TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

superman3d Archive

View 0 posts and 179 comments by superman3d 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

and what you also don't understand is that society limits women sexual freedom already and have in the past, even men. monogamy, religion, media, all pushes a monogamous straight marriage between man and wife. men might want multiple wives, and women want the very most successful man. for the betterment of society it's a law to not be poly. This is more stable for society. you don't get it, you don't see the big picture. women excluding most men, doesn't make it valid just because they can. we s…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:50 AM
1

tinder is a perfect example of women's standards being shallow. and if you look online you will, see many women complaining how most men are unattractive. if you care about height for example, to the point of it excluding most men, that's very shallow. where is character compatibility, and other forms of attractive qualitites in that assesment. Men don't exclude most women, they just find some women more hotter than others, but they wouldn't reject the average girl. Men don't have arbitrary stan…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:43 AM
1

we men orgasm quickly, and we get post nut clarity, so, foreplay is the way to go to sustain time. seems like you found someone on your level, so that's good. However, as long as it doesn't hinder responsibilities it's not an issue, but when it does, you need to find a way to cope or mange it in a healthy way.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:34 AM
1

why can't i say that, unless you are politically correct and have to say women and men are exactly the same and equally good or bad. but the most violent crimes are coming from men, 10% of men commit most crimes. I can say that with no hesitation. but, it seems like you can't critique women in any way. That's an issue for sure. because it just stops thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:29 AM
1

No, having standards doesn't mean they are too high. the issue might be a cultural problem. you seem to think because you can't get a partner with those standards you should automatically lower them. you don't get the big picture. If my standard is don't be a drug addict, and I can only get drug addicts , maybe their is an opioid crisis going on. you think how the world is, validates it, and anyone who complains needs to be passive rather than try to change it. women are influenced by media to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:23 AM
1

im saying i didn't tho. if you are making the claim i did, i wanna know how i did. substantiate the argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:13 AM
1

didn't mean to invalidate you, i was just joking, like im already hypersexual as a man, so the joke was i'll say it's not my fault it's just a condition, lol. but like, im not trying to make fun of you or invalidate your struggle. it's a real struggle making you do mistakes, and the whole not being able to focus is hard.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:11 AM
1

how did i do that?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:02 AM
1

i'll use that excuse next time thanks, in all seriousness, Not the worst condition to have.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 01:01 AM
1

"hypersexual female cult leader" btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 12:43 AM
1

so, how is it bs?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 12:36 AM
1

Big difference between someone who only does that, vs someone who doesn't and yet still sees the unfairness around them. it's not the same, and regardless of intent of the individual, they could still point to real truth and real world issues. The loser mentality is someone who attributes all personal failure and moral failings to external sources. it's learned helplessness. However, real problems happen outside people's control all the time. it's not your fault someone hit you with a car, and n…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 12:35 AM
1

To add to what I was saying, louis ck has a great joke on this: Louis CK Everything is amazing & Nobody is happy - YouTube Now, to touch on what you are saying; many therapists and psychiatrists will tell you most of their patients don't actually have "mental illness", most have "real world problems" external circumstances and how to navigate that. Now, people don't like when others who have great circumstances complain about depression for example, they'll say "how can you be rich and complain"…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 12:19 AM
0

You should focus on your own life, I’m a believer in personal responsibility. Some people can’t even fix their own life yet think they understand complex interdependent economic and social structures. However, each person can see injustice and each person can at least converse in public discourse, this is why we have free speech, that’s the implication. That each person has a redeeming and transformative quality and value. What we need to hear might not come from kings and queens but everyday pe…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 10:14 PM
1

Elaborate
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 10:10 PM
1

single moms come with a responsibility of taking care of someone else's child, i think it's fair to not want that. drug addicts is a lot to deal with , sad and possibly violent, etc. depends on drug and how addicted really. fat woman, depends how fat really, if it becomes a hindrance on daily life that's hard to deal with too. Now; as a general rule, people will say, if you don't have these issues it's reasonable to accept a partner who doesn't either. If you are not a single father, or does dru…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 08:21 PM
1

Yeah peanut allergies. But men aren’t peanuts because each individual is different and unique.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:49 AM
1

Fair enough. But just remember people aren’t fixed and unchanging, if you communicate with people and compromise with them you both can get what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:48 AM
0

ofc it's the truth. it's literally the reason you think most men are bad or would "make your life worse" whatever that means,, to justify or rationalize rejecting them. for someone to make your life better they would have to be better than you.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:35 AM
1

just a collection of unfinished ideas that don't reach further down the logic tree.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:24 AM
1

you as an individual is a biased sample anyway. when looking at data, it is actually useful for understanding behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:22 AM
1

yet you know it's true
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:21 AM
1

it's always vague on purpose, because i don't think you can actually explain specifically how most men would make your life worse, you would have to say what personality traits cause this and then provide data that most men are like this.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:20 AM
1

no it wouldn't because if everyone around you is making you sick, maybe it's you who is ill.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:18 AM
1

seems true in theory until you actually get specific and come out of the vague language. what are these standards and how exactly is having a partner with them better than not. and to the point it's a necessary and uncompromising thing, where you would rather be alone than compromise. How could it possibly be that these standards exclude most if not all of your options, if that is not the intended goal to being with. which i suspect is what's happening. which i'm gonna sound crazy for saying but…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:16 AM
1

i think it does, imagine if you are lonely because your standards are too high. that's pure narcissism at play. and ridiculous, oh is no one good enough for you and you feel lonely about it...tf? Vs someone who tries to connect with anyone but can't find a connection, that's depressing. one seems more valid to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 07:09 AM
1

politically correct bs. no, some people have it way worse than others, that's a fact. socially, in health, in luck, everything. people are not living the same lives and they are not the same people.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 06:59 AM
1

What you are saying is true, but what you don't understand is that people acclimate to their circumstances, and then even a minor inconvenience becomes very annoying to them. It's very possible that women have it better in dating, but the tolerance for negative stimuli is lower. so, from an outside observer the emotions might look the same, but the actual circumstance is way different. for a woman, she might have a hard time choosing a man when she has so many options. for some men, they are lon…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 06:57 AM
1

because it's anti intellectual even if it seems pragmatic. so, you can't think about anything? you observe a social problem and you can't talk about it? how else is change gonna happen, unless you are a cynic and think nothing changes in culture.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 06:50 AM
1

the proportion is very different which is the key distinction lmao. women say 90% of men unattractive. a man would sleep with most women his own age, or a good proportion. and it's not just sex either.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/26 06:48 AM
1

didn't you kinda contradict yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:25 AM
–

I’m neither old or chad. I’m a sigma Batman male.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 01:50 PM
0

you see. I think about things in an emotionally detached, analytical way and don't care if it offends, and I don't aim to offend. I'm sure everyone that's interested in you is old enough to be your father, and no in between, /s. This is most definitely a lie. You are getting defensive because i've hit you with truth about yourself that's uncomfortable.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 05:30 AM
1

elaborate
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:26 AM
1

not even true. i liked girls and wasn't even thinking about it, she was nice and that was enough. you truly don't understand men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:25 AM
1

i doni't like the term settle. because it's a trade off, and character matters more.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:16 AM
2

i coomed
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:14 AM
2

true. but women say and act one way too
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:13 AM
2

think. light switch vs dimmer switch. it's not on or off but it increases.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:12 AM
0

old chads.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:02 AM
1

actual nerd or just a geek.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:01 AM
1

i don't believe in leagues unless at exteremes.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 04:00 AM
1

the term settle is just strange to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 03:58 AM
1

what books do you like
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 03:52 AM
-1

was the fact that they were intrested in you part of the reason why you didn't like them? if so, it's kind of like self hate in a way. because if you don't think you are all that great, then anyone desiring you and liking you must be desprate and therfor not good. you want someone better than you and part of showing that is by not wanting you easily. The mere fact of them wanting you is lowering their status in a way, and this is not an uncommon psychological phenomena. also atachment issues can…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 03:51 AM
1

im gonna yap, so bear with me. let's not take dating apps as the truth to begin with, they are nothing more than an illusion. many problems with it, so much so, that most women won't use it. second point, i actually don't like treating people like a "market value", it's all subjective, and also influenced by societal standards that don't make sense most of the time. being shallow about these things does no one any actual good, when it comes to building genuine human connection. like on tinder th…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 03:59 AM
1

well, lets assume this is correct, like i said, for a woman her looks is more important when it comes to her success in dating, meaning her looks is the main factor and explains 80% of her success. so even if both are eqaully delt the same hand actually it's not the same. second point, hair for a woman is a part of what others percieve as feminine, for a man if he is bald nobody thinks he is un- masculine, in fact, quite the opposite, he can be percieved as more masculine with beard, nice build …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 11:15 PM
1

I don’t need to hear a lot from you to know ur psychology behind it. Because it’s the lack of nuance, tone, and apathy towards the subject that makes this what it is, it’s selective and gives hint at ur perceptions thus values. I already know a whole host of associative thinking patterns you have that are problematic. Because it’s merely a script, it’s like knowing someone’s ideology once you get a hint at someone that they are a communist for example you know they will think privileged people a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:22 PM
1

imo, ur point is that, a man and a woman have the same attribute that's their level/same level. but in reality it's not the same nor that simple. for example same height man and woman won't be percieved or treated the same. men and women are different, and thus subject to different standards. and ofc it's a multivaraite analysis within each gender, ie, many factors play into it in unique ways. for example, a man with status increases his sexual success. for women her looks explain about 80% of h…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:45 AM
3

Healthy food SHOULD be obvious. and ofc we live in a world were people are moderately informed. However, lets look at this example, im sure we have heard of the phrase "bare minimum". what exactly is this? i didn't really understand it until taking time to understand it. you see some women, assume basline attributes and behviour all men SHOULD have. They assume being a good person is a bare minimum, it's not a stand out to them or an extereme positive, just something they should have. and it's n…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:37 AM
1

"Not only are "ugly" men undesirable and live miserable lives, but to hammer that point more, they are actually evil and resentful and misogynistic, so it's actually moral and fair that i disrespect them and reject them, and ostracize them." like this kind of rationlization is evil. tbh. it isn't enough to say, i don't find them attractive, but actually they can't be good people,. ensuring that their is nothing they can do to ascend the "lower status" place you have placed them in. this is the k…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:20 AM
2

you can't say as a group "they are not" that is just evil. like holy hell
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:04 AM
–

holy narcissist. and name checks out
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:01 AM
5

exactly! if healthy food isn't tasty to you, you are the problem! like how do you not understand the analogy, and how it applies to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 07:58 AM
–

some villians aren't born but made
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:53 AM
-1

I don't disagree with the first statment. However, what you are doing is called the availability heuristic, you are judging a group by the most extreme, loud or memorable, and labeling them all as like that. when in reality that's all you see. They become mentally available examples but, not accurately representative. it's easy to make a group all the same, because then it's easy to attack and simpilfy them, making them a strawman. So, you don't actually have to deal with any logical arguments m…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:52 AM
1

a 6/10 man with high status is no longer 6/10 and can land the 9
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:34 AM
1

does this mean after a certain threshold it matters less. and id imagine in men, their status matters and doesn't stop mattering the higher it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:32 AM
1

well the issue is the medium. people's behviour changes depending on the enviornment. for a shallow thinker they will blame women instead of the enviornment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:30 AM
1

dating apps are not like real life tho
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:26 AM
1

women having high standards = saftey is literally ur argument. care to elaborate?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:11 AM
0

proving my point btw. ur first comment wasn't about anything but trying to justify ur own behaviour. ur using whataboutism as a psychological defense mechanism, to diffuse responsibility. "everyone does it." so it's ok.. regardless of the underlying ethics of the conversation. you still felt the need to not be introspective or atleast consider accountability, you sound narcissistic, lack empathy, lack depth, which is an attitude that permeates throughout the current culture especially in some wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 06:55 AM
1

very true ur right
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:29 PM
0

women have unrealistic and skwed standards all because of social media, to mitage this you would need a social change to bring back the perception women have back down to earth.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:20 PM
0

wrong that is not the equivalent.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:16 PM
1

looks = saftey?????
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:14 PM
1

no not true a bald man is not the same as bald women two completly different things
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:14 PM
0

ur just wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:04 PM
1

this is so wrong on so many levels. just because people don't find you attractive doesn't mean you are the problem, and many of these people develop a bad personality is because they become resenttful after being treated badly all their life.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 10:00 PM
1

those three factors are small subset of a bigger picture. bone structure, symmetry, good skin, etc are what makes you look good. if you actually understand blackpill terms you would know someone 5'9 can be a htn (high tier normy) or chadlite, etc. height is one of many things.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:58 PM
1

they are most likely not below average even in looks, but definitely not in other ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:56 PM
1

what planet are you on
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:54 PM
1

classic projection on ur part and a classic example of what people think the world is like and how different it is from reality. and it just shows the lack of personality you have
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:54 PM
1

it's not like the dangers become less relevent with an above average guy lmao. you are just incorrect. women's desire isn't like men's in that women rank men, and it's relative. unlike men where it's more absolute. plus women's libido spike around ovulation. so it's just different. obv men have high test making it more constant.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:35 AM
2

Basic biology, for some reason, life, and including human life strives to "improve" or change. so not all of a species will reproduce. That's what attraction is. Something about another person has good genes, good behaviour. With humans it's more complicated because alot of the things we are selected for are abstracted. but essentially it's about survival, resources, good health, and reproductive capability. edit: so for men, women rank men relative to other men, subconsciously. for men they jus…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:24 AM
1

if you have taken economy what you will realize that whats happening in the dating landscape is essentially an unregulated free market. Just like how free markets have issues, the dating "market" has issues as well. main one being unequal. many men can't adopt the stance that they have value, because sadly they arn't treated like they do. supply and demand. Women , or the average woman has more demand than the average guy. Simply because men desire women more than vice versa. " The best thing yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:17 AM
1

you seem to think sleeping with someone is like eating food or something. you clearly, apart from being delusional, have no idea what you are talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:39 AM
3

being single for life doesn't make sense from a biological prospective. i guess that thinking and behaviour is so incorrect that it would just natrually get weeded out of biology. natrual selection lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:36 AM
1

are you kidding? you don't see the irony? women especially op are the most shallow people on earth.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:31 AM
1

status is the important factor, even if all men looked the same. status would make them different. women select for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:24 AM
0

how would that fix anything
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 10:16 AM
–

Aren’t you tainted too?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 03:27 PM
1

ofc it does. the problem with being picky isn't women not picking dangerous men. nobody says you have to go after unstable, criminal record, drunken man. yet, you used this interchangeably to the whole being picky argument, when the implication there is obv about looks, status, money, etc. you and many women argue that, yet alot go after abusive men who are good looking or rich. so, it's a fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 07:32 AM
1

you can't supress that. supressing will cause serious issues and mental problems, and that will burst in the form of anger, depression, etc
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 07:19 AM
1

this weird sleight of hand you just did is crazy. why is the man dangerous here? we encourage assessing personality flaws, why are you assuming looks = personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 06:57 AM
1

that's becuase the "beast" part doesn't mean ugly but a capable dangerous man which the woman tames, basically. but many people view it wrong and think it's about looks
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 06:50 AM
1

exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 06:45 AM
1

This is complicated. First of all, research papers often use images to assess what they call 'attraction,' but that’s not really the right term — it’s more like 'good-looking,' which isn’t necessarily the same as attraction. Let me explain the difference. For women, seeing a naked man in these studies is about as arousing as seeing a mountain or a flower. Yet, we still say women are straight and attracted to men. So how can that be? Just as someone might say one flower looks better than another,…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 06:43 AM
–

ur perspective is already tainted using phrases such as "better options" is funny. you don't realize it, it infected your brain.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/10/25 06:20 AM
1

you are taking one trait that helps a little to say "looks = status" when in reality the correlation between looks of a man and status is 0.1-0.2. So, that leaves most of the variance on other factors. Hamermesh & Biddle (1994) — “Beauty and the Labor Market”, Mobius & Rosenblat (2006) — “Why Beauty Matters”, Langlois et al. (2000) — Meta-analysis of the social outcomes of attractiveness which showed a 0.14 correlation. As a matter of fact, men who see other men attract women simply due to their…
/r/BlackPillScience15/09/25 06:09 AM
1

wrong. just because you have looks doesn't mean men will elevate you to higher status among men. status is influence, resources, and social power. it's a position in the hierarchy.
/r/BlackPillScience14/09/25 04:29 AM
2

Bro. I have already acknowledged that, sexual selection and natrual selection preasures are roughly good indicators of success in survival. However, you can't seem to understand the naunce here, you don't understand that species can be successful at one point and be extinct because the selection preasure isn't a perfect representaion of what optimally survives and adapts, only good enough for a particular enviornment at a particular time. Moreover, you don't understand my point about runaway sel…
/r/BlackPillScience21/07/25 12:19 AM
3

You are focusing on traits that align with use, but completely ignore once that don’t. Peacocks use to be able to fly but lost that ability due to the peahens preferring larger plumage tail feathers, so now they just leap and glide kinda. So you have no idea what you are talking about, I’m specifically talking about runaway selection. Which is a flaw in sexual selection, being “good enough” is what nature is, it does not aim at perfection. Meaning it’s flawed, so when you refer to nature as good…
/r/BlackPillScience20/07/25 12:38 AM
2

Ironically you have a “shallow” understanding. No pun intended. Not all sexually selected traits are adaptive for survival. Traits may evolve because they’re attractive, not because they’re useful. Search up runaway sexual selection. And also sexual dimorphism can cause risk too. Essentially, a trait can look attractive, this will be sexually selected for, if no regulation occurs it creates a feedback loop, regardless if that trait may later hinder your survival, health, or lifespan.
/r/BlackPillScience14/07/25 08:31 AM
1

You are correct. It’s a a sort of superficial imitation, Pastiche. It lacks the depth, accountability, responsibility, and the good side of it. It’s a parody of it, but takes only the self interested, narcissistic, selfish version of it.
/r/BlackPillScience14/07/25 08:18 AM
1

No this isn’t true. And this is the common myth and one of the biggest flaws of this ideology. You assume status = just using you for resources and no actual love or lust. This is incorrect, status makes women actually notice you, pay attention, and take any man and increase his status and way more women will find him suddenly attractive. Don’t go to the extremes to try and disprove my point either.
/r/BlackPillScience14/07/25 08:14 AM
1

Survival and reproduction are what’s most important everything else is cope
/r/BlackPillScience14/07/25 08:08 AM
1

Ok, I guess I’ll put it in simple terms, although it will lack the depth of earlier. I have already explained the pros and cons of being a “social sheep”. It’s like a mental shortcut, thinking for yourself is a difficult and time consuming thing. However, it can lead to loss of individuality and personal innovation, growth, uniqueness etc. the fact that women do this more is data to me not an ideological statement. Second point is simple. Status matters for men does not mean a high status man wi…
/r/BlackPillScience28/06/25 03:31 AM
1

Btw the assortative mating being used as a counter argument against the “high status man can date a McDonald worker but not the other way around” is a statement often used by leftist or rad leftist/ or feminist against red pill men online so I have heard about this argument before and have thought about it. And it’s not well thought out as I have already outlined in my previous comment. I’m really not sure why feminists or leftist like to strawmann the other side’s arguments and not really think…
/r/BlackPillScience28/06/25 03:05 AM
4

I don’t remember saying it was negative per se. Going with the crowd more often than not leads to positive outcomes. Going with the crowd has benefits like safety, social acceptance, and mental ease, it helps you belong, avoid risk, and make quicker decisions in uncertain situations. It can even be smart when the group has diverse, independent input (the “wisdom of the crowd”). But the downsides are real: you risk groupthink, losing your individuality, falling into mob mentality, or limiting you…
/r/BlackPillScience28/06/25 02:57 AM
5

You don’t understand it? It’s not that… it’s if a man has a woman attracted to him a random woman seeing that will find him more attractive. It’s BECAUSE other women find him attractive or he has woman around etc, that she finds him more attractive. while men find women attractive regardless not BECAUSE she has men orbiting her or getting attention from men. I know what you will say attractive people will attract people, but my point is that social proof is more powerful used against women. An i…
/r/BlackPillScience28/06/25 02:21 AM
7

Because this only applies to women. Men don’t find women with a lot of men around her more attractive. However, I know, even from personal experience the more women around you the more women will be attracted to you. And this study adds more evidence, and it’s not just this. Basically women copy other women in more ways than men copy men. Even their ideas and what they say, if you notice on social media, you would know too.
/r/BlackPillScience28/06/25 01:35 AM
7

No I didn’t his comment implied that since women have money and have an education that they don’t care about money or status. That’s cope. Looks and status is the top two factors for a man’s success in dating. But they are different take any man and increase his status and he will have greater success with women, so it’s a whole separate thing. His whole comment implies it doesn’t matter and only looks matters and that’s objectively false.
/r/BlackPillScience19/06/25 12:48 AM
12

What he said was rude and harsh and I can why you would have an emotional reaction. However, it’s not false.
/r/BlackPillScience18/06/25 03:18 AM
1

It traits can be separately selected for not all cluster
/r/BlackPillScience18/06/25 03:14 AM
24

This is false. Women even when they have money and get educated want a man higher status/ socioeconomic status than them. Yall don’t know anything if you don’t know this.
/r/BlackPillScience18/06/25 03:10 AM
1

I strongly disagree with the your status statement the data is clear that it plays a Big Role. Idk why you mix genuine insight with bs.
/r/BlackPillScience14/05/25 08:07 PM
1

I'll lay my argument like this It's more complex than that, as all things are. Never rely on a univariate analysis. Looks account for 40%, socio-economic status 36%, and the rest includes social skills, opportunities, libido, and other factors. So it's very likely that a man who isn't successful with women lacks in multiple dimensions. It's not obvious what is you and what isn't—your fashion, material conditions, relationships with people, and status are all reflections of you.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 01:41 AM
1

That's just not true at all, by the way. Most women don't separate who you are as a person from your socio-economic status. That is part of how they perceive a man and, in some sense, a representation of his intrinsic essence. They are genuinely more attracted to higher status, regardless of looks. Although looks is important, it's a seperate factor. But you can isolate the power of status as a factor. To prove this, take any man and either lower or increase his status. If his status increases, …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 01:31 AM
1

You are correct—so much so that they stopped responding. Lmao. You perfectly laid out what I was thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 01:24 AM
1

The correlation between socio-economic status and male sexual success is 0.6, accounting for 36% of the variability, while looks account for something like 40%. Women find their partners less sexually attractive if they lose their job or drop in the socio-economic hierarchy, regardless of looks. So if it is "artificial," explain that. The world is never explained in a univariate fashion—ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 01:17 AM
1

I'll split my argument into two parts. If I am lazy and procrastinate, and everything around me is in chaos, is the environment the problem, or am I? You see, it's not actually easy to differentiate between what's around me and what is me. You aren't just your body—everything around you is a reflection of you. You say you are "nothing more than what you provide," outside of some women who only view you for the material things you bring—let’s say, "gold diggers." But what makes you think women se…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 01:11 AM
1

you can't say all women who value status in men are gold diggers tho
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/25 12:57 AM
–

You clearly don't know women lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/25 08:53 AM
1

Kinda, on average, I guess. However, I don't agree with your rubric for assessing looksmatch—like equating baldness to an obese woman. That kind of comparison is an assumption based on your internal model of the world; it's not an objective fact, nor is it practically true in its implications regarding dating success and potential. I also don't agree that looks are the be-all and end-all. You clearly didn't pay attention to what I said earlier—I mentioned that men have many strategies to be succ…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/25 09:40 PM
1

Same can be said for women tho no? Regardless, I don't care.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/25 04:20 AM
1

My motivations are beyond your comprehension. I am self-affirming; I set my own values. I don't feel oppressed or weak. I don't care about external validation. I simply conquer the world, according to my motivations and a will to live. If dating a Victoria's Secret model is part of my plan, then that's fine. lmao
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/25 12:49 AM
1

😭 either you are a troll or actually low iq. Either way, have a good day. 👍
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 05:47 PM
1

Ok, so you're going to ignore everything I said and focus only on that? It seems like your mind is made up—you’re not thinking deeply or with nuance. I'm not sure if this conversation is productive. For the last time, I am not the one controlling the perception of these things. Biology, culture, society, media, social media, etc., all play a role. Biologically, men's beauty is not as important as women's. Culturally, men are expected to make money, provide, be competent, strong, and tough. In me…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 09:26 AM
1

I don't make the rules, i don't control societal expectations, and gender expectations. Shallow means 'of little depth' i was saying you don't think about things beyond the surface. If you thought deeper you would know what i am talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/25 01:31 AM
1

No I am not. Your point is reductionist/ oversimplified, subjective, and shallow. Think deeper, if you can’t understand nuance that’s not my fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 08:49 PM
1

Ok let me explain: Hair (let’s assume nice hair) is an attractive quality, no doubt, in both men and women. Hair also hides your flaws, which is useful. However, The absence of it doesn’t “make you ugly”, if you are “ugly” you are ugly with or without it. Attractiveness is a collection of traits, symmetry, good facial proportions, good health, fit, good immune function, good skin. Etc. attractiveness is not one trait, the reason for example, obesity is uniquely unattractive to me is that it affe…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 07:33 PM
1

You should ask yourself why being an asshole works. If attractive = i don't have to be nice. If ugly = nice, asshole, santa, jesus, doesn't matter. That's what you are implying, no? In that case, no shit. Why would anyone put in any meaningful work into things that don't matter, "being nice" by letting people walk all over you is pathetic. "Oh him hes nice, but he is just a friend." Phrases like these create actual villians. I've seen it time and time again. Because women don't want "nice guys" …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 09:37 AM
1

NO, lmao. What is the fat female equivalent of a male like jason statham or the rock? Bald doesn't equal ugly, ugly = ugly. fat = fat. However, to say bald woman = bald man is actually wrong. that's a false equivalence, male pattern baldness (androgenic alopecia specifically) is predominantly a male thing, it's literally caused by male sex hormones testosterone and dht. The genes make you sensitive to those hormones, and the hormones cause the hair cycle to shrink. It's normal and not unhealthy …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/25 09:19 AM
–

on the surface, it seems like we don't disagree. I’ve already said that women don’t select intelligence per se but rather use markers of intelligence. However, your claim that women primarily look at health, which is correlated with intelligence and education level or job "income," oversimplifies the situation. At first glance, it doesn’t seem like a mistake, but upon deeper analysis, I realized a key issue: health and intelligence can both be independently selected for and have distinct selecti…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/24 06:03 AM
1

This is incorrect. It's not the same as height. While intelligence is heritable (40–80%, depending on age), environmental factors like education, nutrition, and social context have a larger role compared to height. The higher iq a woman is the less likely she is to find a partner/ marry, the same is not for men women, even when they are well off, want a man to make more than them, be higher in the social hierarchy, taller than them, etc. People often meet partners in settings (e.g., schools, job…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:19 AM
1

What you are describing is a very slim portion of human history. Throughout human history/ Evolution a large chunk/majority had choice. Forcing people is never an effective strategy. So the whole, "women had no choice" is wrong. Total (Out of ~200,000 Years of Human History) High Choice: ~192,870 years (~96%). Low Choice: ~7,130 years (~4%). Time Period Years with High Choice Years with Low Choice Hunter-Gatherer Era ~190,000 years ~10,000 years Agricultural to Early Civilizations ~2,500 years ~…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/24 01:03 AM
1

Dumb ash. attraction can be built off of literal words, what are you talking about? attraction is way more complicated than you wanna make it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 04:16 PM
1

you are correct, it can also be innate however and people will make the logical fallacy of assuming if some attraction is innate none can be conditioned.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 04:14 PM
1

people downvoting a truth will never not amaze me.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 04:12 PM
1

it's literally not the same holy smokes. If you wanna live in a lie whatever, at this point just get mad.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 04:12 PM
1

You are just incorrect because you don't understand what status means, you think it's just money lmao. Status can signal competence, resources, intelligence, etc, so women evolved to be drawn to indicators of status. A man with higher status has way more sexual opportunities, That's just a fact, regardless of what you think "should" happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:59 PM
1

A beta by definition is lower in the social hierarchy. I's not like a high status man is doing beta bux lmao. Beta bux is someone who is low in status but has enough money, so the women who didn't want him for him "settled" for him, because he was the best option for long term strategy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:52 PM
1

"socially inept" is signaling low status, regardless of money. Status is social perception of value.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:48 PM
1

Status isn't just perceived, but yes you can mimic or fraud your way.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:38 PM
1

Status is quite literally a social rank and as a consequence people at the top have better opportunities. Yes even things you wouldn't think of could affect social rank, it's pretty simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:33 PM
1

Many people don't have an evolutionary, social, or psychological understanding of what status is. They think it's some shallow popularity contest. It's hilarious, knowing those very same people are moved and even pay attention to things for those reasons without knowing, it's quite poetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:31 PM
1

wow good advice! Gain status so you don't obsess over status. What a genius move?!?!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:27 PM
1

Talking vs actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:25 PM
1

lol, just "ok"
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:24 PM
1

"This definition of status is an overly broad one that I imagine would also be true for men as well..." not really, as anything that matters socially is technically important for status, some traits matter way more than others. Even the indicators can be ranked in a hierarchy of importance as it pertains to status. The reason humans are smart is because women valued men for things other than looks. Women value status. The number 1 indicator of high status in a given hierarchy, across all games, …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:20 PM
1

Status can be defined as an individual’s relative position or rank within a social hierarchy, which reflects their influence, respect, or access to resources and opportunities in a group or society. The concept of status can be understood from both evolutionary and social perspectives. If you wanna get into it we can.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:07 PM
1

You are just wrong for the simple fact that you said if you "meet my standards", those standards are likely considered good by you whether you know it or not by being high in status in some way. A lot of women just aren't aware of just how important status really is. Example: being confident is an indicator of higher status, intelligence, etc. It's just that people have a very shallow view of status; this makes the conversation difficult.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 03:01 PM
1

Yes and no. the tall, larger, whatever guy, is definitely just short term if low status. However, The high status guy is absolutely not just long term, they can be short term as well, it's not like women can just secure a high status guy easily, plus "good genes" aren't just visible by looking, Being able to climb the social latter is a very good indicator of good genes as well in a different way, Intelligence, for example, is highly genetic. What you are focusing on is simply resources acquisit…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:36 PM
1

wrong, you can in your local group, if everyone around your group is broke. status works locally, than it expands.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:25 PM
1

thank you for being smart
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:23 PM
1

achieved status, Earned through actions, accomplishments, or personal qualities. Status determines influence and group dynamics. High-status individuals often set norms, lead decision-making, and attract admiration or imitation. This status is context-dependent; what confers high status in one group or culture might not in another. Indicators of status could include wealth, education, job title, physical attractiveness, charisma, and other traits valued within a given culture. The reason it's im…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 02:02 PM
1

There are two types of status, ascribed and achieved. caste system would be ascribed status. What we are talking about is achieved status, Earned through actions, accomplishments, or personal qualities. Status determines influence and group dynamics. High-status individuals often set norms, lead decision-making, and attract admiration or imitation. This status is context-dependent; what confers high status in one group or culture might not in another. Indicators of status could include wealth, e…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/11/24 01:58 PM
1

Like I said. You can choose to live in delusion if that helps you sleep at night. Like I’m not sure what you are getting at? The word incel is the most misused bastardized word in recent internet history. If you think disagreeing/ even hating certain opinions of some woman = incel, you are delusional. For some reason if a woman said the same thing the guy above said, you wouldn’t say what you said. It’s only ever an argument that somehow being a good person = getting laid when it comes to being …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 09:57 PM
12

what are you talking about? " Feminism has given feminists a kind of moral authority where they can say or do whatever they want and if you say anything against them, you are a problem." " it would matter. Because men vote and you can alienate, demonize, insult men so much before they would rather make it a lose lose situation than support you." Is this not what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 07:27 AM
13

You didn't hurt their feefees you literally ignore that men face problems, have their own interest that might not align with your own, and are people with wants, and demonizing them. If you think words have no impact on the world, you are naive. Words change the culture, and how people think.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 07:09 AM
11

Men wanting things isn't evil, they are simply more invested in their own self interest as most people are, as women as well. Appealing to morality or the good, ie the interest of other people aside from yourself only works if that other person doesn't ignore your own interest. You seem to think that if i don't care about men's self interest they should de facto care about mine. And appealing to morality in this case is hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:59 AM
2

You said things that are generally true without making a specific case. So, unless you provide a specific case i can't tell if you are logical or not. it's possible to apply this illogically.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:55 AM
-3

why not?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:42 AM
5

you don't understand people.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:41 AM
23

The fact that you think it's only "hurting feeefees" is the reason why you are dividing men. Y
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:36 AM
1

or it would probably radicalize men way more, and actually think women can't vote or have agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:28 AM
2

I find it hilarious that if a man said this they would be called a loser. double standards
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:26 AM
2

Any person who threatens not to have kids will simply just die off without spreading genes. Nature doesn't care about your feelings, the whole 4b movement is loser mentality. it's like saying if I go down you will go down too, except in reality those men will go to other women and they will be left alone, they are the losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:05 AM
3

lol. dying without reproducing is worse than dying after reproducing. if everyone acted like how you said our society would be worse. you are too individualistic, your phrase of "will your great grand kids remember you" is evidence of this.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 06:01 AM
1

This is more complicated than you make it sound.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:55 AM
1

throughout all of human history, how did women cope???
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:54 AM
1

I don't think the actual pregnancy is the issue. 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:52 AM
1

Any man who aligns himself politically to what leftist women think in hopes of getting laid is pathetic. They call these guys "male feminist". You are delusional if you think any man who doesn't align with you politically can't get laid, lmao. And the fact that you think using this as a shaming tactic is hilarious.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:46 AM
1

Feminist always use language like " "women" vs you" to create this illusion that all women de facto think like you the individual. lmao. It's exclusionary rhetoric.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:42 AM
1

it's language like this that keeps dividing people. "repulsed by men". Your ideology isn't about morality, it's about power and control. You want as much power and control in your hands while throwing men under the bus. You don't care what happens to men as long as you get what you want, admit it. This is the reason you will divide young men and women and will lose.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:37 AM
1

Your entire ideology doesn't care about men, that's why the only person caring about men is gonna get their support. It's the same reason why Andrew Tate was popular, as much as you think he was bad, he was the only person acknowledging men. The extreme left isolates young men. That's why I don't think you care about morality, you only care about power and self interest.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/24 05:33 AM
1

so what happens if you are an unattractive woman?? I don't think you suddenly become attracted to men you otherwise wouldn't be attracted to if you were more attractive??? how does that work? people shoot above what they look like all time, otherwise that would be boring. 2. women value more things in men than just looks. and functionally speaking sex is sex, the idea that it wouldn't be enjoyable because someone doesn't meet your hyper specific standards is laughable. so, I think, your issue is…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/24 07:28 AM
4

I think what he is saying is that, on average, most people should be considered "average." He believes the distribution of attractiveness should resemble a normal distribution, specifically a Gaussian distribution, where 68% of individuals fall within one standard deviation of the mean. In contrast, what you are describing seems more like a right-skewed distribution, where most people score in the range of 0 to 4, with very few reaching a score of 10. He implies that attractiveness or beauty is …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/24 06:52 AM
1

I get what he is saying. Obviously friends and family wouldn’t date them. But he is saying if they were a stranger. Like the qualities and attributes of a person given the same age.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/24 04:57 AM
1

It’s probably one of the biggest, Let’s be fr. and when they do they always say, I think you’re nice or your personality is good, “you’re just not my type”. It’s just a cop out.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/24 04:55 AM
3

It’s very simple. Equality of outcome is a problem. When people putting in the same effort get the same reward, it creates inefficiency in systems due to a lack of motivation and incentive to innovate. However, how does being born looking different cause people to treat you unequally? This is exactly equivalent to racism. How does this unjust system not cause any rational person not to feel resentment and anger?? The goal should be to create systems where people are judged on effort, abilities, …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/24 03:38 AM
–

It’s always technically the person’s “fault” but it’s a lot of the time not their fault. What I mean is, sometimes it’s for things you can actively change about yourself and other times you can not. It doesn’t really matter if that's personality, looks, socio-economic status. Personality only matters when it’s in conjunction with things the other person wants. Personality is a marker if that person will get what they want from that person. However, personality itself is almost never initself the…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 01:00 AM
–

idk 1. It depends on long-term relationships and short-term. Which is what a lot of men want, they don’t want to commit. 2. Looks definitely gives you more opportunities/ advantages. If you can’t admit that you are wrong, women can be more shallow than you know. It sounds cringe, but the smv, (sexual market value), and rmv (relationship market value) are a lot different, for lack of better terms. A lot of women can’t just have a personality. They need the physical aspect. So it’s even a bigger h…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 12:49 AM
–

How do you know this about him? 2. Are you saying it would be easier if he doesn’t have those traits? I don’t disagree with social skills.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/24 12:40 AM
–

It’s not like women like jerks, it’s just that “chad” is a jerk. Like, obviously, no one owes anyone anything. But for some people, being themselves isn’t enough. It’s really hard for people to understand unless they are those people. So, when being yourself isn’t enough, you look towards the external factors, the behavior or a systematic approach towards relationships and people, almost analytically. Like, if I do this, she will do it. It's not naturally flowing. The problem isn't that being ni…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/24 03:15 PM
0

It’s not that they think they are owed for being nice. But how would they compensate for lack of looks? To them being nice is part of the “work” you have to do to gain sex. Given that mindset, you work and still don’t get paid whereas some people don’t work and get paid. Seeing that, resentment is not surprising.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/24 12:10 PM
0

You only call them “entitled” because you are not attracted to them and feel as though they are undesirable. If I rejected a woman who wanted sex from me, she would have the same response. She would be very mad. It’s a human response. Also, if we assume the meaning of the word “entitled” as the feeling of wanting to gain something without doing the “work”. Now is there a clear way to get sex? What steps are required? work? If there is no clear way to gain sex through a set of actions, then how c…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/24 11:42 AM
1

Being indifferent proves how you think of them. Like nothing, they don’t exist to you, you don’t care what happens to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/24 01:30 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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