels a date with a shitty explanation. If this just happens once, it might be that the shitty explanation actually is true, even though I’d suspect a lie. If it happens twice or more often, I wouldn’t be so trustful anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:10 PM
3

You can account for that in the simulator by reducing the number of iterations
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 07:08 PM
1

Yeah, I just undermined your argument by saying, you can’t say anything about the reasons behind not having as much sex as before besides what you maybe have experienced yourself (which will be a quite small sample size). You can now go on saying: But I know it! And that will be the end of our debate.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 03:54 PM
0

Normally you’d have to provide evidence to make a statement, not the person that contradicts your view. Additionally, even if you had evidence that couples have less sex after marriage (and I wouldn’t even reject that notion on average), then that is still not enough evidence to state that women use sex to get married and hence are less likely to provide that after they got what they wanted. Could be a variety of factors that account for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 03:06 PM
0

My man, why don’t you just conduct such a study yourself before making bold statements about everyone else’s sex life?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/12/21 02:51 PM
2

Pre marital relationships are only bad for people who completely rightfully fear that they’ll be missing out if everyone’s free to choose at any point in time
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 11:47 PM
1

There’s one big problem I have with these kinds of societal-level-arguments: They propose that people 1) know deeply about the dynamics of the dating market, 2) have a clear goal of what they want to get out of a relationship and 3) make their decisions purely rationally to optimize their outcome. It’s the same when someone is building his economical argument around the existence of a fictional homo oeconomicus. It’s just a thought experiment that doesn’t represent real humans and is used best o…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 06:56 PM
0

Well we have that situation, don’t we? No one will ever get shamed for not marrying someone. No one should get shamed for being in a relationship with an age/cultural/educational/whatever gap between the two partners (though I’ll agree with you that this happens a lot of times - I guess it’s just not a gender issue, as some men criticize that frequently, too). Nobody should get shamed for their sexual preferences, as long as they are practiced in a way that doesn’t harm anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 06:40 PM
4

If there were some women that won’t do the things you enlisted here, would you be willing to behave differently towards them, despite not seeing any broad change in societal norms in general?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 06:35 PM
1

Reality just proves you wrong, because sexual attraction is not the solely deciding factor whether a woman will start a family with a man today (and it never was). The notion that women choose their partners based purely on sexual desire is just plain fiction. They take into account a lot of things, so do many men. The majority of men today are not sexless their whole life. And the minority of men you’d probably describe as alpha isn’t that homogeneous either, there will be quite a lot of men wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 06:32 PM
1

Won’t work really, as sex work is something that is not really scalable. You’ll always need at least round about one worker to serve one customer, thus you can’t really lever that much synergies (besides rent for example, which is why there are brothels already). Think of it like the barber business, which is one of the few industries that, in their core, haven’t been affected by digitalization in any way yet. That might change with robots in the future. Which is why it is far more likely that c…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/21 05:48 PM
1

They’re both bullshit concepts
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 11:22 PM
1

I guess he was questioning that women get by better without sexual intimacy. That he had sex phobia just accounts for the fact that they hadn’t sex and would leave him because of that, regardless of the intimacy they got otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 06:41 PM
4

Well I was silently implying that you have talked with your partner about the things that bother you before starting that thought process, of course. But the thought „After all: Is it better to end the relationship?“ itself is not something that you would have communicate about, because as you said, the needs of your partner don’t matter in that decision making process.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 05:21 PM
7

In what way is that manipulative if someone takes his time to make a well thought out decision? Thoughts can be volatile.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 05:05 PM
6

I don’t think that you should communicate every doubt you have. It’s perfectly normal to question a relationship from time to time and I guess it can be quite hard to clearly identify the moment when a spontaneous thought has to become a decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 04:48 PM
1

It’s funny that I actually work as a reporter for a business newspaper, I think you brought me to an idea here…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 04:23 PM
1

When I was 20, I also wanted to have a girlfriend who’s hot and that wants to have sex oftentimes. Now I’m in my thirties and I would say that sexual energy is still important to me, but it’s not the only decisive factor - and I can certainly live with someone who may not be smoking hot, but whom I still feel attracted to. Will my future relationships feel as passionate as the ones in my younger years? Probably not, because you can’t compare any partner to your first real love, because the feeli…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 02:16 AM
1

I don’t know man, the examples you’ve given here could easily be covered by a women who is ashamed of her sexuality and therefore lies about it. Or by a woman that doesn’t really know the exact amount of sexual partners she had without giving it a longer thought (an issue I totally can relate to, I couldn’t name the exact number without thinking and counting in my mind, either). Or a woman who has experienced something negative that makes her not want to do it again (e. g. one night stands). My …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 01:18 AM
1

I still don’t get how you 1) get that information and 2) can interpret it accordingly. You’d have to talk to your partner and they had to openly admit that they like something and openly refuse it when doing it with you, while still having more or less enthusiastic sex with you, because if not, you’d just notice their lack of attraction by them not having sex with you. I’d go for sexual enthusiasm to assess my partners sexual attraction towards me. I can’t imagine how I‘d get to the knowledge ab…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 12:31 AM
2

I will totally agree with you that there are a lot of marriages where sexual attraction fades over the course of time - and I totally agree that one indicator for that is less frequent sex and less sexual enthusiasm than in the beginning of that relationship. I’m also totally with you that this is something that should catch your attention, as it’s a sign that you should communicate with your partner what’s going wrong. I just have the feeling that this something entirely different than what has…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/21 12:04 AM
2

No, I don’t question that people get into relationships for ulterior motives. I’m questioning that you should use sexual favors that your girlfriend has done in the past in comparison to you as measure of what her level of general attraction is because it’s a shitty measure, for a lot of reasons. You can’t really say if she’s not doing sex or whatever with you out of a lack of attraction as there might be other reasons. And you can’t really say if she’s doing it with you out of attraction, as he…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 10:45 PM
2

That’s the case if one of the two partners mistakes a friendship for a romantic relationship - and you will know it because there’s no sexual attraction at all, hence she doesn’t want to sleep with you. The thing is, a lot of people seem to confuse the things a partner is willing to do with sexual enthusiasm. If you take sexual enthusiasm as a measure of sexual attraction, that would be totally fine, as there’s a causation between the two. But there’s not necessarily a causation between enthusia…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 10:22 PM
2

Yeah, but if you have a girlfriend that is not interested in you being happy, you have a problem in general. Because of your girlfriend being not attracted to you in general, not just sexually. And I doubt that a lot of people enjoy sex with someone they’re not attracted to in general and sexually. So it won’t matter to them if they have sex with you or give you a BJ or whatever if they just do it to keep you around. If that’s the deal with your relationship - take the 80 year old and the 20 yea…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 09:29 PM
1

How would the women in that case would react when asked about vanilla sex? And why would she do that and no BJs? Because we agreed on BJs not being more intimate, so there wouldn’t be any more investment from here in doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 09:11 PM
2

Yeah, but again, that’s not limited to sexual favors. It applies to favors in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 09:01 PM
2

I myself try to live by double-tit-for-tat, which works extraordinarily fine for me, if you’re interested in that personal single case study. And I have studied mathematical philosophy myself, so I make those decisions consciously. But you are so spot on with the prisoners dilemma and the dating market and the problems a lot of people have: it’s lack of trust that leads to miscommunication and people making stupid decisions because of that. As I said, double-tit-for-tat worked so well for me, I …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 08:35 PM
2

That is right, it has something to do with how keen your partner is to comfort you. And if your partner doesn’t try to comfort you, then something is going wrong with your relationship. But that is a very broad statement that could apply to every giving and taking in the relationship. So you could say: If your girlfriend doesn’t care for your wellbeing in general, she seems to be not attracted to you. If your girlfriend is trying to comfort you in any way but sexually, she’s probably caring for …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 08:30 PM
1

The concern I have here is this: It’s not more intimate to have anal with someone than to just have sex. It’s not more intimate if I get a blowjob. It’s not really more of a sacrifice for someone who doesn’t hate blowjobs to give it to someone who they’re less attracted to. The attraction threshold will most likely be the same, given there’s no reason someone rejects said practices in general (which would hold them from doing it with Chad, too).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 08:13 PM
1

A man seeing a 16 year old would be perfectly fine in my country, as it’s legal to have sex with anyone the time you’re 16. When talking about pedophiles, I’d think of way younger people.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 06:36 PM
2

But why is the women the problem here? Why is it not the bad guy that chooses to not take care of his child? Of course you can say to that woman: You should’ve been more careful, it was obvious that this guy wasn’t going to stick around - but in the end, it’s the guys fault, that is even literally why you would call him the bad guy. Why don’t say: Deadbeat fathers hurt society, they are bad, so we should hold all parents accountable for fostering their child? Why is it the woman you’re targeting…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 06:34 PM
2

Pedophilia harms an innocent person on an individual level, that is why it’s wrong. On the other side, e. g. sleeping with bad boys: There are a whole lot of personal decisions society tolerates because they are perceived as a matter personal freedom - regardless if there are negative outcomes for society as a whole. Take legal drugs like alcohol and nicotine: It harms society as it reduces the workforce and destroys families, it’s harmful for social systems as they have to bear more incapable p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 06:21 PM
3

No, the problem with pedophiles is not that it would be inherently bad if they’d fulfill their sexual needs, the problem is that there is no situation in which they can do so with someone that is mentally able to consent. So it’s a very special situation. Opposed to that is a women who prefers bad boys: It’s just two adults who want to have consensual sex with each other. None of anyone’s business in my view. Why should society care?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 06:07 PM
3

Everyone who has sex with someone else without their consent should be held accountable for that. If someone just happens to be pedophile and doesn’t act on that in any way, I don’t think that person should be held accountable for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 05:08 PM
1

Point is: There are people in society that think sexual preferences are not something you can be held accountable for. Just like you can’t be held accountable for homosexuality, in my view. Of course there may be effects on society, but you can’t choose who you are in that sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 04:55 PM
2

Well the authorities in homophobic jurisdictions will think the same about the treatment they’re offering - and they will gladly explain to you how homosexual relationships harm society, just as you did with promiscuous women
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 04:47 PM
1

Man, there are circumstances in which it is justified to lie to avoid unjustified treatment by others. Think of people being homosexual in countries where that behavior is forbidden. Don’t you think they’re right to lie when asked by someone if they are gay?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/21 04:41 PM
1

It might be that women are more likely to believe that the marriage will last forever - and therefore take offense in just thinking about what might happen if that’s not the case. It might be that the majority of women won’t be as hurt financially by a divorce as their husbands, which is why they wouldn’t just think about a prenup if the man doesn’t address the topic. It might certainly be that some women are hostile toward prenups because they don’t fit their plans of abusing their husbands fin…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 07:11 PM
2

It does not reveal what you postulate. It just reveals that women are more hostile towards prenups, statistically. There are at least a dozen possible explanations for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 07:03 PM
2

Never heard of that problem, really. Of course sexual attraction can and will temporarily fade over the course of years (if it fades permanently, I’d be worried, at least at my age), but if there are two people that truly love each other, there will be heavy sexual energy, at least in the beginning - and from then it’s some work for both to maintain it, to a certain degree. Why would the women go for someone she’s not that attracted to in the first place? Or, if she really loves him, why wouldn’…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 01:42 AM
1

What you call less sexual attraction in this example, I’d call maybe just "sexual tolerance" - and I do not think there are a lot of girls that would start a relationship with somebody they just sexually tolerate. It happens, yeah, with millionaires, because they get something in exchange for living without sexual pleasure. But most guys won’t be able to supply that, especially the guys you’d think of when someone speaks of BB.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 01:28 AM
1

If there is any sexual attraction and I love my partner and want his needs to be met, I will also do stuff I maybe don’t imagine I’d like that much (of course within certain boundaries). But this doesn’t have anything to do with my sexual attraction, but more with me trying to care for my partner. I‘m a guy and I never experienced the problem that my partner wouldn’t try something out with me if I suggested that. But at the same time I wouldn’t be remorseful if my partner did deny in some cases.…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 01:01 AM
2

You are describing a type of woman that is knowingly entering a relationship without feeling any sexual attraction towards her future partner? If that’s the case, I’d say that is a very minor problem only a few millionaires maybe will ever experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/21 12:46 AM
1

Don’t do it - and in what way is talking about kinky sex and cuddling turning up the heat just a pinch? Sounds like a rush to me
/r/seduction08/12/21 09:14 PM
1

I don’t really know actually. The times I have been in love it surely felt like I have met someone perfect. And by perfect I don’t mean that in the technical sense, it’s just what could be described with rose colored glasses. Of course, in the long run, you’ll inevitably start to view your relationships more realistically. But that magical Disney moment, it exists, at least in my experience. Although you shouldn’t be surprised when that feeling fades, as that is perfectly normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 09:05 PM
4

I‘m from Germany, it’s probably different here, as unemployment rates are low and even low-income jobs can pay for a stable life. (Edit: And it’s not uncommon for men to visit a therapist here as it’s free of charge - mind I am talking about urban areas here.)
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 08:42 PM
4

Yeah, but they talk as if these kinds of men were unicorns, when there are actually a whole lot of them around.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 08:34 PM
1

I’d advise people to use the term generally in the broader meaning, as it makes it clearer that it’s not a problem to discriminate in general - you just have to be transparent why you chose the criteria you chose and justify that decision. This narrow understanding of discrimination encourages people to misinterpret you on purpose, as they’d often say: Isn’t this and that discrimination, too, then? Well yeah, it is, but the problem is not discrimination itself, it’s the reasons you do it for.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 07:27 PM
-1

Actually it is a discrimination, as the word in general just accounts for differentiation concerning different categories. Whether it’s a unjustified discrimination is the question here. I wouldn’t say it is, though. If you date only certain types of people, you discriminate in a justified way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 05:43 PM
2

Depends on the employee aka partner you’re looking for. If you’re looking for a self-reliant mature and inspiring person, you’d prefer the second person. If you’re just looking for someone who’s clueless and won’t protest being abused, you’d take the first person. Which again says a lot about the guy who made that analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/21 03:31 AM
7

I am in a relationship already, but actually I would really prefer not dating a virgin (would be hard in my age group anyways). Otherwise I don’t care about her n count, I care about my needs being met to a reasonable amount - whether it be sexually or in any other sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 11:00 PM
12

Guess he means that you were willing to harm yourself when you were young because you didn’t know better or had no better choices, but now that you’re older, you got picky. He sees the man as your employer in that case, which speaks legion about his view of the relationship between men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 10:55 PM
7

Oh god, what? I’m just saying that I tried a lot of different stuff sexually and I know what I like. That’s the measurement a partner should meet, set aside some probable compromises (of course I don’t need all of my sexual needs to be met, I’m perfectly fine with a sufficient share of them). Not what they did with previous partners. If I met a woman who doesn’t have as much experience and would want to try out something I experienced not liking at all, I probably wouldn’t do that and be upfront…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 10:51 PM
5

I am a guy
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 10:36 PM
4

You would totally think different about it if you would have tried all that stuff already yourself. The willingness to try out things is not what I’m looking for in a partner, at least not anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 10:27 PM
1

Not automatically. If she otherwise engages with great pleasure in sexual activities with you, it’s more likely that the reason for not doing xy is something else than her not being into you.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/21 02:19 PM
2

Why don’t you just want what you actually want? Why does Chad matter that much in the equation? If I get what I want, I’m fine, if I don’t get what I want, not fine. And no one wants to get played on - so, if you'd say, I want a partner that’s sexually attracted to me and shows it frequently, I guess the vast majority of people would relate to that. And if you’d say, if a partner isn’t engaging as enthusiastically in sex with me than they did with former partners, that’s a sign for them not bein…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 06:22 PM
6

But why does it matter more to you what Chad got than what you want personally? If you don’t want dirty bar sex, why would you care if she gave it to her exes and won’t give it to you? If you wouldn’t want to wait three months, why would it be okay if Chad also had to wait three months? My sexual preferences are absolute and aren’t defined in relation to what other people desire and do.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:58 PM
4

But then again, they wouldn’t like to have normal sex either. And the problem here is that they’re not into me, not that they refuse to do sexual stuff with me they did with their exes.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:21 PM
1

Yeah, in that very hypothetical situation I can see why you’d say that. But I guess that guy should ask himself if he’s really willing to tolerate a relationship where his sexual needs aren’t met in the first place. Sounds like settling to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:16 PM
6

I asked that because when I read ridiculous general assumptions about the opposite gender (i. e. that women in general will refuse to do kinky things they like with people they have sex with), I always ask myself if it’s some sort of projection. I just can’t think of a situation where I’d have sex with someone but refuse to do kinky stuff I really like. Either I don’t find somebody attractive and refuse to have sex with them at all or I find someone attractive and I’d do all the things that plea…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:13 PM
1

Yeah, I find that quite strange - mainly because some men seem to be willing to compromise sexually, if the conditions are right.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:05 PM
3

Why would you try and match her energy? Why not just leave if she doesn’t match your energy? And with the BJs: Why does it matter if she did it to her exes? Wouldn’t you just leave, too, if she never gave any BJs and refused to do so with you, too? So how does it change anything if she just refuses to do it with you? Sounds like the outcome would be the same in both options.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 05:03 PM
3

Do you feel the same with women? Are there women you’re into and you’d say, okay, I’d do this and that with them, but I wouldn’t do these things to a less attractive women, though I’d have vanilla sex with her?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 04:59 PM
4

The thing is, most people that answered don’t care what happened in past relationships, as long as their needs are met. They are fine with inconsistencies in sexual behavior as long as the current state pleases them. In my view, too, sex is a way to give and receive pleasure - I don’t use it as a measurement tool for the sexual attraction my partner feels towards me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 04:54 PM
1

Have you ever heard of comparative cost advantage? David Ricardo? If not, you should. It absolutely doesn’t have to be that one is taking more than the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 02:52 PM
2

It is an abbreviation for „alpha fucks/beta bucks“ which describes the red pill belief that women would feel sexual arousal only for physical attractive men while they still were willing to go into a relationship with a physically not-so-desirable man, but only for financial reasons. Which then supposedly leads to a sexless marriage and cheating wives. I don’t share that view though.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 02:27 AM
1

I guess it’s because eros is widely perceived as something people can’t control and typically get overwhelmed by. Of course that’s not true for everybody, but that’s the typical way that feeling of eros is portrayed mostly (in TV, literature and so on). Whereas the pragma kind of love is one that doesn’t sound special at first glance, as it mostly requires work, dedication and communication skills. I think most people today want both: Start off with eros and build pragma from then. It’s surely n…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 01:08 AM
1

I, too, believe that two people can build a life around that pragma (thanks for the terms by the way, I looked them and the other five up and find all of them very helpful in shaping my thoughts). But the problem is, someone who has experienced eros kind of love with someone else will always feel that he or she is settling when trying to build a pragma kind of love with somebody they don’t feel erotical attraction to. That’s why they are looking for someone who hasn’t experienced eros, preferabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/21 12:15 AM
1

That is right, the point I was going to with the arranged marriages was that, when you had a relationship based on love before, you wouldn’t want an arranged marriage after that. If your idea of pair bonding is merely to build a family with anyone who doesn’t violate minimal standards of decency, then you probably should look for someone who hasn’t ever fallen in love before. The reason why I put virgin and low n count in the same category here is because in general, both don’t know how much peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/21 11:51 PM
1

They’d usually answer that the ability to pair bond is flawed with women with a high n count - because in their ideology, pair bonding means the endeavor of forming a lifelong bond with anyone, regardless of compatibility. In that sense they share an ideological aspect with societies where arranged marriages are the norm. And yes, I guess if you had relationships based on love before, you wouldn’t want to try and pair bond with just anyone just because they’re of your sexually desired gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/21 11:04 PM
2

I agree with you in that there certainly are valid situations where someone has the preference of only dating someone with a low n count or someone who doesn’t value casual sex. But I get the impression that for a lot of dudes who say they’d only marry a virgin, they just want a partner who can’t compare them to previous partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/21 10:45 PM
12

You described the problem exactly in your second paragraph. The whole AF/BB fear and the desire for a partner with low n count are deeply rooted in trust problems, in my view. If you really trust your partner, you wouldn’t think of them settling for you, as you would perceive their affection automatically as genuine.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/21 09:07 PM
2

I think it’s mostly a diversity issue in your peer group when you’re young. I’ve had female friends since kindergarten, so I learned pretty early that people with a vagina don’t differ from me in any other aspect (at least in average). I guess you can observe the same regarding xenophobia, which is much more common in areas where almost no foreign inhabitants exist - such as many rural places. Another area where you can observe that effect is when someone from a lower social class meets someone …
/r/seduction26/11/21 07:31 PM
3

In the end, it all comes down to a lack of trust. I wholeheartedly agree with you, that is completely my observation, too. I‘m a person that can trust quite easily, so I never really had a problem in dating. And it’s actually the rational thing to do, if you follow actual research on game theory (the philosophical discipline, not this dating game crap).
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/21 05:20 PM
4

„Hi, what has been going on lately, would you like to grab a coffee some time“ Edit: If you really wanna do that, I’d suggest that you do not mention that your breakup is just days ago, as that would rightfully creep off anybody who’s interested in more than casual sex - otherwise you should be fine anyway
/r/seduction25/11/21 01:16 AM
19

Just invite her to do something, she’ll surely ask what has been going on lately and then you tell her that you’re single now. And then proceed based on how she reacts to that.
/r/seduction25/11/21 12:47 AM
2

I am really curious bc of your wording: Do you only have sex with men that are sterilized or have some condition that makes them infertile? Or do you just prefer women?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/21 10:33 PM
1

And what rhetorical device were you using exactly when you call called Netflix your primary source of information? Edit: I’m sorry, I’m trolling you for a while now, let’s just part ways, didn’t mean it a mean way.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:56 AM
1

Well you sure should have a look at their sarcasm masterclass
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:52 AM
1

Watched the series
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:50 AM
1

I can clearly see that, the Vikings probably wouldn’t have liked it either
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:41 AM
1

That’s not a very liberal standpoint. I’d rather get to choose my fights myself - and if I don’t see the need to fight, won’t fight.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:36 AM
1

Guess it was hard to be tough enough for a transatlantic ride on a shitty boat also back then. The number of applicants is so low mainly because most men just today don’t fit the requirements. That’s actually not indicating a lack of possibilities to be a man (in the obviously very archaic sense that you use the term). If you like to go to Valhalla, train your body and mind and get fit enough to join the FFL or to climb Mount Everest or to partake in Mixed Martial Arts or whatever. The only diff…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:30 AM
1

Ever heard of the French Foreign Legion?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:21 AM
1

Well I guess even the Vikings didn’t do the most basic shit the most dangerous way back then (assuming, although they believed in Valhalla, they haven’t been idiots). So they wouldn’t whine about transatlantic ship travel becoming less dangerous, they’d just risk their lives otherwise, if necessary. Fortunately, with still many, many wars going on around the world, people today still can partake in life-risking fights, if they like to try and go to Valhalla. I’d guess anybody looking for a good …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:17 AM
1

Yeah and my point was that his ancestors probably wouldn’t be ashamed of him, they’d be amazed by the modern possibilities he has that don’t require him to risk his life just to get to another continent. By the way there are still a lot of other courageous and gritty things to do for modern men, the bar is just higher. Take flying to outer space or jumping from the stratosphere with only a parachute, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/21 01:00 AM
1

Well I guess it’s an achievement then to not be able to build a boat that’s better than these that we have today, isn’t it
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/21 11:22 PM
7

What makes you think that if you have great sex with a women, she’ll be yours forever, while the opposite is not the case? I personally would rather go with the assumption, great sex is surely something that you’ll remember (regardless of gender), but it’s not like it’s some magical thing that gets women being possessed with you.
/r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen01/11/21 03:27 PM
11

I had to learn it’s not about wallowing, it’s more that many women I’ve met wanted to make sure that they’re right in their feelings somehow - and then, after they’ve sort of "felt" through the situation, they’ll figure out a solution themselves. They don’t need you to solve the situation, they need you to support them emotionally and to assure them they’re not alone, most of the times. I wonder if this miscommunication arises so frequently because men are socially expected to be problem-solving…
/r/seduction29/10/21 06:10 PM
34

I find it really hard to give proper emotional support sometimes. When a woman tells me about something that bothers her, my immediate reaction is to look for a solution, present it and expect the situation to be dealt with accordingly. Most of the times, though, the woman isn’t really asking for an advice but rather for a validation of her feelings from a different person, meaning someone to tell her that the way she’s feeling is adequate and relatable. Took many years until I got that and I st…
/r/seduction29/10/21 01:57 PM
9

Absolutely this. I have had sex with several women and as I experienced it, every one of them was turned on by something different. And I don’t really get why it should be otherwise when it comes to penis size or what to do with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/21 11:03 PM
3

I think the main difference to TRP ideology is my conviction that women are people the same as members of every other gender are, and that all people are individual in their own way. There may be some observable characteristics in what certain demographics typically look for in a partner (which differs also between the types of partnerships that are pursued) - but that doesn’t mean that you can draw any conclusions from that, if you have a person in front of you to deal with. That being said, I …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/21 01:19 AM
0

They’re objectively measurable but that doesn’t say anything about their value to a specific person. Like, a divorced guy with two kids from his first marriage might not mind dating someone who also has children - and he’s probably looking for something else than fertility when searching for a partner
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 03:12 PM
1

But in the end, you have to be desirable to the one you want to be with - not to an anonymous idea of an average women that might just not exist in her ideal form in reality
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 03:45 AM
1

That’s not what I’m saying, for the sake of the argument I’m willing to accept the notion of the dating market as some sort of trade-off system. I’m just saying that these trade-offs are more complex than most of what I’ve read about that in the TRP context.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 03:42 AM
1

Sorry English is not my mother tongue
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 03:17 AM
1

It does maybe for a start, but on its own, it’s certainly not sufficient. If you’re saying that being sexual attractive increases your chances to get into a relationship, then that might be the case - although I’m not sure if that makes you more likely to meet the one you want to be with
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/21 12:45 AM
1

But don’t these memories affect your preferences in life and in a partner? I mean sure, everyone would think of Megan Fox as hot for example, but that doesn’t say anything about whether I would want to be in a relationship with her
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 11:28 PM
2

Yeah, but attention alone doesn’t get you love or relationships, that was my point
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 10:52 PM
1

That’s interesting thanks
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 10:47 PM
1

Well, as you say, my behaviour patterns can be heavily influenced by many factors, which makes them automatically very unique over a course of time. In its nuances it is even like a fingerprint, considering the unique experiences every human makes. That may sound like a romance novel to you, but what strikes me more is the fact that you don’t perceive yourself that way. Don’t you think that your unique memories make you sort of special and unique?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 10:47 PM
2

I totally agree with you that you‘d probably become more visible to many people given the features you named. But they won’t get you love or a relationship in any way
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 10:18 PM
1

But aren’t you unique and special, too? In the way you would like a relationship to be and in the view of who‘d make a fit? Or is it just like: I don‘t care as long as she‘s 7/10, has had X sexual partners and is willing to bear my children? I‘d think anyone would agree that a relationship that’s based on more than that is preferable, which at some point makes it a very individual constellation of criteria on both sides (note that I‘m talking about relationships here). I get the point it’s heuri…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 10:10 PM
1

But actually personalities do attract people - maybe not when you're talking about casual sex, but even that might occur. Sometimes people even are attracted to you just because you remind them of people - in the way you move or talk or like something for example. Definitely experienced that.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 09:48 PM
-1

Well what I‘m trying to point out is the subjectivity of the term status which is in my opinion way more complex than you are suggesting right now. Also the notion that humans have two arms and legs is also undercomplex as there are humans who don’t have these.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 09:41 PM
2

I don’t think it has a good predictive power in a any specific situation, I guess you could just compare it to roulette where a certain trend can be observed after an absurdly long series of repetitions, but that doesn’t help you at all to predict the outcome when you place your chips for that outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 08:33 PM
1

But even the assumption it would be best for men to get the most casual sex they can doesn’t fit reality - and I‘ve read a lot from TRPers where they were basically saying true love can’t exist because of the dynamics described by TRP. Which is wrong, I would say. So yes, they might be true about some dynamics behind casual sex, but surely not about love in general and how it can be established.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:52 PM
1

I‘ll have a look and get back to you, thanks
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:46 PM
5

Well, I doubt it‘s just outliers, I think the vast majority of people has a very complex set of preferences that they‘re probably not even aware of themselves - which would make it very hard to make general assumptions about this, if anyone would try to do that 👀
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:25 PM
5

But nobody needs assumptions that are so undercomplex that they don‘t represent anything near reality, either.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:21 PM
2

Of course anyone would come up with a model to make general assumptions about reality that blend out irrelevant factors. But if you take a look at the complexity of an average economic model these days, that differs wildly from anything I‘ve ever seen in the TRP context. It‘s like people talking about the homo oeconomicus as if it was a real thing observable in reality, when the model itself doesn‘t teach you anything about real people (and no serious economist would argue that most people would…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:20 PM
-1

I get that, as there might be some components to value that a sufficient large number of individuals might agree on, in general. But there will almost certainly be other components that are completely individual (and sometimes even won‘t be completely rational), let alone the differences in geographic and demographic aspects. I think it would be really interesting and insightful to quantificate the dating market like that, but I don‘t really think that would work out on a global scale, especiall…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 07:07 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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