TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

shemademedoit1 Archive

View 0 posts and 175 comments by shemademedoit1 on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

It will upset a lot of men who will no longer benefit from a woman pursuing a dual mating strategy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/24 08:38 AM
1

Nothing wrong with it, it's just more and more women are contributing to the economy so they gain political and social power and obviously they promote the sexuality that they prefer. A couple hundred years ago women had very little political and social power so men were easily able to get 100% support for male sexuality. As women continue to enter into the economy as workers, we can expect support for male sexuality to be 50% and support for women sexuality to be 50%. So it only creates an illu…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/24 08:36 AM
1

If you don't have enough intellectual integrity to put forth and defend your argument in open in this sub then that's up to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 02:23 PM
1

You are willing to have a conversation with me about whether men can easily get casual sex. Why aren't you willing to have it with the rest of the sub?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 01:51 PM
1

Like I said, go have that conversation with them then. Just put it on the daily thread
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 01:40 PM
1

Go argue that with the people here. It's literally one of the fundamental assumptions of men on this sub. If you disagree with that then go have that conversation lmao, I'd love to see how it turns out.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 01:31 PM
1

Then go make a post on your belief "most men can get casual sex" and see how people on this sub react lmao. There's a reason trp/purplepill/etc all came to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 01:26 PM
1

Prostitutes don't count
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 01:24 PM
1

The guy i replied to is talking about ease of getting casual sex. Not forming long lasting relationships. They are entirely different things
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 12:50 PM
2

Women don't work like that man, if all it took to get a woman's attention is hot pics then women wouldn't be complaining about getting random nudes from guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 07:57 AM
–

To be more precise, it is more unequal. Most women are attracted to a minority of guys. If you're in that minority then good for you you are a "winner" of modern hookup culture. If you are a regular guy then good luck lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/24 07:53 AM
1

Lmao women love attention that's why they cant emotionally share a man. If get it if its purely casual but if they want companionship and shit very few women would actually be okay with it
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/24 07:32 AM
–

Those aren’t my matches, those are likes, id be really lucky if i matched with all those women. Im pretty restrictive with my matches cuz im “looking for the one”. Also i did buy bumble premium so im sure that helps (you get seen more often and thats a big deal)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 07:39 AM
–

Asian
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 06:53 AM
–

I came back to this sub temporarily because i recently broke up with my gf and was gonna start dating again. Well i signed back onto bumble and i was worried after 7 months it would be tough getting back in but again time and time proves that the blue pill works Heres my screenshot before going snooze mode (found a girl i really like and although were just chatting im not the kind of guy to date multiple girls at once. Ill go back on the app if this doesnt work out, obviously) Blue pill always w…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/24 06:46 AM
1

Im not denying pretty privilege, but my point is about whether your dating strategy will actually change. It won't change much cuz your standards go up.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 10:05 AM
2

Nah science shows that attractive people tend to settle down with other attractive people (or wealthy in the case of guys). If what you were saying is true then the science should show that attractive people get with non attractive people because theyll take whoeber they can easily get.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 09:30 AM
2

Yeah but it doesn't mean you'll want to date them. You'll be looking for models and shit
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 09:20 AM
1

Your attractiveness certainly matters but it impacts your standards more than your dating policy. For example if I was more attractive my strategy still remains the same: meeting women on apps or in public, trying to find common ground with a woman when im dating her, etc. The only thing that changes significantly is the type of women considered "in my radar" or not. So that affects the outcome of what women I get with but the core dating strategy is unchanged. Of course, being extra attractive …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/24 07:36 AM
9

Definitely not on my FYP bro. Most of the stuff I get are couple memes and shit. I don't even search it up i think it's cuz my gf shares them to me so much the algorithm thinks I want them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 05:57 AM
1

What's an inkwell
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 05:34 AM
1

This is wrong. Differences based on biology are inherent and attempting to change them causes problems... extreme imbalances! This isn't true, there are plenty of times where it is okay to compensate for differences in biology. For example there are many people born with genetic differences in height, shape, mental health etc. and we have laws to make sure society accounts for these differences (accessibility ramps, disabled parking, special education, etc.) Even basic things like eyesight, some…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/24 05:26 AM
1

Sex is different for men than it is for women. Yet you want equality in this matter do you not? Isn't that what you were advocating for? I want certain aspects to be equal (e.g. if men don't get slut shamed, women shouldn't too). I don't want all aspects to be equal (e.g. men penetrate during sex and women receive during sex, this doesn't need to change.) So, if a man sleeps with 100 women... he does so because 100 women see him as high quality. If a woman sleeps with 100 men... this does not im…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/24 12:43 PM
1

Not all men have to visit prostitutes. Not all men use guns, but people who use guns are mostly men, so it's masculine. Not all men pay for prostitutes. But people who pay for prostitutes are mostly men so paying for prostitution is a masculine act. Most people who become prostitutes are women so being a prostitute is a feminine act.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 11:18 PM
1

Yeah the reason why most customers are men is because they are attracted by the femininity of the sellers. This shows the prostitutes are feminine. If selling your body for sex was masculine then that would repel male customers. Instead it attract them, because men are attracted to femininity.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 06:04 PM
1

It's gender neutral because it takes a man and a woman for both. So it's 50/50.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:48 PM
1

It is not inherently masculine to sell sex for money, if that was true then most people who sell sex for money would be men. But that's not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:40 PM
1

Infanticide isn't a job so it's not part of this discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:30 PM
1

As long as the people doing something are women, then it is feminine. Most nurses are women, most babysitters are women, most prostitutes are women. The fact that men are 99% of customers actually confirms that it is a feminine job, because the men want to purchase something only women can give. Men don't buy sex from masculine people (unless they are gay). Also secretaries are a job where most secretaries are women and most bosses are men. So prostitution isn't unique.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:27 PM
1

Becayse the job is more to do with ther person doing the job, rather than the person buying the job. For example, most nurses are women, but patients are gender neutral. Nursing is still a feminine job. Because the feminity of the job depends on the people doing it not on the people buying it. In the case of prostitution. Paying for prostitutes is a masculine act and being a prostitute is a feminine act.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:19 PM
1

That doesn't change what I'm saying
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:13 PM
1

The seller matters more than the customer.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 05:03 PM
1

Having sex for money isn't enough to stop a person from being feminine. Prostitution is one of the most female-associated jobs in history
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 04:38 PM
1

Doing a masculine act doesn't override all of a woman's femininity. For example, punching someone is a masculine act. But if I see a feminine person punch someone, does that mean they are "spoilt" and are no longer feminine? Of course not.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 04:15 PM
1

You can still be feminine even if some of the things you do isn't feminine.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 04:00 PM
1

How do you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 03:53 PM
1

Im not saying holding an opinion is oppression. Verbal harrassment can be oppression.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 03:52 PM
1

No that's not how I'm describing equality. If you think that's what I mean by equality then you are mistaken. That is not what I mean by equality.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 01:17 PM
1

No, I think if anyone wants to surgically modify themselfes then they should be allowed to do so. I'm not saying they must do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 12:29 PM
1

Men and women aren't equal yet. Women still get slut shamed, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/24 11:53 AM
2

Most of those involve men who know theybe left their biological child with a woman. My point is that a man is more conscious about being cheated on because finding out you've been raising someone elses son is particularly devastating
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 02:15 AM
0

For that statistic to be relevant we need to know what proportion of single mothers are single because theyve cheated on their husband and their husband left them to raise kids on their own. Otherwise you cant draw any conclusions about men avoiding the consequences of cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:58 AM
-1

The single mother statistic is only relevant if they became single mothers if they cheated on their partner and were forced to raise the child themselves
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:52 AM
3

Why It appears that more men believe their partner is cheating? Men are more afraid of getting cheated on because the consequences are severe (raising a kid that isn't your own) The consequences used to be as severe for a woman (losing your economic security) but that's been mitigated heavily now that women participate in the workforce. So more severe consequences = higher rates of suspicion
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:49 AM
1

Humans can be ugly when no one's looking, my man, especially when you live alone. Women don't wear make up, men don't put on deodorant or fix their hair. Nothing wrong with it as long as they fix themselves up before being seen by other people.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:42 AM
3

Dude im a guy and i just wear boxers at home half the time. Like not even a shirt on. That's as slobby as it gets no one cares.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:29 AM
3

Slides and hoodies aren't masculine only lmao. Do you expect women to wear skirts the whole time even in their house cmon.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 01:20 AM
2

Nah plenty more hyperfeminine OF girls out there too compared to the past
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 12:54 AM
6

Feminism is about equality. That means allowing women to be more masculine if they want to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/24 12:38 AM
1

Nah you said "attracted". Not "sleep with" so you are moving goalposts. Moreover a majority of women can and are sexually attracted to men who don't even know she exists (celebrities).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 02:01 AM
1

Well obviously you need to flirt. But you said there are lots of women who "only" develop attraction "after" a guy shows an interest in her. This isn't how it generally works. (Tradfem) Women generally filter men out extremely early on. Like upon meeting the guy she will have an idea whether she is attracted to him or not, or she will be on the fence and wait to get to know him more. But the fact that he expresses an interest in her (or not) doesn't really impact this.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 01:44 AM
2

There is because (tradfem) women generally are attracted to more "exclusive" guys, like celebrities. In fact there are plenty of women who gain an interest in a guy who is in a relationship because of the social validation effect. Im sure there are women who are only attracted to guys who have already express an interest in them but this must be a tiny minority.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 01:40 AM
2

No friendzoning is when a man expresses romantic interest in a woman but the woman rejects him by making it clear she views him as a platonic friend only.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 01:33 AM
5

Friendzoning is still far too prevalent for your statement to be true.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 01:28 AM
5

Nah most women reject simps. That's why friendzoning is so prevalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 01:26 AM
-21

Ok she can keep the makeup on 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 02:23 PM
5

Maybe there's something undesirable about you? How fit are you, how financially stable are you, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 02:48 AM
3

Nah even when guys have wives or gfs, they still keep up the grind. Men just want to be bigger and better than other men. If it was mainly about getting a woman then once you get married your drive should slow down a little (since you already got what you are looking for), but no, most men still keep on climbing
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 02:31 AM
4

All the most financially competitive people out there are guys. The grind, work to make it big, coming out richer than the rest, these are all masculine attitudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 01:54 AM
2

Men are taller than women, so more men being in the nba than women is fine. Men aren't smarter than women, so it doesn't make sense that they get more promotions into top roles than women do.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 04:58 PM
1

Engineering and Construction aren't problems cuz women choose not to do those careers. So it's understandable. That's not the case for corporate jobs: finance has 46% women but finance ceos are only 10%. So there's a problem. In these industries Women are half the workers but not half the leaders. It's worse for other industries like healthcare/teaching. Women make up 70% of workers in teaching but only 50% of women make it principal level. You'd expect it to be the same. 90% of construction wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 04:32 PM
-1

If what you're saying is true then there should be more women than men in these roles already (since women are getting all these advantages). But that's not the case
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 04:03 PM
1

No ones stopping women from doing construction jobs (well...), so there's no issue there. But there are ppl stopping women from doing wall street / ceo jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 02:18 PM
–

Are your views on the right to self autonomy really that absolute? What if it's you and your starving children, and you have to choose between knocking out a wealthy man and taking his keys to steal food from his store vs letting you and your kids die from starvation tonight. I know it's an extreme example but I want to test if there are limits to your respect for third party bodily autonomy. That's your trolley problem. Do you still respect bodily autonomy there?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 01:18 PM
3

Disgruntled men are timeless, but I definitely feel like the heat is higher compared to last year. Or maybe I just haven't experienced toxicity in a while and need time to adjust back haha.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 01:13 PM
–

Ok let's introduce the possibility of these people being a threat to your safety. Let's say these people wanted the invaders to come and genocide you. To make it more believable imagine a situation where an enemy wants to genocide a specific ethnicity in your country (your ethnicity), and there are a minority of people from a separate ethnicity who actually are okay with this happening, because they will be spared and they want your nation to be taken over by the invaders. Now that we've introdu…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 12:13 PM
–

But there will always be at some people who wouldn't want to fight back even in those situations. Would you be okay with using the threat of jail to force them into fighting?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 11:15 AM
–

Do you have any exceptions to this general belief? Presumably there are obvious exceptions like "unless the invading force will genocide me and my people". Anything other exceptions you can think of?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 09:29 AM
2

What's up with the anti feminism in the sub? Ive been gone for 6 months (got in a relationship, now might break up with her) and this place is a lot more anti-feminist before. Im seeing constant hate and toxicity. Did something happen to piss the red pills off lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 09:20 AM
1

He might have a mom/sister who he saw treated badly by men and so might be a feminist because of that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/24 09:14 AM
0

There are witnesses who witnessed him rape her? That would definitely be enough. If there's chat lot where he apologises for having sex with her even though he knew she didn't consent, then that would be enough too. Im surprised he's not in jail already with evidence like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:11 AM
1

I actually did some digging and turns out you're wrong. There are instances of women waging war on women, the War of the Castilian Succession was fought between the then Ruling Queen of Castille vs the then Ruling Queen of Portugal. Both were direct rulers as well, like actual heads of their respective states. And what's more amazing is that there's a recent study on the propensity of women to be engaged in wars, and it turns out that women leaders were 27% more likely than men to wage war. (Not…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 07:33 AM
1

All I need to show is that women are capable of declaring war, to arrive to my conclusion that women can declare war just like men do. Therefore I only need to give an example of women waging war, i dont have to give an example of women waging war against other women
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:56 AM
1

Technically speaking I don't have to. Just because something hasn't yet happened doesn't mean it never will. But Thatcher and falkland islands, buddica, are examples. During the chinese civil war the empress dowager was rhe ruler while her son was imprisoned by her so that too
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:53 AM
2

Men are more likely to declare war. This doesn't make war exclusive to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:49 AM
3

Men are more likely to be violent. This doesn't make violence exclusive to men
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:47 AM
5

This is because men are normally in power. Not because only men have a desire to go to war. If there were only women on earth we would still have wars because the underlying causes for war (fighting over resources or political control) still exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 04:43 AM
5

That's only for the aggressor. There's still the country being attacked that needs to find people to defend it
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/23 03:36 AM
1

Women lose all the time. Usually in the form of sleeping with a guy thinking that it might develop into a relationship and then finding he wasn't ever really interested in that possibility. Happens all the time man. The goals are just different.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/09/23 08:17 AM
2

Need is too strong of a word. Having relationship experience will probably increase your chances with women. But if you are already very successful with women, which is what your post seems, then who cares? Keep living life the way you want
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/23 04:15 PM
3

Women usually react more badly to "weirdness" than guys do. I mean guys also react negatively to weirdness, but it's not that big a deal, for women it's a much bigger deal for some reason. Anyway in your case women would immediately assume that you've never been in a relationship because there's something wrong with you that makes other women not want to be in a relationship with you. Of course you will say that actually women do want to be in a relationship with you, but u just reject them, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/23 03:46 PM
1

Get more attractive. And these things will start to change. But tactically speaking, begging women for attention (i know you're exaggerating here but still) is actually a disadvantageous move because it's actually a turn off.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/23 09:42 AM
6

How do you know the rule still exists if there are so many exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/23 05:15 AM
1

I'm just saying that the jonas situation is different from the one in your post. Your post is about a guy being mad that a girl in her early 20s behaves like a girl in her early 20s. The jonas situation is different because the behaviour that caused the divorced happened later in her 20s, which is more understandable than the first situation (not that much more understandable, since it's natural for someone in their early or late 20s to party), but it is different.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 10:11 AM
1

At least taking the blue pill keeps the blue balls away ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 10:05 AM
1

A good message can override the whole 'I'm texting too quickly' thing. But it has to be good, like a funny comment on a story or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 10:04 AM
1

He only divorced her after she aged out of her early 20s but still maintained that behaviour.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/23 10:00 AM
3

Dude if he's still willing to have sex even after seeing her in real life (and finding out that she faked her looks) then he's basically saying "yeah you faked your looks, But I'm fine with this"
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/23 02:48 AM
1

Yeah that's a rough one. A lot of people justify not admitting to cheating with that excuse. "Yeah it was wrong, but admitting it will cause too much pain. I'm actually being a good person to her by not letting her know"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/23 07:30 AM
1

Sure women don't need (financially, socially) men anymore, in the same way men never needed women (financially, socially). But there is still the whole "I wanna have kids and have it with someone I can enjoy living a life with" thing that both sexes feel. But yeah, the bargaining power of men has reduced. Not all men though, mainly the "betas" haha. Still good to be "alpha".
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/23 07:28 AM
1

While common sense says their vastly different sexual experiences probably means they have different vallues, the fact that they got together in the first place (in your scenario) probably means that they overcame major obstacles already. If n-count was an issue for them then they would probably never have gotten together in the first place. So the fact that they did might mean this actually has a good chance of lasting. There must be something really strong bringing them together in the first p…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/23 01:47 AM
1

I don't think so. I think they have clearly different meanings. Saying X does Y does not have the same meaning as Y does X. (For example, All cars are vehicles vs all vehicles are cars). I don't want to "play" semantics so I'm asking for an example from you, not only would it serve as evidence that the issue is actually happening, it would help clarify any misunderstandings between our arguments.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 08:38 AM
1

"men are rapists". Second one is talking about how [all] rapists are men and that its men who rape. Is this true? The correct way to say that all rapists are men would be to say "Rapists are men", rather than to say "men are rapists". To avoid confusion, can you give an example of the usage you are describing? Something from mainstream media, for example, where a person says "Men are rapists", we can then analyse the use of that term in that context to see what the person is actually meaning to …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 08:30 AM
–

As its totally okay to say men are rapists, No it's not. Well, you can say "Statistically X% of men commit rape", but you can't say "Being a man means you naturally want to rape people" Note how both of those sub-statements can be inferred from the vague statement "men are rapists". The first sub-statement is okay, the second one is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 07:55 AM
–

Sentiments like "only white people can be racist" and "every white person IS racially biased whether they acknowledge it or not" are not only supported but even encouraged to great extent in academia and popular media. Two things. So those statements taken within context don't mean what they say at first glance. Let's look at the first one: Only white people can be racist. That claim doesn't actually mean that the only human beings capable of experience hatred or prejudice towards another race a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 07:17 AM
–

I'm glad you had that experience. But to clarify, when people talk about the "wall" for women they are talking about trends for women in general, rather than case-by-case situations. The trend being that a woman is more likely to be seen as physically attractive when she was 25 compared to the same woman 45 years later. That doesn't mean the older version of her is not attractive. It just means a younger version of her physical body would be seen as more physically attractive than an older versi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 06:21 AM
–

I'll look at one of your examples, since the 3 examples you give can vary widely in meaning depending on context. So let's look at the statement "white people are complicit in racial oppression". The first step would be to check whether it fits into the definition of generalisation, and the second step is to check whether it is the immoral kind of generalisation. Step 1 is a bit tricky, because the phrase can be read two ways. It can be read in a factual manner. I.e. "Factually speaking, racial …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 06:05 AM
–

Like...white people? But There is no stereotype that white people are stupid
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 05:41 AM
–

Whereas the example about "such and such group of people are stupid" is a stereotype that society deems acceptable for certain groups but not others. You could say it's that inconsistency that I find problematic and insincere. Which groups of people does society find this acceptable with?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 05:13 AM
–

Don't go for those women. The obesity thing works in your favour btw, since 35% of men are overweight, while 27% of women are overweight. This means american men are cancelling themselves out of the dating game more than women are, which should increase your chances (assuming you aren't overweight yourself lol)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 05:12 AM
–

Yeah, but there are some additional nuances to consider, which makes it more than an argument between "Lower inherent value but higher mobility vs higher inherent value but lower mobility". Men's attractiveness curve starts lower than a woman, but peaks far later. Women hit the wall far earlier. More over, men don't really hit a wall, they go down a mountainslope. Women hit the wall and the affect is drastic within a few years. That difference in the curve is itself much more in favour of men th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 05:10 AM
–

Maybe that itself (a few pounds) is already too much for them to accept.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 05:05 AM
–

Why should hope be lost in the first place. We man at least have a huge amount of control over our social status and wealth. Women on the other hand, are far more bound by their genetic physical attractiveness, and this gives them much less wiggle room.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:56 AM
–

I think they don't want too much muscle, maybe they don't consider it aesthetic. Despite the fat loss benefits of having muscle.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:54 AM
–

There are super popular men like Adam Levine and Will Smith who got absolutely shat on for their stuff. I think it would damage George Clooney for sure, since part of his celeb identity is the cool and unphased guy. If that image is broken it could absolutely destroy his career.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:53 AM
–

How do you know?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:24 AM
–

I wouldn't say "by default", but yeah, men have to compete for women, 1 man can impregnate multiple women, doesn't really work the other way around.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 04:23 AM
–

I think it depends in what way you generalise them and how you act on this generalisation. There's stuff which is not acceptable, like assuming people of a certain race to be stupid and therefore choosing not to work or hire them. And there's stuff which is acceptable, like assuming people of a certain gender love big boobies and therefore choosing to put attractive people on your advertising billboard for your alcoholic drink. Of course, from a fundamental perspective, generalisation is "bad" i…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 03:44 AM
2

The poes law reference means you were being sarcastic, right? (Don't woosh me). Were you being sarcastic about your whole comment or just the height thing?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/23 02:19 PM
0

Which uncomfortable truths
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/23 12:41 PM
1

How are you going about "trying" to get from 180cm to 188cm? Also 15%bf is good, but 66kg that implies a lean body mass of 57 which is very small imo for someone 180cm tall.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/23 09:25 AM
1

0 vs 2000, 0 vs 20, 0 vs 10. The effect is still there, just lesser amounts. But it's still there
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 03:56 PM
1

But I also think he's not as far off the mark as some people here think about men with that level of wealth being able to get most whatever they want. Are we reading the same post, because the "level of wealth" OP is talking about is the top 0.5% percent of men. That's 1/200 men, which I guess means millionaire. And he's claiming that men in that range are easily able to enter into long term one-sided polygamous relationships. (so, the wife knows he's sleeping with other women and chooses to sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 03:04 PM
3

All you blue pill and PPD guys are just so hopelessly out of touch, you may as well be aliens. Or better put, ants. You make it sound like we disagree with you. No one is disagreeing that having 7 digits in net worth will make you more successful in the dating market compared to an identical version of yourself with 0 net worth.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:59 PM
1

Depends on your definition of attractive. If attractive just means looks, then body count has no affect. If attractive means "overall" attractiveness (so included status, wealth, etc) then having a huge body count is a disadvantage. Certaintly if you compared two different 10/10 women with identical personalities and status/wealth etc., where the only difference is that one is a virgin and the other has had like 2000 different men in her life. The vast majority of men will pick the first girl ov…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:55 PM
1

But is this really true in OP's sense? OP is saying a 0.5% guy (1 in 200) can easily have a one-sided polyamourous relationship. But can you find examples in reality to corroborate this? I can find emperors or kings in history, sure. But those are not 1 in 200 odds lmao. Even 0.00001% men like Elon musk get divorced on. He had a prenup with grimes too so it's not like Makenzie bezos where she could take half his wealth for herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:53 PM
1

No. Status success resources are about 90% of what a girl will like/not like about a guy. The rest is vibes/personality. There's also an additional factor called "dealbreakers". A girl might find religion a deal breaker. A guy might find rampant sexual history a dealbreaker. If a dealbreaker is hit, then unfortunately status/success won't matter. Same with girls. A super hot girl who's a millionnaire heiress is a 10/10, but if she has a really crazy sexual history then most guys would consider i…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:49 PM
1

A gold digger wouldn't want the guy to be healthy, but frail and with a few years left to live. So that she can inherit relatively fast.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:35 PM
1

When I hear that women fare better in education than men, it has to be a distorted average. What statistics would you like to look at? The number of women who have college degrees vs the number of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:34 PM
2

You don't understand. Attractiveness is only one component of value. (in the example of the cars, a higher price tag car). I'll do it in a guy's pov to make it simpler. Compare a 7/10 virgin vs 10/10 millionnaire heiress girl that gets a train ran on her every other night before meeting you. Who would YOU rather pick? Of course the first one. The vast majority of dudes on this sub, myself included, would pick the first one. Attractiveness is literally just 1 aspect of "true value". Same with car…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 02:14 PM
2

Even if I had a million dollars. If I need a tractor I will buy a tractor. In the same vein, even if a girl was a supermodel, she could end up picking the funny goofy guy who completes her, instead of some george clooney dude. There are plenty of high value female + regular dude couples out there, and the very existence of these show that your claim isn't as generalised as you make it out to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 01:59 PM
4

No. If a person's needs are different, they could very well pick a cheaper car over a more expensive one. For example, a farmer would choose a pickup over a sportscar. A hiker would prefer the 4-wheel drive toyota over a sportscar etc. The price tag is basically the equivalent of the "how hot are you out of 10". But when actually picking lifelong partners people are heavily influenced by stuff like religion, values etc. That's not just women btw, even average men will reject a 10/10 woman if she…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 01:46 PM
15

Dude I get what you're saying but your example is bad because many people will absolutely pick an affordable toyota over a high end merc because of the reliability, ease of repair, and availability of spare parts. Cars are literally an example of why one measure of value (cost) does not apply universally to all customers.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/06/23 10:43 AM
1

I wonder what kind of men older sex workers tend to settle down with. Since decent men are scarce, after all. Im a "finance bro" and i couldn't imagine myself being in a relationship with someone like that. Not because they aren't attractive, but stuff like the fact that that kind of woman would never be accepted in my social circles. I definitely have had fling though, and those are nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/23 06:02 AM
1

Yes it does. Imagine being told "What's worse, being forced to eat shit or being forced to eat shit while getting beatup up". Clearly the second one is worse, even though both are absolutely vile things to go through. The same thing is here: Both getting gangbanged and hanving an N count of 12 can be dealbreakers. But they are deal breakers for potentialy different reasons. The first is because a person may have an attitude to sex devoid of emotion and bonding, and that's a red flag. The second …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 01:58 PM
1

Yeah but what if it's 3 (but gangbang) vs 10 ONS? What's worse is the question, not whether either is acceptable.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/06/23 12:33 PM
2

It may change their perspectives and all, but still most men here will remain with their dicks dry and the girls with cats to feed. Yeah but that's because adult humans generally have a hard time altering their ingrained behaviour. It's not an issue unique to this sub, and therefore not something you should criticise this sub over. It's like a guy comes and asks, how to get laid, and a girl tells him "stop being a mysoginist", and he follows the advice and, besides maybe being a better person he…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/23 09:32 AM
-1

I however believe people arguing aren't coming from a point of trying to either help others or expand their view If you believed something to be true, then convincing someone else of that viewpoint would be "helping them", since it's helping them see the light, if you get what I mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/23 09:16 AM
0

People here rarely say what they believe, instead they are mostly trying to win arguments. I disagree with this statement. I think the vast majority of participants here say things which they do genuinely believe. It's just that people believe so strongly in their world-view that they will argue to defend it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/23 09:12 AM
1

The discussion isn't pointless. It still exposes you to other people's perspectives, even if those perspectives are based on personal experience. That exposure itself can be a valuable learning experience for you
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/23 09:04 AM
2

Why
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/23 01:36 AM
1

Just find a sugar daddy, can't be that hard. I've got one myself (sugar baby, that is)
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/23 01:29 AM
5

He's not talking about how fair the market is, he's talking about how free it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/23 02:27 AM
2

Who's the second girl though 👀
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/23 01:14 AM
8

That's not the problem. It takes about 3-5 years of that regime to get to your natural genetic limits. Of course. Totally doable. Im doing that right now. But it's not something anyone can just do. Years of dedication is the hadd part.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/23 12:59 AM
2

I'm a guy, and I was happy to lose my virginity to a hot chick. I'm sure (a majority of) women would also prefer to lose their virginity to a stud or high value male, rather than a regular dude. So what ends up happening is the chads are the ones who'll most often get the chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/23 07:08 AM
1

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/23 06:14 AM
1

I'd love to see a study of men accurately picking out someone's age It's less about the actual age, and more about markers of youthfulness. So wrinkles, sun spots, etc. Again, we don't really know why this is the case. The only reason it's that interesting of a phenomenon is because for men, the wall appears to exist too, but studies indicate a far later age range for men to hit the wall than women. Which implies that youthfulness is far less of an important marker for sexual attractiveness for …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/23 06:01 AM
3

It's a theory to explain a real world statistic that men of all ages tend to find younger women more sexually attractive compared to older women. E.g. 100 random dudes are shown a picture of the same woman, one when she was 25, and one where she is at her current age of 45, most men would say the picture of her at a younger age is more visually attractive. It's called a wall because people think there is a certain age where (if we repeated that experiment above), women's physical attractiveness …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/23 05:40 AM
1

Does it matter whether or not it is a "style"? I thought all that matters is if it occurs naturally only in pre-pubescent people? Isn't your argument: "if something only appears in prepubescent people. Then it's wrong to expect it in adults"?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 11:23 PM
1

So you don't have an issue with asking someone to remove facial hair, but you have an issue with asking someone to remove body hair? Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 04:09 PM
–

The comparison works because you are saying "if something only naturally appears in a prepubescent, then it is wrong to be attracted to it" And that can apply to clean shaven beards.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:28 PM
1

Honest question, are any of these reasons psychological or are the related to a fetish or kink you have? Neither. I'm just thinking that despite abuse being a bad thing, I think there are some things which I would totally tolerate abuse in exchange for. (in this case, being with a woman who fulfills my lifestyle dreams) Is their phone unlocked too and can you go through it or is this a one-sided thing? One-sided One sided screams more hypocrisy than abuse unless this figurative person gets viole…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:23 PM
–

The "wax the body" part doesn't matter. As long as a part of their body (in this case a clean-shaven face) can only naturally show up in a pre-pubescent boy, then it's the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:17 PM
1

I'm a guy but there are probably exceptions where I'll date a rich but abusive woman. There are different types of abuse, ranging from "always leave your phone unlocked" to physical abuse. I'd be okay with something like "always leave your phone unlocked and let me regularly go through it", in exchange for having the lifestyle of my dreams.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:03 PM
1

School (and college/university) isn't meant to be enjoyed, it's meant to give you the ability to have a better life in the future. You don't have to view it as "I hate school, so it's not for me". If you view it as a tool to get what you want out of life, maybe you'll see it for the great opportunity it is. I'm 29 though so I wish I did more in school instead of fucking around.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:59 PM
–

NOBODY who says they like younger women says they like hairy women. The only demographic of people with completely hairless bodies are prepubescent children. This is like saying "Women who prefer clean shaven men are actually interested in pre-pubescent boys, because that's the only time when a man naturally has 0 facial hair" Cmon lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:57 PM
1

Incorrect summary of my arguments. It actually goes like this (assuming unborn people have the same universal rights as people who are already born): 1. All humans are people (and therefore have all rights associated with being a person) 2. Despite statement 1, a woman's right to bodily autonomy is more important than an unborn child's right to life (Because of 1+2, abortion is okay) 3. An unborn child has, in addition to its right to live, a right to financial support. 4. This right to financia…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:51 PM
1

I didn’t say right to work. I said right to choose to work. And seeing as the man wants the financial abortion, he is not in a consensual agreement. Whether it is right to work or right to choose to work, it doesn't change my argument. None of those are the rights of bodily autonomy. Interesting for you to bring up conscription as that is almost exclusively men being forced to give up bodily autonomy to the state. Yes, and it's not slavery. Right? You agree that it's not slavery right? You belie…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 05:58 AM
1

Do I not have the right to choose to physically work or not Incorrect interpretation. The right to work somewhere is not an extension of your right to bodily autonomy, it is an extension of your right to enter into consensual agreements (in this case, an employment contract) Or do you believe people should be forced to use their bodies to work (back to slavery)? Forcing someone to work does not equate to slavery. For example: Forced Military conscription is a form of forcing people to use their …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 05:38 AM
1

No it doesn't. Financial abortion refer to removing a parent's obligation to financially support a child. This has nothing to do with bodily autonomy. The right to spend your money in whatever way you want is called the right to private property (the right to do what you want with what you own). This is separate to bodily autonomy which refers specifically to making decisions about your physical body. I know you are trying to hamstring it all together with some sort of "everything we do, we do w…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 05:17 AM
1

“My belief = objective, your belief = subjective” is not an argument. I didn't say my belief is objective. It is subjective, and so is yours. What matters is if my (subjective) belief is logically consistent. Which it is. Choosing what to do with your body, such as work and spend money, falls under bodily autonomy. Choosing to kill another person because it benefits you does not. Incorrect. Bodily autonomy refers to the right to do whatever you want with your body. Such as eating foods (or in th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 05:05 AM
2

If you believe that abortion is justified at X point, then financial abortion is just as justified at X point. Nope. Abortion is okay because a woman's right to bodily autonomy beats the kids right to life (well, that is the "sure unborn kids are people too but it's still okay to abort them" argument anyway. My viewpoint is that the kid has no right to life to begin with (up until he is born), not that it is outweighed by the mom's right to do what she wants with her body, but in this discussion…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 04:49 AM
2

Yes. Neither form of abortion is justifiable, Oh well all my position from the beginning of this thread is that financial abortion is not justifiable (well, not possible) but yeah. I can definitely still show that abortion can be justified despite it meaning some humans will not have human rights. It's not logically inconsistent at all, it just depends on when you believe a human gets human rights (upon fertilization/viability/3 months/birth) and whether you believe the rights of one person can …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 04:13 AM
1

Oh so then "financial abortion" is wrong too then, right? You can't take away the right to life, and you can't take away the right to financial support. Right?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 04:03 AM
1

Ah fair enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:56 AM
1

Lol. If all "humans" are "people", then how do you justify abortion?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:54 AM
3

I have ADHD and honestly it looks like ADHD lol. It’s your (non diagnosed bulls hit made up) adhd 🥺 Just wanna say, I had all the same skepticism about whether ADHD is a "real" disease or not. But ever since I got on the (methylphenedate) pill it was like night and day. No more clutter, remembering all my appointments, etc. So there was definitely something.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:45 AM
1

So you are of the belief that not all humans are people, I don't consider an unborn child to have rights of personhood. Putting it the way you said is wrong because readers will think I'm talking about humans as in walking, born, breathing people, and that would be misleading. Because that is literally the same moral justification used for slavery and genocide. Nope. Slavery involves taking away the rights of people who are already born (and therefore gained their human rights). I'm talking abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:42 AM
1

Yeah I should have used the term non-person. My point is the pre birth, the kid has no rights, post birth it does. The semantics of using the term human, or non-human, or whatever has no bearing whatsoever on my argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 03:01 AM
1

Do you think abortion is different than infanticide? If so, why? Yes I think it's different. Abortion is the destruction of a non-human. Infanticide is the killing of a human. Do you think financial abortion is different than ending your financial support of an infant? If so, why? I don't think financial abortion is logically possible. Financial abortion means to take away the financial rights of an unborn child. But since an unborn child is a non-person, it has no financial rights to begin with…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:55 AM
2

So you require a person’s consent to stop financially supporting them, but not ending their life? That's not what I'm saying. You require a person's consent to stop financially supporting them, and you require a person's consent to end their life. But if a person has no right to financial support, and has no right to life (like an unborn baby), then you can do anything you want. A dad has no obligation to pay child support while the baby is not born. He doesn't have to pay for the hospital bills…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:44 AM
2

I think a financial abortion is a physical impossibility. In theory I think you can have a financial abortion, but only if the kid consents (cuz duh, if the kid is the beneficiary of the child support, only it can decided to give it up). But for obvious reasons, this is not possible. A child has no legal personhood until he is born. It's not like he has human rights while in the womb. It has no rights, and there is no "financial support" to abort. You don't owe it any to begin with. You can abor…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:33 AM
1

Don't you meet women in person? Don't you, I don't know, WANT to turn your brain on in the process of dating? Of course I do. But if I can filter a dealbreaker before the physical date then why not. I don't want to do something like: Go on a few dates, realise she might have mental health isssues, ask her about it, if she says bpd then tell her "sorry, it's nothing against you but I've made a decision not to date someone with the emotional requirements of BPD, this is nothing against you, but it…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:25 AM
2

No I'm pro choice/abortion. But once a living person pops out then it's really about who deserves more compassion, the dad who never wanted a kid or the baby who will only have the financial support of the mom. The kid easily wins, at least in the eyes of the court. There are practical reasons to why we favour the kids' interests over the dad, like the increased tax burden to society if we just rely on mom+welfare to raise the kid, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:20 AM
1

Like she has a criminal record and she has been hospitalized repeatedly and her jon kind of sucks. Sorry to hear about that. My ex never got a criminal record, though yeah, hospitalisations, self harm, needing to call someone to physically stop her, seen it all. It's also pretty rare, though, and there are ways to tell without some kind of shtick in your profile. Yeah, I'm familiar with the signs. Having a "favourite person" you bind yourself to, reacting to things as black and white, etc. But I…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 02:18 AM
1

That's now how justice works my man: Dad: It's unfair on me I didn't choose for it to be born Baby: I'm literally a fucking baby, go easy on me and make both parents financially support me. Court: We agree with the baby. It deserves the best start it can have. So fuck you dad. (There are exceptions, e.g. if the baby isn't related to the dad, or if the dad's sperm was taken from a bank and not through consensual sex, etc.)
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 01:57 AM
1

Yeah my ex had severe BPD. Went through that for 5 years before it ended. Now I literally put in my bio "if you have BPD swipe left". It's harsh, but I know the amount of effort needed to emotionally support that kind of relationship, and I no longer have the willpower for it lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 01:54 AM
2

The problem is, once the baby is born it gets "human rights", like the right to be financially supported by parents until its 18. The issue is not dad vs mom. It's dad vs baby. And courts almost always side with the baby cuz cmon. It's an innocent little thing that never chose to be born into these circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 01:51 AM
2

The 'problem' is that child support laws are made from the perspective of the child, not the mother/father. The philosophy behind it goes something like this: Court: Dude you're the father. You're gonna have to support this kid Man: Nah that's not fair. She refused an abortion, I told her I wouldn't support any child, she's a cheater and lied her way into getting pregnant. I didn't agree to any of this, why should I have to pay for it? Baby: You think you have it bad? If I don't get your child s…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 01:47 AM
1

I've done something similar to two different girls and got completely opposite responses. One loved it and liked being babied like that. The other said it was outright patronising and said not to do it again. I mean, it should go without saying that people can react differently to the same interaction, but the sheer difference in response was eye opening. Really highlights the importance of waiting for the girl to communicate her preferences to you, before you act on your own preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/23 01:37 AM
–

Yeah ive done it too. But it's consensual and feels good so whatever lol
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 12:48 PM
–

Well yeah, if you don't want to grow old with someone and If all u want is to always have someone pretty then marriage is not for you lol. But be warned, cuz it's a lot more expensive to go through hot girl after hot girl for the rest of your life than to settle down with someone. But if you can afford that, why not. You won't have biological kids, or if you do, it'll be hard to have a relationship with them if you don't settle down with their mom. But meh
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 12:20 PM
–

If the person you marry is giving you a lifetime of misery, then it's on you for picking the wrong wife lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 12:08 PM
–

Even if this idea were to be implemented, there are likely to be unintended consequences which will further exacerbate the problem. For example, knowing that having a daughter has a 2% chance of having a miserable life, people might be choose to abort female children and this can negatively skew the birthrate over the long term. Moreover, how do we choose which guys do it with the woman? From a purely logical perspective you would pick guys who have strong genetics, such as genius IQ, good physi…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/23 08:49 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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