TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

pleantrees Archive

View 10 posts and 150 comments by pleantrees on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
308

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 06:27 PM
300

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 01:44 AM
264

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:19 PM
244

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 07:20 PM
244

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 10:55 PM
83

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 11:44 PM
4

Question For Womenpleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 12:38 PM
1

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:06 PM
1

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:11 PM
1

Sciencepleantrees/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/20 09:28 PM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

If you think this study is suggesting that women don't "rarely if ever 'enjoy' sexual harassment" then you're probably misinterpreting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/20 12:25 AM
1

Feel free to voice your concerns to the author. I shared it because I found the study interesting enough, and it helps establish a counterpoint that sexual harassment may not be universally despised among women, especially when considering contextual factors.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 11:31 PM
1

I do not know if the type of harassment was explicit in the survey questions, but the participants were asked about their experienced frequenies of different types of sexual harassment (and even assault).
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 11:27 PM
1

I'm not being ignorant about anything, I'm simply explaining the results of this study. This study explains the types of harassment surveyed. I've already linked them in this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 08:58 PM
1

I'm not arguing that there aren't better study models. This particular study was just a fairly easy way to get a large sample size of responses about the opinions of women regarding sexual harassment. And it discovered that a majority of women hold the opinion that sexual harassment can be made more enjoyable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 08:55 PM
1

I discuss this here https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9ugcy1/ It’s possible that it’s more enjoyable to be harassed by an attractive man than an ugly one but that doesn’t mean that I enjoy being harassed it really doesn’t mean anything because it’s a complete hypothetical Again, this relies on the possibility that sexual harassment can even be more enjoyable. To some women (46%), it can't, according to the study.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 06:05 AM
1

At that point it's a matter of determining how "bad" the sexual harassment is and determining how "good" the conditions are. I'm still struggling to imagine that the majority of women could consider sexual harassment to be objectively horrible yet still consider some of the various conditions to make the experience "more enjoyable." If sexual harassment is such a heinous act, then it wouldn't even make sense to put the concept of "enjoyment" in the same sentence, and women would negatively respo…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 06:02 AM
1

The study does not make it very clear if the survey asked for "enjoyment" or "more enjoyment." But it's one of those two, based on the fact that both are mentioned interchangeably. I agree that the study would be more robust if they actually tried to gauge the level of enjoyment for each condition. However, I have difficulty believing that (assuming the survey specified "more enjoyment" rather than "enjoyment") women would indicate "more enjoyment" for a condition that was not at all enjoyable f…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 03:23 AM
1

That's right, the study was testing which conditions could make sexual harassment more enjoyable, and it found that some can, substantially.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 02:33 AM
2

None is an absolute statement, but we have no idea how they felt about harassment anyway so it's meaningless, they can only hypothesise. We know that only 46% of the participants found it impossible to enjoy sexual harassment under the provided criteria... Why are you now trying to type things that I clearly have not written. But yes, the study literally and objectively supports that sexual harassment by younger and attractive men can be more enjoyable to women. Did you not read the post?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 01:04 AM
2

No, there is no approaching "none" in more than one way. If 100% of women viewed sexual harassment as being impossible to enjoy, then 100% of the participants would have selected "none of the above," but only 46% did. "None" is an absolute statement, not a spectrum.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 12:56 AM
2

I would say this is a a bit of a stretch. Making X more enjoyable may not automatically cross the threshold to someone enjoying X. 46% of participants selecting "none of the above" clearly indicates that none of the previous options increased their enjoyment. The other 54% of participants clearly did not view "none of the above" of the previous options as not increasing enjoyment, which was why they did not select the "none of the above" option...
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/20 12:51 AM
1

The full table lists all the possible options as to how the majority (54%) could find sexual harassment to be more enjoyable. 46% flat out said that none of the above options would increase their enjoyment (but it's worth noting that there could be other, unlisted, options that would...).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 10:17 PM
2

This study only assessed harassment (and even physical assault). No implications of flirting were asked in the survey. Experiences with stranger harassment were assessed using the modified version of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ; Fitzgerald et al. 1995) developed by Fairchild and Rudman (2008). Participants first responded ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ to having ever experienced nine different behaviors from strangers that ranged in severity from unwanted sexual attention to forceful fondling (…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 10:15 PM
0

Experiences with stranger harassment were assessed using the modified version of the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ; Fitzgerald et al. 1995) developed by Fairchild and Rudman (2008). Participants first responded ‘‘yes’’ or ‘‘no’’ to having ever experienced nine different behaviors from strangers that ranged in severity from unwanted sexual attention to forceful fondling (e.g., ‘‘Have you ever experienced unwanted sexual attention or interaction from a stranger?’’; Have you ever experience…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 10:08 PM
5

Considering 54% of participants indicated that sexual harassment could be made more enjoyable (under the correct conditions, such as physical attractiveness), I have a hard time believing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 10:02 PM
2

but you're the one defending it I'm literally sharing the results of the study against many people in this thread misinterpreting it. unenjoyable, but less so under x circumstances It's either more enjoyable or not. If they did not find the situation to be more enjoyable as a result, then they logically would not have selected that option.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:57 PM
4

As already pointed out by many 3/4 of women don’t enjoy sexual harassment, regardless of the perceived attractiveness of the perpetrator. And as pointed out by me in response to everyone incorrectly pointing that out... https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9sl0r6/ Additionally this study doesn’t even have a definition of what sexual harassment is. So we maybe have some women thinking that they should count cat calling as harassme…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:52 PM
4

All this tells me is that the researchers failed to use appropriate language and metrics for discerning between actual enjoyment The survey literally asked participants what would "increase their fear, enjoyment, and likelihood to verbally respond to a typical stranger harassment situation." At this point are you even arguing with me or are you arguing against Kimberly Fairchild's methodology? It seems like you are progressively shifting away from me being at fault here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:48 PM
3

Not according to the study. Sexual harassment was the applied term.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:42 PM
1

Participants responded to the contextual factors by selecting as many of the sixteen factors (or ‘‘none’’) that would likely increase their fear, enjoyment, and likelihood to verbally respond to a typical stranger harassment situation. Table 2 displays the percentages of participants who selected each of the sixteen items or ‘‘none.’’ https://i.imgur.com/4bYERyn.png Use your noggin.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:35 PM
7

Edit: nvm I guess 3/4 of women don’t even like it if he’s hot. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9sl0r6/
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:30 PM
3

The implication is that age is correlated with physical attractiveness (older individuals are deemed less attractive). You conveniently left off the third factor (which certain studies show may correlate with women's perception of physical attractiveness)...
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:07 PM
2

This study made no attempt to test "consensual" sexual harassment.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 09:05 PM
5

Yes, it's entirely possible that when taking the survey, participants did not accurately press all the right buttons and responses to indicate their actual preferences. Using this logic, you may as well discard any study because you lack faith in the participants to answer extensively, completely, and honestly. Without an explicit answer from that 54% We explicitly know that 54% of the participants did not indicate that sexual harassment could not be made more enjoyable. If they had felt that se…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:53 PM
6

You are failing to use common sense. If only 46% indicated that there was nothing that could make harassment more enjoyable, then clearly the remaining 54% believe that something could make the experience enjoyable, which was the entire purpose of the study.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:49 PM
3

No, the researches never got a 54% respondent number - they’re taking the 46% who said that there is nothing that could make harassment more enjoyable, and projecting a response onto the 54% that didn’t chose that reply (not that they chose any reply that is specified) If only 46% indicated that there was nothing that could make harassment more enjoyable, then clearly the remaining 54% believe that something could make the experience enjoyable, which was the entire purpose of the study: Particip…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:47 PM
5

The study literally gauged "fear" versus "enjoyment," not "less fearful" versus "less unenjoyable."
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:37 PM
-1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9sl0r6/
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:36 PM
2

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9sl0r6/
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:36 PM
3

That 'could be' ranges from 'neutral' to 'didn't enjoy'. Yes, and the study did not analyze that range, thus, it cannot be concluded from this study "that 70-80% of women do not enjoy being harassed." What this study did manage to quantify is that the majority (54%) of women indicated that sexual harassment could be made enjoyable.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:34 PM
10

They have no idea why those people responded the way they did; therefore, they have no business supplying hypothetical responses for questions they never asked That is the inherent purpose of the conclusion section of a study. Again, let me reiterate that the majority (54%) of women literally indicated that sexual harassment could be made enjoyable.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:32 PM
6

You mean the study's hypothesis? On the other hand, Fairchild’s (2009) dissertation provides some intriguing tidbits that suggest that the harassment experience may not be universally loathed by women. This is also demonstrated in popular press discussions of stranger harassment or street harassment in which some women declaim harassment as invasions of their personal space, while others enjoy the attention (Grossman 2008). The title of Grossman’s article sums it up: ‘‘Catcalling: creepy or a co…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:25 PM
5

I literally see nothing in the data that indicate the assumptions they’re drawing from these numbers I'm literally quoting page 201 of the study. A full three-quarters said it was not enjoyable, and some said it invoked fear No, that cannot be inferred, as I explained: 27.1% indicated increased enjoyment from an attractive harasser whereas only 1.9% indicated increased fear. That does not necessarily mean that the remaining ~70% of women "don't like being harassed by attractive men"—it's entirel…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:23 PM
4

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/jgttj2/the_physical_attractiveness_of_a_male_sexual/g9sl0r6/
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:20 PM
6

That's not what the study indicated. 27.1% indicated increased enjoyment from an attractive harasser whereas only 1.9% indicated increased fear. That does not necessarily mean that the remaining ~70% of women "don't like being harassed by attractive men"—it's entirely possible that some of the remaining percentage simply have a neutral stance. As I quoted from the study: Finally, 46% of respondents selected ‘‘none’’ in regard to what would make the situation more enjoyable. Because this data was…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:18 PM
4

That was not what this study was able to conclude: Finally, 46% of respondents selected ‘‘none’’ in regard to what would make the situation more enjoyable. Because this data was a simple checklist, it can only be assumed that [46% of] women feel that stranger harassment is an unpleasant experience that cannot be improved. However, it is equally likely that these women (or some of them) find the experience highly enjoyable and such enjoyment cannot be increased. With this data set, it is impossib…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 08:11 PM
7

The study went further than establishing which experiences were "more unnerving," it actually found significant increased reported enjoyment from sexual harassment, depending on the conditions. Only 46% indicated that sexual harassment could not be made more enjoyable: Finally, 46% of respondents selected ‘‘none’’ in regard to what would make the situation more enjoyable. Because this data was a simple checklist, it can only be assumed that [46% of] women feel that stranger harassment is an unpl…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/20 07:33 PM
6

Women sometimes shame other women for sluttiness face to face, and men don’t do it face to face because they want to get into the slut’s pants, but they still don’t want to be long-term partners with them. Yes, that could even be inferred by the study I linked. Basically, men and women slut shame in different ways. The results of the previous study could indicate that men are less likely to shame, rather, they will simply avoid sluts for LTRs (without shaming), as you said.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/20 02:39 AM
3

I'm not sure what you're suggesting. I provided a citation to what you wrote.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/20 02:15 AM
3

No citation for the evo-psych claim that women shame each other for multiple sex partners more than men do. https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/j8wqdf/promiscuous_women_are_more_incompetent_cold_and/
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/20 12:59 AM
9

Thus, it was demonstrated by the researchers that women generally deflate their self-reported number of partners and that this tendency is strongest when they are threatened with social shame or peer exposure for reporting their true number of sexual partners (paternity assurance). An explanation for women lying about their sexual past can likely be found in evolutionary psychology and female intrasexual competition by gossip. Women accuse one another of sluttiness because men prefer non-sluts a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/20 12:13 AM
6

The results of the study would essentially indicate a 1.7x multiplier, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/20 12:12 AM
5

The polygraph used in this study was bogus. Its only purpose was to intimidate honesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 11:00 PM
9

A 2-way ANOVA arguably fuzzes the situation by allowing the slight variance in the male results to influence the test of underreported female counts. A 1-way ANOVA would not even be necessary. A simple t-test could have been used to compare the "pipeline" mean to the "exposure threat" mean. Essentially, the 2 X 3 ANOVA attempts to be all-encompassing (by including both sexes and all three conditions). The only significant merit of this study for specifically analyzing female nature are the mean …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 09:00 PM
3

This is a reflection of your misunderstanding of the study and the post. The sample size relevant to their test was 201, not 101 (both sexes were analyzed together). A 2 X 3 ANOVA was used to analyze the variances between two separate conditions (the two sexes and the three test environments). The test type was not used to specifically assess female nature. If I had the exact dataset, I could use a simple t-test to compare the mean reported female partners for pipeline versus exposure threat. I …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 08:56 PM
2

How?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:27 PM
8

You'd be better off trying to help Terri Fisher, PhD. I'm simply sharing the results of her study.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:22 PM
11

Yes, it's true. The data did strongly favor the predicted pattern, as the researchers said.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:17 PM
10

Apparently it wasn't redundant enough for the researchers, who included it anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:09 PM
8

Yup, the increase from an average of 2.6 partners under exposure threat to 4.4 on pipeline (a 1.7x increase) was not enough to yield statistically significant results under two-way ANOVA. https://i.imgur.com/aXLlfUP.png You didn't quote the full section though: Number of sexual partners. The two-way ANOVA on self-reports of the number of sexual partners yielded no significant effects, F < 1, but the data did strongly favor the predicted pattern (see Figure 2). That is, men reported more sexual p…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/20 07:03 PM
3

I'm not entirely sure. You can view my submission history to see similar posts that were not removed though.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/20 10:09 PM
3

Attempting to find out why. No reason was provided here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/20 09:54 PM
1

Keep in mind the study's conditions: “Imagine you're single and you're out at a restaurant with some friends. You meet an attractive man who is also single. He seems kind, intelligent, funny, and has a great job. You are feeling sexually aroused. He says he's in town for a conference but he has to fly back home tomorrow afternoon. If you could spend only this one night with him, what size would you want him to be?”
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/20 09:37 PM
2

Wouldnt the women otherwise have identical life description to test the hypothesis? Yes, that's how the study was controlled. And I understand it was meant to evoke thoughts on promiscuity, but having that high a number that young is really far outside the norm, it’s going to trigger more extreme judgements and decrease objectivity. The point is that her having a normal n-count would not be seen as promiscuous. They made her n-count 20 for the purpose of ensuring that there would be no doubt abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 08:19 PM
3

The point was that 20 partners (not being the norm) would be more likely to elicit a response regarding promiscuity. Keep in mind that her sexual past was just a small part of her life description.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 08:01 PM
4

The high n doesn't cause depression IIRC there was a study that suggested otherwise. Maybe somebody here can link it. Regardless, I believe it's more of a positive feedback loop. Depression can result in a higher n-count, which in turn results in greater depression.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 04:06 AM
15

Feel free to see for yourself. At least one of them has a public (non-personal, 27k followers) Instagram that took me about 20 seconds to find.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 03:44 AM
2

Yes but these are very young adults, who are holding a bunch of cultural assumptions. Are you implying that older adults do not hold a bunch of cultural assumptions?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 03:23 AM
21

I don't know why guys make studies to try to prove it. 2/3 of the authors of the linked study are female.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 03:20 AM
9

It's near the bottom of the linked study.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 03:03 AM
7

That our culture telling women what they should be. Not actually how people feel about other people. The hypothesis suggests otherwise, as explained in the post: The researchers sought to confirm the hypothesis—originating in evolutionary psychology—that "slut shaming" is actually a more salient feature of same-sex platonic relationships between females, owing to female intrasexual competition for desirable male mates.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 02:57 AM
6

I think this study may be interpreting sexual attractiveness rather than sexual promiscuity. How did you reach that conclusion? The current study focused on nonsexual, same-sex friendships. Our primary goal was to examine how participant permissiveness moderates the expected negative effects of same-sex target permissiveness on several outcomes relevant for same-sex friendships, including friendship desirability, need for mate guarding, target personality preferences, and target sexuality endors…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/20 02:10 AM
0

Small studies are published all the time if they have interesting data. They aren't going to be published if the sample size is so small that the entire study is pointless. But it’s not a large or prestigious journal so that is where small studies with interesting findings that aren’t so reliable end up. Please share a prestigious enough group that could feasibly expect to fund this type of study with a sample size in the multiple millions. If there are none, then with your logic, there's no rea…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/20 01:55 AM
1

Like you, I'm not keen on calculating what sample size would be needed to satisfy that interval, but I'm assuming it would be in the millions. This study was published for the sole purpose of analyzing behavioral differences between sexes. If the authors and publisher did not believe the sample size was large enough to extrapolate from, then the study would have not been published because it would serve absolutely no purpose. When it comes to testing such specific conditions for a broad populati…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/20 01:18 AM
0

And any confidence interval chosen could be argued to not be sufficient enough for extrapolation, and that a larger sample size is needed. This could be continuously argued up until the sample size is finally equal to the entire population being tested. You're arguing that this sample size is too low for extrapolation, yet you aren't even making a case for what confidence interval should even be used.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 11:35 PM
1

You can’t just do any study and expect us to extrapolate it to the whole population. Clearly I can't expect you to, because you don't want to, based on your own opinion of what can and cannot be extrapolated. You have yet to share an objective metric devoid of your opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 11:17 PM
1

You're saying that you aim for 5-10% of the population, but you're not verifying what the established, objective metric for extrapolation is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 09:12 PM
1

When I do research at work on our patient population I aim for 5-10% of the population I’m looking at. What metric does your work use?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 08:38 PM
1

I was never suggesting extrapolating to only Americans. Do you mind calculating the confidence interval to determine what sample size would be necessary to extrapolate this study to the entire population?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 08:19 PM
1

Based on what metric...?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 07:07 PM
0

Generally it requires a meta analysis with tens of thousands of participants to extrapolate to the population And even then, you could still be arguing that the sample size is not large enough. There's certainly no denying that larger sample sizes are favorable, but what you're expressing is your own opinion that this particular study is not large enough to extrapolate from. Its size could be increased 1000x and you still may argue that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 06:36 PM
0

I did see them, and I never said that facial characteristics could be seen. What I did say, however, is that BF% is a major component of facial attractiveness. this study is not large enough and lacks the power to extrapolate to women as a whole. With that logic, no study would ever be, because no study ever assesses the entire female population.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 05:51 PM
0

Women don’t generally care as much about build so it seems like this study is asking women: “all other things being relatively equal, is a high earner or a low earner more attractive?” That's the general takeaway from the study. I would be very hesitant to say that "all other things are relatively equal" though. Women still value the physical attractiveness of men (arguably more so than status when it actually comes to willingly having sex with them). And I’m still just not sure DEXA scans are t…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:52 PM
1

I'm not here to promote anything, I just want to share studies and stir the pot.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:31 PM
1

The results of this study would certainly help validate that belief.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:28 PM
0

DEXA assesses BF%, which is critical for assessing physical attractiveness (especially women's attractiveness, which this study verifies).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:27 PM
1

This study would indicate that isn't nearly as much the case for men assessing women though. Her income provides very little "halo effect."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:26 PM
1

Such as?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:02 PM
2

Thanks. I'll edit the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 04:01 PM
3

Fair enough, but even with inheritance (or a wealthy background), those individuals tend to have higher incomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:56 PM
2

No idea, those terms are fairly abstract.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:54 PM
1

The issue is that physique is a marker of physical attractiveness, which was what economic status was being compared to in this study.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:53 PM
5

In order to have high socio-economic status, an individual actually has to be making income. I'm struggling to think of more "honest ways" when income is literally the most direct marker of SES.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:50 PM
2

But then you'd have to admit that large amounts of what makes someone good-looking are SES cues. Men and women both. This study would possibly suggest otherwise. But for women, "having a high income" is not the traditional signal of high status and success, or even, really, of high SES. I believe the results of the study could imply that her high income is not particularly attractive (on average, comparatively) to men at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:47 PM
4

I'm not sure of the methodology (the study is behind a paywall), but that's a good point. Provided that this study was published recently (2018) and the observed sensitivity was so high, I'm questioning whether "strength and independence" actually have anything to do with "women wanting to be taken care of."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:44 PM
6

Is there a better way?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:38 PM
11

Unless of course their an independent strong woman. The results of this study would almost suggest that that's irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/20 03:37 PM
2

That's more or less the purpose of the post. And the study shared would indicate that young men are four times more likely to kill themselves due to losing their spouse.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 04:51 AM
2

if women have all these options to rechoose these more dominant men why aren’t they acting on them since you think that’s their primary motivation? Many do. The point is that the average woman (in her 20s) has more options than the average man. Men with very few options are more likely to preserve their marriage rather than allow divorce to occur, and are also far more likely to suffer due to widowhood. Nobody once said they had an “easier time” you are the one making this about some big gender …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 04:36 AM
3

As I've already explained multiple times now, the men who are able to remarry are the ones who can actually do so. Furthermore, just because they remarry does not necessarily mean they had an easier time doing so than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 04:24 AM
3

Having the ability to find a bunch of dudes willing to fuck you or date you is not validating or emotionally supportive to women. No, it's simply the ability to find a new partner for marriage or simply emotional support in a realistic timeframe.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 04:19 AM
2

The method itself is not necessarily important, it's whether the method is actually being used in a serious attempt to die. It's very difficult to "attempt" suicide in a reluctant manner with a gun.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 04:07 AM
1

That could certainly be inferred.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 02:14 AM
1

The widowers who end up killing themselves generally probably are. There's probably a reason why the male suicide rates are so much higher with younger males—they haven't had children yet.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:49 AM
0

I have serious doubts that single, widowed fathers previously in healthy marriages would be commonly killing themselves and leaving their children up for adoption (or for someone else). I'm sure you can find anecdotal cases though.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:41 AM
0

Which similarly does not show they are merely jumping from one man to one more dominant “because they can” It's because they have the ability to that may explain why coping is easier after the death of their partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:38 AM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/j7270v/being_widowed_in_ones_20s_increases_suicide_risk/g82cmq5/
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:28 AM
2

Data from a psychological autopsy study were used to test the theory that women who commit suicide use less violent means because they are less intent on dying. Although women were significantly less likely to use a violent method than men, there was no difference in the lethality of their suicidal intent. Yes, women who actually committed suicide had no difference in suicidal intent, as the abstract explains. That's because those women actually intended to kill themselves. Just because the meth…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:26 AM
2

The men who are remarrying are the ones who actually have the feasible ability to do so. Men who are highly dependent on their wife (due to a lack of other available options) are more likely to prevent divorce from occurring (they are less likely to "check out" and engage in infidelity).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:10 AM
1

Men are more violent and choose more violent methods that are more effective Right, because their intention tends to be actually ending their life rather than crying for help.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:07 AM
0

why do you assume that the suicide disparity among 20-24 year old men and women is 100% (or primarily?) due to women finding and moving on to the next “dominant” man? Again, because women (especially younger women) have an easier time finding a new partner after the loss of their previous partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:05 AM
2

Yes, and why do you think men are choosing guns over pills?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 01:00 AM
8

Yup, and the statistics would indicate that men are less suicidal after divorce (commonly initiated due to infidelity) than due to widowhood. The argument to be made is that when men are in potentially healthier marriages with younger women (before "checking out" and potential divorce), they are more suicidal after their partner's death. The point is that when "mutual love" still exists between partners (earlier in the marriage), men will struggle to cope (and possibly move on with life) more th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:55 AM
3

why do men marry again more quickly and more frequently post divorce than women? Do you have statistics for this? Assuming this is true, I would argue that many male-initiated divorces occur when the man has already given up on the marriage and has started looking elsewhere. If a man realistically has very little options outside of marriage then he probably isn't going to want to divorce. Again, focusing on the divorce overlooks the fact that widowhood situations can actually occur during a heal…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:39 AM
0

The point is less so dependent on hypergamy and more so that women tend to have more readily available options, especially when compared to men who are marrying as early as their early 20s.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:28 AM
8

Also, why do you think that men are better at committing suicide? Is it possible that men simply suffer more and are more likely to actually kill themselves rather than making an "attempt" as a "cry for help?" I see this point brought up frequently. Realistically, it isn't particularly difficult to effectively kill yourself. The very effective methods men tend to choose are not necessarily the same methods women tend to choose, which begs the aforementioned question.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:25 AM
3

Divorce is a result of the marriage failing (an "unhealthy" relationship, per se). Widowhood can occur during healthy relationships. It is therefore possible that men have more difficulty coping with the loss of a mutually-loved partner (due to death) than women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:20 AM
4

Yes. That doesn't answer my question though. If you are insinuating the data is irrelevant due to being outdated then you have to explain what has changed since then.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:09 AM
8

The graphs in article 1 show different age brackets. While there may be extremely high rates of suicide in this younger age group (20–34 years), the absolute number of suicides in this age group is much smaller than in older widowers (e.g., about 1350 suicides per year among White men aged 65 and older). And yes, you could make that argument. A long-term marriage would only allow married men to value women for their "fertility and youth" during the period in which they are fertile and youthful, …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/20 12:07 AM
4

What kind of changes have occurred since 1996, and would those changes close the gap in rates or possibly make them even worse?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 11:59 PM
5

Probably. Why do you think so?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 11:51 PM
1

Agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 10:11 PM
1

Women's equivalents can reject them too. True. It would be helpful to see which sex is more likely to reject their equivalents though.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:22 PM
1

Generally, most men don't appreciate it because they realize that women tend to only approach men who are within an exclusive percentile (which tends to be well above the woman's). The frustration is that women rarely approach their equivalents. That's the basis of this study.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 10:42 AM
4

I can only assume that most major publishers will have retractions, and since this article is still up then it wasn't retracted.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 09:38 AM
1

That seems valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 08:30 AM
7

2/3 of the authors of this study are female.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 07:33 AM
3

And again, there are no ages listed. For all we know “attractive” was mid 20’s and “unattractive” was 80. Would those ages be problematic? Eighty-year-olds tend to be much less attractive than twenty-year-olds. The single study provides next to no actual data. Would a larger sample size make it more useful, in your opinion?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:13 AM
2

Yes. The control percentages sit between the attractive accepts and rejections.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:07 AM
1

Are we looking at the same table? https://i.imgur.com/I2E3rIR.png
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:04 AM
0

The numbers are actually very similar for all the options. The differences appear to be statistically significant. If that isn't the case then the abstract is incorrect in reporting a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/20 01:02 AM
0

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Resisting-Connection-Following-Social-Exclusion-Macdonald-Baratta/82c763abc656ed11c9a32d58359511dd7ed59545 That's all the additional info I can find for free. Maybe somebody has access to the full article.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:49 PM
3

The attractiveness of someone who is "accepting" towards me doesn't really matter imo. Keep in mind, this study focuses on how females behave after being rejected, not accepted.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:33 PM
1

What about now?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:16 PM
1

What should be added to make it high effort?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:10 PM
14

Yeah, this study is female-specific. Maybe somebody knows of one which incorporates males. Is the fact that the study is 5-years-old problematic though?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:07 PM
17

I think a point of discussion would be that men are more likely to face sexual rejection throughout their life and have to adjust accordingly.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/20 11:04 PM
1

I didn’t vet this individual out because I didn’t know how to. Do you regret that experience?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:38 PM
1

The reason I phrased my post the way I did was to avoid confusion about what "dates" constitute, rather, focusing on the actual time between meeting and having sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:27 PM
2

Generally if I liked a guy enough that I could see a possibly for exclusive dating I would go with the 3 date rule. I'm confused as to what your average length is. Are you saying that your average would be somewhere around 3 dates?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:23 PM
1

Are you saying that because you've consistently applied it in your case?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:18 PM
1

I have some regrets, but it’s just over sleeping w the dude in general, not how long it took. Had you waited longer to have sex with them do you think that you would have actually had sex with them?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:17 PM
1

I'm assuming your situation(s?) involved online dating then.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:13 PM
1

I only ever had one ONS and I don't plan to repeat that experience, so in that sense I've eliminated the shortest option. Why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:10 PM
2

I'm assuming your consistent average length is around a few hours then.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:09 PM
1

I'd say you get to know more about someone in a few hours in person than months of online. Agreed. But is a few hours enough for you? I'm assuming it is based on your response.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:08 PM
1

Was your relationship physical from the get go with your current husband?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 05:07 PM
0

If only getting to know the shallow surface of someone is how they wanted it to be, then that could also imply that having a higher chance of a breakup occurring is also how they wanted it to be. I don't think many women want to have constant breakups, which was why I asked whether engaging in low-length hookups is a mistake.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 02:15 PM
1

You mention only being able to get a small screenshot from just 2-3 dates. Do you think that's consistent for everyone or do you think others are better at assessing their prospective partners in short time periods?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 02:08 PM
1

makes sense
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 02:04 PM
1

It would probably take a few weeks to get to "know" somebody socially.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:55 PM
1

The point is that without online dating it would probably be very difficult to get to know somebody well within only a few hours of first speaking with them in person.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:54 PM
0

Some people are listing lengths as low as hours. Do you think those individuals are making mistakes?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:48 PM
1

online dating
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:33 PM
0

I weeded out a lot of candidates who weren’t worthy of having my body for that short amount of time. How did you weed them out?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:32 PM
1

A few hours seems pretty short assuming that's your consistent average. Have you only done hookups/OLD?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:27 PM
1

What is the average going to tell you? As I mentioned: Female dating advice often stresses vetting a prospective sexual partner for a certain time period prior to having sex. I am curious to hear from individuals on this topic. It's more useful to think in terms of average time than listing off every single experience, in my opinion. Or maybe not.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:24 PM
1

Do you have any responses to these questions? Assuming you have had multiple sexual partners, has this length of time changed as you have gotten older/more experienced? Has the length of time been a factor you have consciously considered? Do you have any regrets regarding previous lengths of time? If you are currently in a successful LTR, was the length of time significantly different with them than with others in the past?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:00 PM
1

Do you have any responses to these questions? Assuming you have had multiple sexual partners, has this length of time changed as you have gotten older/more experienced? Has the length of time been a factor you have consciously considered? Do you have any regrets regarding previous lengths of time? If you are currently in a successful LTR, was the length of time significantly different with them than with others in the past?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/20 01:00 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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