TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

ta06012022 Archive

View 1 posts and 6,794 comments by ta06012022 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)
8

Question For Womenta06012022/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/24 01:25 PM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 6,794 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
5

Exactly. A working professional 34 year old dating a working professional 27 year old basically gets no reaction, because those people are generally in the same stage of life. A 25 year old working professional dating an 18 year old high school student is going to get a lot more scrutiny.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 01:27 PM
1

The blue pill is just mainstream views. Here are some main stream views: Looks are very important and improving your looks can help. Diet and exercise can improve your appearance. Being confident and sociable can make you more desirable. Knowing how to flirt and build tension is important in the early stages of meeting someone. Those are just a few examples. The red pill is basically just widely held mainstream beliefs with "and women are hypergamous subhumans" layered on top. So if the blue pil…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 01:20 PM
3

Natural tendency.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 03:22 AM
–

What men with the blue pill? Not following.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 12:31 AM
3

There are differences in how men and women should be proactive, but the answer for anyone who's being passive and failing is to be more proactive. Even between different men or different women, my advice would be different depending on the situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 12:30 AM
3

Unless you proactively cut it off. If you wait to long, things start to get messy.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 12:27 AM
3

Maybe my experience isn't the norm, but some of the best sex I've ever had has been in hookups. I just wasn't ready to settle down forever in college. I think a person usually has to be open to commitment for that to happen, but obviously there are exceptions to every rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 10:24 PM
1

I don't really follow that comment. That being said, giving generic advice is difficult because you don't have any details of a hypothetical person's situation. Real advice depends on a person's circumstances. Let's say there's a woman who's been unsuccessful romantically. If I find out that she's not on any dating apps and stays home with her cats rather than socializing, my advice would be to first try getting on dating apps and becoming more socially active. That would at least improve her od…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 10:20 PM
2

Making yourself available is passive. That wouldn't be my advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 08:15 PM
11

I consider myself blue pill. If a woman is passive and struggling with dating, I would tell her she needs to be more proactive. If a woman is passive but successful in dating, I wouldn't give her any advice because what she's doing is working for her. No different for men honestly.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 06:49 PM
–

Eventually by the time I got to my mid 20s, I did start wanting commitment. But in my early 20s and in college, I preferred the novelty of sleeping with lot of different girls. It was easy for me to meet attractive women, so I kept doing it. There are definitely some who I later looked back on with a little regret because they were actually really good options, but that's not what I wanted at the time. My friends who have had a lot of casual sex are mostly fairly similar in that way. It was rare…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/26 02:52 PM
3

That wasn't my experience with situationships. I don't think I've ever slept with a woman who wasn't good enough to show off to my friends or family. Situationships typically happened because I didn't want commitment with anyone at the time. Generally when I've seen a guy sleep with a woman he would be embarrassed of, that's a ONS situation where both of them are very drunk. That's also generally the only time I've seen guys manage to sleep with women who were out of their league. Very drunk peo…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:49 PM
3

these women do not have sex or do anything sexual at all. Then they're not sugar dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 09:43 PM
7

these aren't sex workers, these are tiktok brained women In my opinion, sugar dating is sex work. If someone is getting paid for sexual acts, it's sex work. Just my view. they completely waste time. you do not join sugar dating with the idea you will find conventionally attractive men. Then if it doesn't work for them, they'll eventually give up and leave the market. If it does work for some of them, then those won't. their complaints suggest otherwise. In general, if a woman tries selectively s…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 07:20 PM
13

ones that are willing to commit crimes, drugging, armed robbery with a few committing murder Sex work is an unregulated industry, which contributes to its sketchiness. Of course some sex workers are bad actors. That's always been the case. Even beyond sex work, there are cases of men being robbed, etc. by meeting women or alleged women who they met online, only to be set up and robbed or worse. It's completely a valid risk when it comes to meeting people online, but let's not pretend it's new. a…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 06:56 PM
2

So if you car is broken down and you need a ride to work, you wouldn't ask a friend who works in the same area for a ride? Another example is moving. I've helped friend move and they've helped me move.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:48 AM
4

The reality is; the MAJORITY of self proclaimed incels, don't have to be incels. They just don't want to fuck ugly girls. 100%. The first time I ever heard of incels was when I was in high school and Elliott Rodger went on his shooting spree. In his manifesto, he explained that he was targeting the hottest sorority at his college because those were the types of girls who had rejected him. He was an incel because he wasn't interested in girls on his level. He wanted hot girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:45 AM
1

Here's the problem with this post... "men" don't claim anything. Some men claim some things and other men claim other things. Many of the men who claim that men are desperate and will settle for any woman are likely desperate men who will in fact settle for any woman. Most men aren't desperate and won't settle for any woman, nor do they make that claim. I think there's general consistency at the individual level. This post is sort of a goomba fallacy, but it's somewhat understandable because man…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 03:34 AM
3

That's a fair but in my experience the correlation between money and travelling is not that strong. For instance, here in Europe you can do completely free and paid-for exchange semesters with partner universities within the EU. This is a major difference between the US and Europe. College is very expensive in the US and those exchange programs are a substantial additional cost on top of expensive tuition. I was grew up middle class but went to a university with a lot of affluent to wealthy stud…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 08:59 PM
3

It's established that openness to new experience exists. How strongly that correlates with partner count does not seem to be established. We can speculate, but without any data it's sort of pointless. Like I said, anecdotally the people I've known to travel the most are people with the most money. In my experience, the richest people I know have not been the most promiscuous. In fact, some studies show that people in the lowest income brackets have the highest number of partners. Those people ce…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 07:14 PM
3

Yeah that's what I thought too, openness to experience is probably consistent across domains: if you enjoy the novelty of exploring new countries, you likely also enjoy meeting new people and yes also new sexual experiences. We would need some data to establish that correlation. No reason to just limit it to travel. Some people like the novelty of trying new foods, picking up new hobbies, etc. I think the stronger correlation with travel is likely income/family income. The people I knew in colle…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 06:52 PM
3

I’m just saying that on this sub and others people will deploy false dichotomies to shame men who don’t want high n count women by insisting “low n count women don’t like sex”. I'm not saying no one ever says that, because it's the internet and there's someone out there saying just about everything imaginable, but that's not a common argument. I've seen it applied more when a man insists on only having a relationship with a virgin. Past a certain age, I think it is fair to question why she's a v…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 02:18 PM
5

There are red pill influencers who make a living by being openly misogynist. There are people who cater to misogynist men just like there are people who cater to misandrist women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 12:25 PM
2

There are prominent Democrats who advocate nationalizing all private property? Like who?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 12:03 PM
6

Human relationships are whatever the people involved mutually define them as.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:38 AM
2

What about guys who effortlessly find casual sex? Going all the way back to high school, it was never hard for me to find sex. I have a high n count because it was easy for me. I suspect that many men with high n counts find it easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:35 AM
5

TL;DR There's a sanctity during a relationship regarding sex, but not before it or to any future or true partner: why? There doesn't have to be. Generally couples decide to make relationships exclusive. If two people have made an agreement to be in a relationship on the condition that neither sleeps with another person, then it's a betrayal of trust if one or both sleep with other people. It's more a matter of trust than sanctity. But relationships don't have to be exclusive. Some are open and i…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:29 AM
7

Women say that, "being bisexual as a man while being a virgin is worth 200 hypothetical bodies and dating a single man is un-dateable category" Which women? Where are they saying this?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:23 AM
1

You can keep them or get rid of them depending on what makes sense socially, professionally, etc. Makes sense to be pragmatic. Any choice is acceptable.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:21 AM
2

There are no communists in the Democratic party. There are some borderline socialists who have come to prominence though. I think it's a backlash against the fascists that have taken over the Republican party. I actually suspect the next Democratic presidential candidate will be a southern moderate like Ossoff or Beshear.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 03:19 AM
4

Because you're tilting at windmills. No one claims high n count is better for LTRs.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:58 PM
8

There's nothing wrong with any preference involving two consenting adults. People just don't want to hear other people whining about not being able to find people who meet their standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:54 PM
3

If men criticize older men for dating younger women, the response is often that the woman "knows what she wants," that "women naturally prefer older men," or that "young men have nothing to offer." But if we flip the situation and men say they prefer dating younger women, the reaction is completely different. Suddenly, those men are called "creepy," told they "have nothing to offer women their own age," or accused of wanting to take advantage of younger women's inexperience or naivety. Or... and…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:52 PM
10

I don't know. Anything is possible theoretically I suppose. I'm just saying that people in general are far, far more attractive in a large liberal city like NYC than they are in conservative southern suburbs. It's not even close, whatever the reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/26 03:35 AM
1

That’s a terrible first message. Out of thousands of matches I’ve fortunately never gotten one like, so fortunately I’d say it’s rare. Some people just have low emotional intelligence.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:54 PM
8

There’s no such thing as fairness. If she wants to wait six months, that it what it is. If the guy isn’t okay with that, he can just move on. The overwhelming majority of women don’t want to wait anywhere close to six months.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:26 PM
41

I live in NYC. I’m surrounded by above average to attractive women and men, almost all of whom are at least relatively liberal, Democratic voters. In general, this is true of white people in Manhattan. I visit my extended family in ultra-MAGA rural western Pennsylvania, and it’s like visiting humanity’s dumpster. Obesity everywhere, high rates of addiction, and frankly just odd looking people (like why so many narrow set eyes?). It’s bad health piled on top of bad genetics. Even if I use a more …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/26 09:06 PM
5

That was sort of my take as well. I feel like it’s helpful to provide examples of the same people saying contradictory things if you’re going to make a post like that. I think some of the confusion on this particular topic comes from the fact that there are a lot of guys with red pill flair who don’t seem to be red pill at all. It almost seems like most “red pill” guys here are actually black pill or tradcon, which is very different from red pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 09:23 PM
–

If I tried, I could enter a relationship to get sex But in the vast majority of cases, sex comes well before a relationship. Sex normally happens between the first and third date, but exclusivity typically comes after the people have already been sleeping together. In the course of normal dating, most people you sleep with won’t turn into LTRs.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 09:20 PM
3

BP is just mainstream society. Mainstream society isn’t outraged by these people. Most Americans probably aren’t even aware of their existence. This is shit that people in the mainstream just don’t really care about. I’d consider myself pretty mainstream but I’m in an age group where I know who Clavicular is. I’m not outraged by him. I just don’t care him at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 07:41 PM
3

Dating apps are most certainly not just for long-term relationships. If anything I would argue that Tinder is more for short term than long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 06:03 PM
3

As a guy who’s always been successful with women, why would I choose to have a relationship with a woman who doesn’t seem to be giving me her best in bed? Why wouldn’t I just go with another option that’s better and more engaged with sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 06:00 PM
–

Being less visible is the natural state without manipulation due to the gender ratio. It's not throttling, it's just math. Paying makes you more visible than the natural state. Now obviously visibility is a zero sum game. Every time you move a paying user towards the front of the deck, you have to move other free users back by a spot. So in that way I guess you could argue that it's "match throttling" for the free users who get moved back. At the same time, it's transparent for all users. I don'…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 01:48 PM
–

I mean, you can pretend that there is no difference that you are aware of between the free and paid versions of any dating app; that's a choice. I used the free versions of Tinder, Bumble, and Hinge for years and they worked well for me. I used Tinder gold for a month when they were running a promo and I didn't notice any difference. Yes, I could scroll through the women who had like me as advertised, but those were mostly just women I had already swiped left on. Having gold for a month didn't c…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 12:18 PM
1

Slightly and slightly. Men and women cheat about the same and within the margin of error across age groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:18 AM
0

It logically follows they don't desire the men they decide (For whatever reason.) to be in a relationship with because their standards are so high. How is that logical? So the women that I just sleep with desire me? But the ones I sleep with and eventually form a relationship with don't?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 03:14 AM
–

That’s a great question. Without any description whatsoever of how match throttling works, it’s hard to know exactly what to ask for. That “study” left the term so vague that it’s nearly meaningless without additional context.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:32 AM
1

What do you define as a leftist? The US is divided roughly equally between Democrats and Republicans. Most Democrats don’t shame men for preferring hairless bodies, just like most Republicans don’t carry Nazi flags around DC on the Fourth of July. Those people are extreme fringe.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/26 02:30 AM
2

Leftist in what sense? Socially I assume? I’m socially liberal and I don’t think that or know anyone who does. Based on my downloaded tinder data, I swipe right less than 3% and it’s on conventionally attractive women. I don’t see anything wrong with that. I have no issue saying that I prefer fit women either. I mostly tend to like white women. There’s nothing wrong with anyone having whatever preferences they have. I’ve stated my preferences many times and have never been shamed on Reddit for i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 02:41 AM
1

The golden age fallacy is strong here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:51 AM
1

The golden age fallacy is strong here.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:50 AM
1

Most women aren’t paying for premium, so they don’t have height filters.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:49 AM
4

I don’t think the dating market is all that bad. What I think is happening is that everyone treats everyone with a certain level of apathy before you impress them enough into treating you with a deeper level of commitment. What is happening is that platforms like Reddit and others give people who have dating problems a means to come together and commiserate. There have always been people who struggle with dating, but they were only able to talk about it with their immediate social circle. Now th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 05:54 PM
2

That article claims there is "match throttling" without actually presenting any evidence of it. Not saying it doesn't happen, but would like to see some evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 05:48 PM
6

I think low emotional intelligence drives a preference for vague and ambiguous communication, because the direct equivalent is scary, and confronting that requires emotional intelligence. Someone with high emotional intelligence recognizes when it's beneficial for them to use vague language vs. direct language. Good salesmen for example do this very well.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:44 PM
6

After you run out of profiles on tinder, it says you're out of people to swipe on for a while. Then one day it resets and starts showing you all the same people again, so those 2M swipes likely aren't 2M unique women. There were also times when I was using tinder that the profiles I got were like 25% obvious bots. I assume bots get reported and banned pretty quickly, but then new ones automatically spawn again. That means that in any given city, there are hundreds or even thousands of new bots s…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:29 PM
2

If he really messaged 1,269 women and got one date, then yes he's obviously doing something very wrong in his texting. The only thing I'll say is I don't know what counts as a chat in those stats. If it's just one party sending a message regardless of whether the other responds, then I have a thought. Even though I swiped selectively and also actively tried to avoid bots, sometimes I would match with a bot on tinder and "she" would immediately send an opening message with just a snapchat name or…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:18 PM
3

So what is it you specifically believe the dating apps are doing to keep users single?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 02:07 PM
–

Oh there are definitely ways you can find out, but a lot of that depends on how open someone is. I've had women just flat out tell (a high number) me without being asked. In other cases, there are things you can infer. For example I've had women make a comment like "there was this guy I hookup with one time who...". But comments like that don't really provide much insight into exact count. Maybe she hooked up once or twice, or maybe 10 times, or maybe 30 times. In some cases you can also get som…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 08:01 PM
3

As of the most recent Census Bureau data (2024), half of American women were legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be with top 15% men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 07:45 PM
2

I personally don't think anyone is entitled to know my exact n count. I would answer questions. Have I always used protection for casual? Have I been tested for STDs? Those are health things that my partner is entitled to know. She's not entitled to the past details of my sex life. If she doesn't like that, she can move right along.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 11:06 PM
6

But the same concept applies to women and men. Whenever I meet a new woman, I don't know anything about her past and she doesn't know anything about my past. It goes both ways. I guess maybe it's a bit extreme for me living in NYC, but I've never had any preexisting overlap in social circles with women I've met from the apps. Yes you eventually meet each other's friends, but despite dating very actively for all of my adult life, I've never had a woman's friend say anything that would reveal anyt…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 11:04 PM
3

Most people don't ask about n count, but if they do, you can just make up a number. It's a thing that people fret about even though the truth is unknowable.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 08:48 PM
–

If a man votes for politicians who vote to keep the draft male-only, is he part of the problem too?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 08:32 PM
2

Because I often sense this rather grim sentiment that once a woman has accumulated a body count or slept with some guy(s) very early she is "ruined" forever and there is nothing she can do. Does this woman live in a really small town where everyone knows each other? Generally whenever I started dating a new woman as an adult, she knew absolutely nothing about my past. My n count was irrelevant because it was completely unknown.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 07:51 PM
–

The post is about how they rate themselves, so I responded to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 01:21 PM
–

I think that’s why you seem more women say they’re above. 34% of women and 34% of men rated themselves above average. The distribution of how above average they rated themselves is identical for men and women (at least across all age groups combined).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 12:26 PM
–

Stats on the distribution of dating app likes don't show how women rate themselves. The stats show how women swipe on men. I think you're going down the path of claiming that because the top X% of men get the majority of likes, that means women as a whole are delusional and think that they themselves are above average. I would argue that the women are swiping rationally in an environment with a 3:1 or more M:F ratio, where they know some men swipe right on everyone. Dating apps are massively sta…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 12:18 PM
–

"Women don't get to rate themselves. I get to say how they rate themselves." Cringy.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:36 AM
–

This is an anonymous poll conducted online. It's not public.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:30 AM
–

YouGov polling that asks this question directly. Across all ages, exactly the same percentage of men and women rate themselves as above average. Among young people, more men rate themselves as above average. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:28 AM
–

Sorry, I should have been more clear. Young dating age men rate themselves slightly higher, but within margin of error. I assume we don't care what elderly people think. Across all ages, exactly the same percentage of men and women rate themselves as above average. Among young people, more men rate themselves as above average. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:24 AM
–

You could ask that question at any point in modern US history and get the same results. It's a classic golden age fallacy. People always believe that they have it harder than those who came before them. Most people are whiny little bitches. Is what it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:43 AM
–

Most think they're about average, as do most men. OP is demonstrably wrong though. <image>
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:40 AM
–

I suspect it has nothing to do with that preference. I express a preference for fit women too, and I've never been called an incel. Every woman I've ever slept with has been fit. That doesn't make me an incel. The two things are unrelated.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:34 AM
–

Reality is men and women rate themselves about the same. Technically men rate themselves slightly higher, but it's within the margin of error. The point really should be, the majority of women and men rate themselves as roughly average.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:30 AM
–

I linked to one of them, including the question exactly how it was asked.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:21 AM
–

Men and women rate themselves pretty similarly. <image> Maybe you're playing around with semantics, because most women don't rate themselves as perfectly average (i.e., exactly 5 on a 0-10 scale), but 59% of women rate themselves between 4 and 6. I would call that roughly average. So yes, most women think they're roughly average (as do 57% of men).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 03:04 AM
3

https://www.academia.edu/38205096/Attractiveness_and_sexual_behavior
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 07:24 PM
3

It depends on which study you're talking about. Most show a weak positive correlation for men and a weaker positive correlation or weak negative correlation for women. For example, Rhodes et al. (2005) found this. To put it in perspective, a .2 positive correlation is stronger than what that study found for male partner count, and it looks like this. Yes there's a slight positive correlation, but it's much, much closer to random than to perfectly correlated.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 03:13 AM
–

Meanwhile, at a bar you get maybe 10–30 seconds to make an impression. Compare that to a one-on-one date from dating apps or instagram I get what you're saying, but this is sort of the wrong analogy. You have 10-30 seconds in a bar/club/party to get a woman to do the equivalent of swiping right on you. Those 10-30 seconds need to get her to think "okay I'll talk to this guy". Getting past that hurdle is basically like just matching on a dating app (or maybe matching, sending an opening message, …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:28 PM
–

They get to have their pick of the litter Only if they're having casual sex with attractive women. I would describe the guy with probably the highest n count I know as "above average" but certainly not "Chad". I don't know his count, but it has to be well over 100. He's big into the nightlife scene and does really well in that environment. I knew this guy in college and he was my roommate for a while after college. All of the women he brought home where somewhere between average and a little abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:22 PM
–

Most men who have had a lot of casual sex eventually decide that they would prefer to settle down with one woman. Maybe being single forever works for some men, but most gravitate towards relationships, even if they can easily find casual sex. You mention that novelty fades, which is true, but the novelty of casual sex fades too. The first few times I hooked up with new girls, it was a massive dopamine hit. Past a handful of hookups, it didn't produce a massive high anymore. By the time time of …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:25 PM
–

It's not rare at all in my experience. The biggest mismatches I've observed have been in a ONS situation, typically involving two very drunk people. When it comes to ongoing contact like FWB situations, it seems like the people are typically evenly matched. You can nitpick about whether one person is slightly better looking than the other in any relationship, but "a few ranks" of difference is pretty rare. Those are outlier situations. edit- Also worth noting that attractive women have FWBs/situ…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 05:55 PM
3

Some men. Some men. Some men. Some men. Some men. Some men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 12:09 PM
3

What do you consider "older"?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 10:43 PM
1

Game, like many things, matters all else being equal. A confident, outgoing, sociable guy who knows how to talk to women will be more successful than his awkward identical twin brother.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 10:22 PM
1

I don't even know if it's usually for religious reasons. I knew some very good looking guys in my frat who were in relationships for most of our four years of college. They could have had lots of casual sex, but were more inclined towards relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 01:58 PM
2

In other words, it's not casual sex that makes him "high value". It's the ability to easily have casual sex. I think you're conflating cause and effect. Men aren't "high value" because they can easily have casual sex. They can easily have casual sex because they're "high value".
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 01:55 PM
1

Being toxic reduces a man's options. A man with many good options can be toxic and still retain enough viable options to be successful. A man with very few options doesn't have the luxury of limiting his options. If a guy doesn't have much going for him, being a toxic piece of shit might eliminate the few options he could have.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 02:29 PM
7

It definitely shows there are more women willing to sleep with toxic and violent men Or that toxic violent men are unable and/or unwilling to maintain long-term monogamous relationships like normal men. Being toxic and violent can make relationships challenging. So rather than settle down like most men, they continue to sleep with new women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 02:20 PM
1

The blog post literally says it's a scale of 0 to 5. We also know that skipping a rating assigns a score of 0 stars.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 01:31 PM
3

Women see as okcupid data 80% of men as bellow average That's not actually what the OKCupid study found. First of all, there was no option to rate someone's attractiveness on OKCupid. There was a prompt that said "rate or skip his profile" and gave the option of rating the profile between 1 and 5 stars. Now you can argue that profile ratings are probably positively correlated with someone's attractiveness and I would agree, but just to be clear, the 1 through 5 star ratings were profile ratings,…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 03:49 AM
1

The guys I'm talking about typically seem to have pretty active professional/social/family lives. It's not like they're just sitting around on the couch or anything. They just aren't in shape.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 05:04 PM
2

But I can guarantee a man who is taking care of business is taking care of his body. This is a very bad assumption. Over the last six years, I've worked in finance. In my experience, the vast majority of men who are taking care of business are not taking care of their bodies. Most are overweight or skinny fat at best, especially past a certain age. They have their acts together professionally and are making top 1% incomes, but most are definitely not taking care of their bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 04:04 AM
2

The west's dating market is cooked and will never recover. How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 03:55 AM
3

A tiny amount of alcohol, sure. You don’t experience anything from that. But as someone who has had a lot of sex and consumed a lot of alcohol, I don’t see that much difference. Both are just a thing you can choose to do. Both feel big and special the first few times, but then they don’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 09:28 PM
3

But the people around me don’t know about my n count. When i sleep with another woman from a dating app, no one knows.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 09:23 PM
–

According the the NIH, 43% of men and 42% of women are obese. Its pretty similar.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 09:08 PM
1

Those numbers bounce around like crazy from year to year, but still give some directional indication of sexlessness. In recent years, it’s ranged from 12% to 28%, so it’s likely somewhere in that ballpark. I’m not saying some men don’t struggle immensely, but it’s not most men. edit- Those numbers also aren’t all incels. They also include men who are celebrate by choice for religious reasons, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:48 PM
1

My generation of men (18-30) have a ton of work to get done if we want to have a partner as we grow up. According to 2024 Census Bureau data, half of 29 year old American men are legally married or living with a partner. Based on that same data, more men 18-29 were married or living with a partner in 2024 than there were 10 years earlier in 2014 when that cohort was all Millennial. Considering the state of the average American, most have not done “a ton of work” but Gen Z men a still finding rel…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:33 PM
7

In this thought experiment, are sex drives reversed so that women have higher sex drives than men on average? Is there far greater demand for casual sex among women than among men? Are there far more women than men on dating apps?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:26 PM
10

Yes, but the average BMI in the 20-29 age group is 25.8. That means the average woman in her 20s is 5’4 and 151 lbs. It’s not 170, but I still think it’s still much heavier than many young men believe to be average.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 03:44 PM
2

That’s why most don’t say never. Typically it’s something like “I’m not looking for anything serious right now”.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:20 PM
10

When a man either becomes attractive or always was he’s gonna either take his woman and leave the talk and the spaces where relationships form or play the field indefinitely. Some play the field indefinitely, but most play the field for a while and eventually settle down. In my experience, casual sex became progressively less fulfilling over time. I think that’s the case for most guys. And yes, you’re right that some also meet a woman early and exit the market very young. They’re locked down and…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:15 PM
–

The Census Bureau MDAT site lets you pick a year and slice ACS data however you want. https://data.census.gov/app/mdat/ACSPUMS1Y2024 You can look at the MAR and PARTNER variables and filter first on 29 year old men and then on 26 year old women. The ACS uses a 3.5M sample size annually, so the margin of error is very small.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:58 PM
–

What are you taking about? There’s no 50 year old in that statistic. Put another way, as of the most recent Census Bureau data (2024 American Community Survey), half of men who were 29 in 2024 were either legally married or living with a partner. Half of the women who were 26 in 2024 were either legally married or living with a partner. 50 year olds have absolutely no bearing on those statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:47 PM
2

But the dynamics are different at different parts of the SMP. Okay, so where is the surplus of single women? What I mean by that is, if women are generally dating up, then somewhere in the percentile range, there’s a surplus of women who are single because their male counterparts have chosen to date less attractive women than them. You already acknowledged that 99th percentile men generally pair up with 99th percentile women, so the surplus isn’t at the very top. Do 95th percentile men and below…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:44 PM
–

Even if you take all of those things into account, men would fall on some shape of a bell curve. Half of American men are married or living with a partner by 29. There’s not enough room at the left and right tails of the curve for all of those men to be the worst or the best. Most of them are average men under the bell. What you’re describing in your post would only be possible if a very small portion of men were in couples and those men were all outliers. But that’s not reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:05 PM
1

To an extent. I don’t know that I would necessarily call it acting, but early in dating people are typically on their best behavior. This hides their red flags for at least a period of time. Someone might seem perfectly decent up front but prove to be a total asshole later in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:01 PM
2

So if 99th percentile women are with 99th percentile men, who are the 98th percentile women with? We’re talking about 1:1 relationships, not many:many casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 01:33 PM
5

But before he finds this woman, in theory he has the choice to fuck around with his pick of the litter. Mostly with top women. Dating app changed the game and supply an attractive man with a nearly endless supply of attractive options for casual sex (assuming he lives in a city).
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:12 AM
6

Women do date up overall in relative mate value RANK, as in if you ranked all women among women by mate value and all men among men, most women would be dating a higher ranked guy. If that’s true, then top ranked women should generally be single. But that’s not the case. In my experience, the most desirable women are only single for brief periods between relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:10 AM
-2

And if men do consistently date down, that should result in a surplus of attractive single women. If 99th percentile men are all with 80th percentile women and women only date up, then the 80-99th percentile of women should all be single.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:00 AM
0

Misery loves company. There are men who are genuinely lonely, struggling, and would date practically any woman. They’re a minority, but many of them seem to take comfort in pretending it’s most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 03:56 AM
2

Well yeah, no shit. If you repeal a law, then the law no longer applies.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:34 PM
0

What risks?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:44 PM
7

But if enough men decide that if they are not getting what they want from life they are not buying into that agreement that agreement kinda ceases to be. We live in a democratic republic here in the US. If the majority of people voted for elected leaders who support legalizing murder, then murder could be legalized. Considering murder has been outlawed in ever democratic nation on earth, I think the odds of legalization here are exceedingly slim. In the event it did happen, people would no longe…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:52 PM
3

What's being discussed here is selectivity. The harm is not being selected. An analogy is either not being picked for the team or only being picked by a team that you're not interested in playing for.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:36 PM
10

if nobody owes anyone anyhting. No one is saying that. People are saying no one owes anyone sex. You're not legally entitled to sex, so no one owes it to you. Other examples you use like physical safety and equality are things that you are legally entitled to. As a society, we've agreed that we owe it to each other to not assault or murder each other. That's why our elected leaders have passed laws prohibiting those activities. Everyone does owe everyone their physical safety.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:34 PM
3

Mating has been and always will be competitive, but the double standard is that when the losers of that competition are men they're seen as acceptable casualties, but when the losers of that competition are women society sees that as misogynistic and unacceptable and a problem men caused. I don't think people generally care about the dating problems of women or men. Women who struggle with dating tend to care about women's dating problems. Men who struggle with dating tend to care about men's da…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:18 PM
19

we have police, govornment, army ect for that. men do not owe women our vote, free unpaid safety, or even preventative measure. especially if nobody is entitled to anything. obviously everyone is entitled to things under the law The point is, as a society, we care about things like safety and equality and believe people should be entitled to them. That's why our elected leaders have passed laws on those matters. As a society we don't believe that men are entitled to sex. Comparing the two and as…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 07:04 PM
6

Yeah, sex is great, but most people also prefer committed relationships, and casual sex is bad for that. Gotta pick a lane. But you literally don't have to pick a lane. I've had casual sex and relationships. You can have both because you don't have to pick a lane. Waiting till marriage for sex I think is a massive win for everyone. Most people don't want that, so it's not a win for most people. If most people wanted to wait until marriage, most people would wait until marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 06:39 PM
19

Society constantly expects men to care about the "bad outcomes" women face. Whether it’s physical safety, systemic inequalities, emotional support, or just the general day-to-day struggles of women, men are routinely shamed if they do not display active empathy In the US, people (men and women) are legally entitled to things like physical safety and equality. We care when people break the law, so we enforce it. The alternative is lawlessness, which most people don't want. Men are not legally ent…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 06:33 PM
2

I guess in theory, but it would still be far less efficient and more costly than dating apps. A man had to make a concerted effort to go out and find hookups that way. Today he can arrange a hookup from the comfort of his own toilet.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 05:38 PM
2

I think you're overestimating the number of matches those women have, and how many of those matches are men with 30 matches per week. Attractive women on dating apps easily get 30 matches per week. Because they're attractive, they can be very selective and generally only swipe right on attractive men. Those are the men who get lots of matches. Even swiping very selectively, the match rate for the most attractive women is likely very high. We know from dating app data that the number of men overa…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 05:34 PM
2

Yes, in theory but meeting them was highly inefficient and works better in some settings than others. It's a numbers game and dating apps allow for casting a very wide net over a bunch of attractive options in a way that in-person generally can't.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 05:25 PM
3

As a man, I certainly don't want to metaphorically eat a sub-optimal meal. That's why I've been selective about the women I've dated, hooked up with, etc. Dating is self-serving by its very nature. I frankly don't care if my selectivity harms women as an accidental byproduct. I feel for people who genuinely struggle with dating, but I'm not going to change my behavior to benefit them. I personally don't see what's wrong with that. Mating has been and always will be competitive.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 05:10 PM
11

Very few people (in the US anyway) want to wait until marriage though. People like to have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 04:54 PM
2

Of course the odds of marrying any given match is low, because I had a bunch of matches and so did those women. Matching is just the first step. That's not really the point. I'm responding to your statement that attractive men can easily get casual sex from women they would never want to spend a life with. That makes it sound like the women we're having casual sex with are of lower quality than the ones we would want to spend a life with. That's not the case. I would rephrase it to say that attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 04:52 PM
10

Dating apps have actually had the opposite impact in my experience. Before dating apps, a post-college man might have known a few attractive single women, because attractive people are rare. Once he slept with them, he could either settle down with one or keep casually sleeping with progressively less attractive women. Now with dating apps, there's essentially an infinite supply of attractive women for an attractive man in a big city, so there's very little incentive to lower standards. At any g…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:51 PM
-2

There's lot of talk about how women ruined dating, less men get a chance, and now women are holding out for mr. perfect when mr. average use to get partnered up. According to 2024 Census Bureau data, half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by the age of 26. There aren't enough Mr. Perfects out there for that to be true, especially in a country where the majority of people are overweight or obese. While I know more women are are single; the women who aren't tend to be …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 02:10 PM
2

Dating apps becoming more common has meant a small number of attractive men can online order casual sex from women they would never want to spend a life with, and women can pretend they're part of social circles they don't actually fit in with. I believe dating apps have actually had the opposite effect for attractive men. For context, based on my tinder data I swiped right a little less than 3% and matched 22% of the time. The other apps were probably similar but I didn't download my data. That…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 04:07 AM
4

I feel like if someone is too afraid to approach an attractive stranger in a grocery store, start a conversation, and ask them on a date, then they should not be allowed to give dating advice. The vast majority of dating doesn't result from cold approaches. Apps are the most common way people meet. If a man does really well on the apps, it makes sense for him to give advice about the apps, but that doesn't mean he should give advice about cold approaching in grocery stores. Also keep in mind tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 03:53 AM
2

It's a bit of semantics. A person can't cheat unless they've made a commitment. Until a couple has committed to being exclusive, they can sleep with whoever they want and it's not cheating. What you seem to be saying is the women who tolerate cheating are women who can't get commitment from a man of that caliber without letting him cheat. That also means that there are men who get into relationships with women who are less desirable than their other options because those less desirable options w…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 11:04 PM
2

Women who tolerate it are more likely to be unable to get men of their preferred caliber to commit to them (which also includes men “committing” to them and cheating). But if a man cheats on her, then she already has been able to get him to commit. You're saying it's less likely, but the probability of her getting a man of that caliber to commit to her is 100%, because she's already done it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 10:39 PM
3

Then maybe I'm not following. You can't cheat if it's not a committed relationship. Everyone who cheats has committed, otherwise it's not cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 10:31 PM
1

many women put up with cheating because they can’t get anyone of that caliber to commit to them Are you talking about situationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 10:01 PM
5

There are indeed women who complain a lot about their boyfriends cheating but then stick around anyway for some reason. I thought of one I know off the top of my head as I was reading that comment. Yep, it absolutely happens. It also happens with men. I know guys who have been cheated on by women they're still with too. Some people simply lack self-respect and/or naively believe the other person will change. Or sometimes it's other factors. Like I have a friend who found out his girlfriend cheat…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 04:39 PM
1

None of that changes the fact that a new woman typically (as I said) doesn't know a man is a bad person when he's hiding it. That doesn't mean there are no exceptions. Most people (men and women) manage to hide their negative qualities in the early stages of dating. Being on trial for sexual assault most certainly negatively impacts your dating prospects. That doesn't mean it reduces your options to zero, but it certainly eliminates a lot of women as options.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 01:47 PM
–

A lot don't get the chance. How do you define "a lot"?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 01:41 PM
–

I responded to what you said. I think you're refusing to engage in good faith debate by ignoring the main points of my comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 01:39 PM
–

Women abstaining from the game or coming back is like flipping a light switch. You could always just pick an average dude that means well if you actually decided, there's nothing stopping that from happening. For casual sex, sure. But most women aren't looking for casual sex most of the time. Finding someone who's compatible for a relationship is much more difficult. I've literally never seen a girl, 5.5/10 in looks that couldn't land some manner of man. The majority of women are less than a 5.5…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 12:09 PM
0

I can't speak for the UK, but when I was down in Florida this spring, there were a bunch of real life "average SEC couple meme" couples down there. Perhaps try moving to the American south.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 04:06 AM
3

Generally yes, but there's a very small middle ground. A left swipe vs. right swipe decision is normally very easy, but occasionally she falls right on the line.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:49 AM
7

That's what OP is missing. Based on US case law, drunk people can consent but incapacitated people cannot. Men generally can't get it up while incapacitated, which is why it happens far less frequently to us.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:25 AM
11

And US courts have taken that same view. Case law says that drunk people can consent, but incapacitated people cannot.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:23 AM
8

But that is how it is applied in practice. That is how it's applied in practice. There's a lot of case law on this subject. Someone who has consumed alcohol but isn't drunk can consent. Someone who is drunk but not incapacitated can consent. Someone who is incapacitated can't consent. Please do some digging on actual legal precedents on this topic. The bar is typically incapacitation. That's why you see this happen to women far more than men. Women can typically have sex while incapacitated. Men…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 03:19 AM
1

Okay? I'm answering your question in the title. All the way back in high school health class we were taught that no one could consent while drunk (men or women). Why ask if you don't want to hear people's answers?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 02:52 AM
15

I can't speak for all men. There are obviously some extremely low-value men out there who will have extremely low-value views. But yes, I support equal rights for women regardless of any personal impact it has on me. I also support equal rights for people of all races, even though my race benefited from unequal rights. I'm not a complete piece of shit, so I generally try to do the right thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 02:50 AM
2

Who is saying that only women can't consent while drunk? Of course it's the same for men and women. I don't see anyone arguing otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 02:45 AM
1

But it is the reason. Most sexually successful men who are complete assholes aren't complete assholes until you get to know them well. They're typically charming and charismatic up front.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 02:22 AM
1

There are two factors that play into how many sexual/romantic options a man has. First is the number of women he's exposed to and second is the percentage of those women who want him. Take a famous serial killer like Ted Bundy. Let's say he was exposed to 50 million women, Even if just 0.01% of those women want him, that gives him 500 options. Being a celebrity gives you massive exposure, so even with an extremely low success rate, you still have many options. The world is a very large place. Ou…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 02:16 AM
2

Most women say they would not have hooked up with their husbands or boyfriends, or that their husbands are not as physically attractive as their hookups, and that looks are not as important in relationships. Gonna need a source for that. Not some random women saying that their husband is less attractive. Something showing that most women say that. Where it doesn't make much sense, is that many if not most relationships these days start as casual sex. The norm is to have sex by the third date bef…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 09:20 PM
1

Yeah, there are a lot of ignorant people.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 08:00 PM
2

I literally haven't claimed anything about my lived or personal experience. What the fuck are you talking about? You said "It arguably is better in the sense that it’s obvious how shit it is". What's obvious?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 07:58 PM
3

His claim was "young people have plenty of sex still it's just the Chad cycling through a roster of 30 different women". That's obviously a lie based on Census data. You're doing what a lot of red/black pill guys do when they're called out for lying about this point. They move the goal posts to "yeah but those women don't actually want those beta men and are all dreaming of Chad". It always shifts from "only Chad is having sex" to "well okay but those other guys are all betas and their women don…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 07:57 PM
3

It arguably is better in the sense that it’s obvious how shit it is. Whatever you make up is not arguably better. Data gives you a directional sense for reality. So yes, that data is better than some silly incel claim that only 5% of men (or pick your percent) have sex. What you're claiming is obvious to you due to your lived experiences. It's not obvious to me based on my lived experiences. So what's obvious you on a personal level isn't necessarily obvious to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 07:51 PM
4

Where's your data to support that? Or are you one of those red/black pill guys who thinks you and you alone dictate reality. Ironically, red/blackk pillers consistently point to the GSS as proof that men are sexless. When someone shows GSS data for women too, suddenly the GSS is no good.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 06:09 PM
3

Women do generally dislike men who are openly misogynist. Many men are silently misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 05:44 PM
5

But "trust me bro" is no better.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 05:43 PM
5

But that's not true. There's a general rise in sexlessness among both men and women in the last decade, according to the GSS Data Explorer. Historically, the percentage of sexless men 18-29 has been higher than the percentage of sexless women 18-29, but there are occasional instances where that's not the case (2021 and 2022 being the most recent examples). Year Sexless Men 18-29 Sexless Women 18-29 Sexless Men per Sexless Woman 2000 16.4% 10.5% 1.56 2002 11.7% 9.5% 1.23 2004 17.4% 13.8% 1.26 200…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 04:20 PM
9

I'm sure those "I can fix him" type women exist, but I've never actually met one. But yeah the world is a big place and there are all types.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 04:04 PM
2

But that's not neutral. Ranting misogynistically about women being the source of all your problems is detrimental to your success. Women generally don't like hateful, whiny men who don't take any accountability.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 04:02 PM
4

Perhaps those things contribute as well. But ranting misogynistically about women being the source of all your problems doesn't contribute to success either. Women don't want to listen to that whiny shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:43 PM
3

I already said there's no defense of either man. But women aren't omniscient. The first type of guy is hiding the fact that he's an asshole. Especially in a hookup/short-term type of situation, the fact that he's an asshole is likely to remain hidden the entire time. That's the whole point. If the person doesn't know you're an asshole, you don't suffer from being an asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:41 PM
12

Yes, because typically the new women don't have that information. People who are good at hiding the fact they're bad people aren't negatively impacted in dating,
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:36 PM
6

There's no defense in either case, but the first type of guy will be far more successful with women than the second type of guy. They're both bad people though. I consistently see guys like OP who comes across as the second type of guy, raging on reddit about being unsuccessful with women. When you point out that women don't like him because he's a miserable misogynist who blames all of his problems on women, his response is "but women like bad men". He fails to recognize that women sometimes li…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:26 PM
10

Sure, but that doesn't mean they actually are nice or assholes. Her point is, a woman can be attracted to a man she's never spoken to, so of course he could be an asshole in reality. Your title is stating the obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:18 PM
2

Perhaps that and the reasons OP raises. Without data, we're all just speculating.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:14 PM
1

And yet half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. I guess there are a lot of Chads out there.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:03 PM
4

So why are women also having less sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 03:02 PM
1

explain why a women shouldn't, at least, extend a simple greating to a man whom she finds attractive They should and do.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 02:16 PM
7

Exactly. If you look at how recently engaged couples met, only 9% met in a social setting. Most of the ways men meet women don't involve cold approaching. Even in a social setting, at all 9% come from men cold approaching. Sometimes women approach. Sometimes it just kind of happens. About 2/3 of couples meet through dating apps, mutual friends, or school. There are plenty of options beyond cold approaching. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with cold approaching, but doing it succe…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 02:13 PM
1

Behave that way? Most people can't be attractive, no matter how much effort they put in. They know that being attractive matters though.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 01:56 PM
9

When women are in the position to simp for a man, they tend to forget that men have no obligation to meet their demands. And when they hook up with said men, they are surprised that the sex didn't hook him effectively enough to make him stay. Are you saying that a woman sleeping with a man she finds attractive is simping? I've hooked up with dozens of women, and very few seemed surprised that I wanted to keep things casual. Maybe it helped that I was almost always very explicit about that before…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 07:07 PM
1

Well no shit. Everyone prefers attractive people. That doesn't mean people are all the same overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 06:57 PM
0

I don't think his experience is something to scoff at and not think about. 50 women is a lot for a single person to experience and the chances of them all being the same way behavior wise is worth analyzing at the very least maybe? I've also been with 50+ women, but I suspect my experience has been quite a bit different from his. These samples aren't random. They're strongly influenced by factors like location, socioeconomic class, and perhaps most importantly, how the man is selecting the women…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:27 PM
0

In other words, these women were significantly different, but responded to certain stimuli consistently. What are those stimuli?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 03:22 PM
15

At that point you might as well date the 5.5/10 and above because going lower doesn't mean she’ll treat you right. Usually when people advise men to date less attractive women, it's because the men are complaining about a total lack of success. These aren't men who have the option of dating above average women. If they could, most would. It's like telling men that if their low paying job treats you poorly, you might as well work in a high paying job. For most of the men working in low paring job…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:06 PM
2

It's not that close to 100%. Plenty of desirable men don't have high n counts. Take this study, for example. A quarter of very attractive men have n counts of 2 or less.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:42 PM
2

That's my point. He's claiming in absolute terms that if you don't have a high body count, "that means you are not desirable". If he were claiming that on average men with high body counts are more desirable, I would agree with him. But claiming that if you don't have a high body count, you're not desirable is a silly claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 09:20 PM
10

Another theory: men inflate their numbers. The real answer is likely somewhere in the middle between 25k and 53k. It is interesting though that the to 1% of men and the top 1% of women both account for about one in every five sexual couplings.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:52 PM
1

the women who sleep with me tend to like me more That's one reasonable explanation. Another is that some women never sleep with any guy on the first date. Keep in mind the median college girl has an n count of 1. You have no way of knowing whether that's the case with any given woman, so if you're interested in dating efficiently, you can assume there's a lack of attraction and move on.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:49 PM
1

A guy shouldn’t be using apps like Tinder if he takes 3 dates to sleep with his preferred women. The problem is, there's variability. I agree that things tend to move quickly in the world of dating apps. I would guess that somewhere around 60-70% of my first dates from apps ended with sex, but it's not 100%. They were all my preferred women, but some would sleep with me on the first date and others wouldn't. That's how life works in practice. It's not black and white.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:37 PM
6

Here you go. Mean number of opposite-sex sexual partners since age 18 Percentile Men Women 0-32nd 1 1 33-79th 7 4 80-89th 21 9 90-94th 38 15 95-98th 85 26 99th 287 105 The difference seems to driven by the fact that sampled men as a whole reported a little over 2x more sexual couplings than sampled women as a whole reported. Men reported ~53k unique couplings while women reported ~25k unique couplings. In theory those numbers should be equal within a margin of error, but they are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:30 PM
6

As a guy with a plethora of options, that hasn't been my experience. Sometimes you know it's a one time thing, like when I've hooked up on spring break. But typically I want to at least leave the door open for the future.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:15 PM
0

It's in the realm of normal though, which was my point. First date and second date are also normal. I was trying to understand whether he met normal waiting vs. abnormal waiting. I would say beyond three dates is abnormal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:13 PM
2

Interesting stats. I used the GSS Data Explorer to pull the same data on share of sexual partners for women. Share of all opposite-sex sexual partnerships Percentile Men Women 0-32nd 3% 4% 33-79th 24% 29% 80-89th 15% 16% 90-94th 14% 14% 95-98th 24% 19% 99th 20% 18%
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:05 PM
17

As a guy who's had quite a bit of casual sex, I agree. I never put forth less effort in hookups vs. the relationships I've had. You want her to sleep with you more than once. If you don't perform in a hookup situation then it's not going to be more than a ONS. Even for a man with a lot of options, it's easier to sleep with the same woman multiple times vs. sleeping with a new woman. At a minimum you want to keep her as an option going forward, so there's definitely an incentive to perform. Also,…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:11 PM
3

Men who receive few casual sexual opportunities accumulate less sexual experience on average. You typically gain far more sexual experience in a relationship than through casual sex. It occurred to be during college that the girls I slept with who had been in relationships were consistently better in bed than the ones who had never had a real LTR. The ones without LTR experience may have had more partners, but they had likely had far less sex. The same applies to men. A guy who's slept with a fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 04:55 PM
1

Most men don't have a nasty attitude. Most men are normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 03:11 PM
–

That's interesting. Hasn't been my experience at all. Maybe it varies by location, socioeconomic class, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 03:08 PM
–

I'm Gen Z and I agree with him. Keep in mind your algorithm isn't a random representation of young women. It feeds you the content you want. I would say young women care less about money today than ever before because their earnings potential has caught up so much.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 01:44 PM
9

Since women want at least equal and ideally up, their dating pool is shrinking. But it is not men doing the shrinking. If the dating pool were shrinking, you would expect fewer women to find partners. But that's not what's happening. The percentage of young Americans married or living with a partner fell sharply during the Great Recession, flat lined around 2014, then started to rebound slightly by 2019. I've seen tons of fit, conventionally attractive men with "mid", overweight, or even "ugly" …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 01:39 PM
0

How do you define "wait"? Most adults have sex by the third date, but obviously there are exceptions. Are you talking about waiting until the third date, or some longer term wait?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 01:20 PM
3

Lack of effort is the reason that many people are mediocre at many things. Sex is no different.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 10:06 PM
1

So younger women will be the only option According to the Census Bureau, half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26 and half of American men by 29 (due to a 2.5 year median age gap). On average women date slightly older and men date slightly younger, but it's not typically a huge gap and it certainly isn't the only option.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 07:57 PM
3

Most things in life are roughly a bell curve. About 15% are good, 15% are bad, and the other 70% are about average.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 07:48 PM
-1

Talking about your dating preferences is acceptable in a variety of contexts, women do it all the time Yes, but typically not explicitly sexual preferences. I could tell anyone, including my coworkers, that I prefer women who are outgoing, educated, and and in shape. I can't discuss sex. It's fine for a woman to say similar things. She can say she prefers a man who's tall, but she can't say she prefers a man with a big dick, for example. There are a much more limited number of settings in which …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 07:26 PM
0

It's an odd thing to state in most settings, so it's often going to get some odd looks.. People will also look at you funny if you neutrally state that you don't care about a woman's body count, because again, it's an odd thing to say in most settings. There are only certain forums where open discussion of sex is socially acceptable.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 11:33 AM
2

If almost all Americans uniformly called the Pacific Ocean the Atlantic Ocean, then yes, actually. it IS the Atlantic Ocean now And if that happened, the dictionary would be updated to reflect it. But it hasn't happened, so the dictionary hasn't been updated. Same thing is true of feminism.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 11:30 AM
1

Dictionaries will literally go back and change the definitions of words that are now used differently. That's a great point! Let's check the current definition of feminism from the authoritative American English dictionary. To your point, they would update the definition if the word were now used differently. But it's not. Feminism is still a belief in equality, even if some people misuse it. Many Americans can't point to the Pacific Ocean on a map. But that doesn't mean the Atlantic becomes the…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 05:55 AM
0

I did, but you sound ignorant. Words have meanings. You want to lie and make words mean something they don't. For example, most modern American "conservatives" aren't actually conservative. They're just racist, sexist, authoritarians who believe in using big government to attack their perceived enemies. So no, MAGA isn't conservative. Words have meanings.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 05:37 AM
1

Well if that's the case, then 99% of people who claim to be feminists are not feminists. Yes, that's correct. Most people don't walk around loudly claiming to be feminist. That's outlier behavior. Ironically, those outliers often aren't actually feminists because they don't believe in equal rights between men and women. On the flip side, most people do believe in equal rights between men and women, but either claim to not be feminists or are silent on it. It's not surprising though, because most…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 05:24 AM
2

Honestly I haven't thought too much about it. I've thought about what women seem to enjoy during sex and try to do those things that they enjoy. But I can't say I've ever really contemplated sex from a woman's perspective. I guess to me, penetrating vs. being penetrated just seem like two sides of the same coin. One gender generally likes one while the other gender generally likes the other. Both are getting what they want. If I have to look at thinks from a woman's perspective, I would think th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 04:38 AM
3

Ghosting, usuary, or just being ignored Usury doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 04:31 AM
1

I don't know. I've never been penetrated, so I cant speak to the experience. I'll take your word for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 04:19 AM
3

What's the unrealistic expectations? Yes, I've been to Europe a number of times. What about it?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 03:53 AM
4

No lies here, data backs me up, not you. Another lie. I called you out on lying about the divorce rate and provided a link. All you can do is lie. But it’s good to hear that you’re struggling with dating. Natural selection at its finest.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 02:06 AM
10

So if women don’t start fucking men they don’t find attractive, ISIS takes over the world?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:55 AM
3

Let’s just assume status quo.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:50 AM
1

The difference is that most people who aren't already RP don't really talk about women that way. That’s just not true. You can keep saying it, but it’s not true. It's also a little ironic to complain about "whiny men with victimhood complexes" while responding to a discussion about double standards by attacking the people making the argument instead of the argument itself. I already addressed the argument. As I already said, you’re focusing only on what women say about women and men, while ignor…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:49 AM
6

And if you had to make a guess, what would it be?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:43 AM
1

Irrelevant anecdotal evidence, statistics basically disagree with you entirely I pointed to Census Bureau stats showing half of 26 year old women are legally married or living with a partner. Clearly there are commitment-oriented young women. Ironically, your comment above only provided personal anecdotes. You’re lying when you claim I only provided anecdotes. You also lied when you claim the statistics disagree with me completely. marriage rates are also at an all time low That’s because cohabi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:37 AM
1

This is said by women in plenty of places on and offline, not just random internet comments. Yeah and plenty of men on and offline say the opposite. The point is, you’re comparing what women say about women to what women say about men, while ignoring what men say about women and what men say about men. That's a smaller online pocket It’s not though. You’re just wrong about that. That's more common in spaces specifically built around criticizing female dating behavior. That’s simply not true. The…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:20 AM
1

A man wanting the best partner he can attract is often called shallow, entitled, selfish, insecure, or unrealistic By women on the internet. A woman wanting the best partner she can attract is usually described as having standards, knowing her worth, refusing to settle, or doing what is best for herself. By women on the internet. And men on the internet generally say the opposite to both of those things. Half the posts on this sub n be boiled down to “women bad”.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:08 AM
1

I’m older Gen Z as well (graduated from college in 2020). Most of the guys I knew from college are in serious relationships now. A lot of them are living with a girlfriend. Some are engaged. I’m going to some weddings this summer. And it’s not like I live in some rural conservative area. I live in NYC and so do some of the guys I’m talking about. Others live mostly in other large east coast cities. Keep in mind that half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. Avera…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 12:59 AM
4

if you are dating bc you want a wife and kids, you are gonna have serious problems especially in younger age groups As a Gen Z man, I disagree with this take. When I went from looking for casual to looking for something serious, things got easier. In my experience it’s far easier to get a woman to agree to a date when you’re open to a serious relationship than it is to just get casual sex. And I say that as a guy who’s had far more casual sex than average. edit- From maybe 18-22 it might not hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 12:11 AM
1

It has to be a compulsive behavior despite negative results. It often is but doesn’t have to be. There are articles on the impact of sex addiction on marriages for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 10:18 PM
1

I read the your response, but it was nonsensical. The Webster definition of conservation is correct. Words have meanings. I also believe that many people claiming to be “conservative” are in fact not. That doesn’t change the definition of conservatism. Some people who deny being conservative in fact are. The average person is nearly brain dead and has no idea what they’re talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 10:17 PM
3

Is it tour personal experience that being penetrated is more emotionally fraught than doing the penetrating? I was asking for one of the many studies referenced by the person above, not a personal anecdote.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 02:44 PM
7

Nope, most sex involves two people in a monogamous relationship, because people in relationships have far more sex than single people on average. What I’m talking about is the subset of men and women who are having casual sex at any given time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 02:42 PM
12

I do see these types of views from guys with red pill flair, but I would argue it’s not really red pill. Red pill is spinning plates, she’s not the one it’s just your turn, etc. A lot of the guys with red pill flair actually seem to be some mix of transcontinental and black pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 12:30 PM
3

I agree it’s hard for some people to separate. I just don’t think it’s 80%. I don’t even think it’s the majority based on my experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 12:23 PM
4

Such as?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 12:21 PM
11

In his fantasy he has a bunch of “plates” (to use an on old TRP term) who are completely devoted to him. I see that fantasy here all the time. In reality, if a guy is fucking other women, those women are typically fucking other men. Very few women are willing to cut off their other options for a guy they’re mot exclusive with.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 12:19 PM
3

Most men and women know that people like attractive people from a young age. Your looks determine your ceiling. Your personality, including kindness, mostly determines how well you perform under that ceiling.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 04:07 AM
2

I doubt that you are actually ignorant, so the only other conclusion is that you are actively lying to present the most positive image possible. I’m just pointing to the authoritative American English definition of the word. You can lie about what the word means, but that doesn’t change it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:23 AM
1

That’s not true. The most recent 2024 Census Bureau data is almost identical to the 2019 and 2014 data. It’s moving very, very slowly. You can easily look it up on the Census MDAT site. The percentage of young Americans married or living with a partner has actually been trending upward very slightly since 2019.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 02:37 AM
–

Only if you include views that aren’t exclusively red pill. A lot of “red pill beliefs” are just mainstream common sense views that were widely held before the red pill existed. Looks matter, workout/lift, be confident, etc. were all mainstream already.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 07:20 PM
5

Feminism is literally just the belief in equal rights for women. That's the definition in the authoritative American English dictionary. It's that simple. It has nothing to do with "patriarchy theory". Do you believe in men and women having equal rights? If so, you're a feminist.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 04:42 PM
9

That's why I oppose​ feminism. Feminism is just the belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. You oppose feminism because you think that taking rights away from women will improve your own outcomes.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 04:29 PM
5

You say bad character can kill attraction, but we have countless examples of men with openly bad character, arrogance, misogyny, selfishness, criminal records, infidelity, or outright hostility toward women who still have no shortage of romantic and sexual options. Those character traits you describe reduce a man's desirability. If a man is physically attractive enough and/or exposed to enough women, he can withstand reduced desirability and still find plenty of options. Those character traits a…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:13 PM
0

Right, because most men aren't total pieces of shit. But when a guy is on reddit acting like a total piece of shit, the women assume that's his problem with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 03:06 PM
-1

If attraction is genuinely amoral, then being unselected is not evidence of being a bad person. It's simply evidence that you weren't chosen. If a woman doesn't select a man because he's a total piece of shit, then yes, he wasn't selected because he was a bad person. If she doesn't select him because she doesn't find him physically attractive, then no, then I agree that's not evidence that he's a bad person.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:37 PM
2

Someone with a count of 1 could have a sex addiction, while someone with a count of 100 may not. People who have the most sex are typically people in relationships. To me, high n count says more about tendency towards novelty seeking and risk taking than it does about sex addiction. If you want consistent sex, a stable relationship is the best way to get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 01:45 PM
5

Part of the problem is when women say stuff such as “I like a guy who’s experienced” That's a stated preference and some women do state that. Most don't. Hence the stated preference results in the study. Just because women in general state a preference for men with lower n count doesn't mean that there aren't exceptions. based on how women behave, there are many reasons people think they actually like the “high N” guys in “revealed preferences” You're conflating cause and effect. The men who wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 02:51 AM
6

The fact that both genders prefer lower n counts for relationships makes complete sense, but it's worth clarifying that it's all else equal. That study asked the question for both low-mate-value (i.e., unattractive) and high-mate-value (i.e., attractive) options. When comparing between unattractive options with different n counts or attractive options with different n counts, men and women both picked relationships with the low-n-count options. That makes perfect sense. But both men and women ra…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 01:08 AM
3

This is part of the stated vs. revealed preferences dilemma. Not exactly. Because n count is rarely discussed before having sex, it's not exactly a matter of stated vs. revealed preference. People generally make the decision on whether or not to sleep with someone without knowing their n count. So while they would prefer a person with lower n count, that information is generally unknown. It's not that they have a different revealed preference. It's that they don't have enough information to sele…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 12:37 AM
1

What you might not have seen is the degree to which the mid looking girls doing everything 10x more There's not much evidence of that though. As I posted below, the median college girl has an n count of 1. The vast majority of people are mid. There's absolutely zero data to support the idea that mid girls are generally sleeping with 10x more guys than attractive girls. College girls who sleep with a bunch of guys are outliers. Now if you're saying that those outliers are typically mid, then yes,…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/26 12:09 AM
3

My experience is the opposite. Any "non-ugly" woman who was not dating a long term bf, was having casual sex, and not just a hook up "once" at college. But that experience isn't supported by data from women or men, which indicates that your experience is less the norm than mine.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:16 PM
1

It doesn't really matter when they are all having sex with the same type of guy ie. their equivalent greek dude. I was responding to the guy's claim that "pretty girls" aren't promiscuous. Of course attractive women are sleeping with attractive men who exist in the same social circle. Basically any average looking girl who does not have a boyfriend in college will be "promiscuous." That hasn't been my experience anecdotally. Most girls I knew had a hookup or two over the course of their four yea…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:07 PM
6

When it comes to casual sex, men actually prefer higher n count women. Women don't share the same strong preference for higher n count men for casual, but they don't penalize men for being higher n count either. When it comes to LTRs, both women and men prefer lower n count partners, though women's preference for lower n count is slightly stronger.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 10:06 PM
6

No one cares if you have a preference. People generally do care if you're berating people who don't meet your preference. I have lots of preferences when it comes to women, but I don't rant on reddit at women who fail to meet those preferences. I just don't date them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 09:14 PM
2

My school is in the "south" but it's heavily northern influenced. What you're describing is how I imagine the SEC schools working. More of a deep south thing I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 08:51 PM
2

But at the same time, a man who stays single until an older age typically accumulates a higher n count himself. I think in general, people with higher n counts tend to have different views on what constitutes "high".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:50 PM
6

As a guy who spent four years in a frat, I can tell you some very attractive girls from the best sororities absolutely had casual sex. Some had a lot of it. They were definitely the cheerleader types. The better sororities were pretty much that type on the whole. In general, Greek life was better looking and more promiscuous than average. Part of that probably has to do with lots of alcohol.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 06:14 PM
6

Better analogy is some women care about high n count just like some men care about high n count.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 02:14 PM
–

Profile still seemed to make a difference on dating apps. My results would shift with changes to photos or bio. At least it seemed that way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 11:43 AM
3

Zero interest in that.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 04:13 AM
1

labeled himself as “long term, open to short” When I started looking more seriously, I changed my preference from "short term, open to long" to "long term, open to short" and I felt like I started getting fewer matches. I don't have any stats to back that up, so it could be my imagination or it could be random. I switched it up to "still figuring it out" and it seemed to fix the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 04:04 AM
3

The difference is a lot of men recognize at some point that they would have to lower their standards Most men and women lower their standards. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. There aren't enough attractive men for them to all be with their ideal partner. Half of American men are legally married or living with a partner by 29. There also aren't enough attractive women for them to all be with their ideal partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 03:42 AM
4

But when it comes to actually selecting an option, do you typically pick one of your most attractive options?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 02:59 AM
6

So how do you narrow down your options when you find half of women your age attractive? There must be degrees of attractiveness that drive how you select right?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 02:44 AM
12

One of the best looking guys I know has an n count of two. The first was his high school girlfriend and the second was a 10/10 girl he hooked up with in the first week or two of college. They're still together almost 10 years later. This guy was in my frat and I watched girls absolutely throw themselves at him for four years, but he never cheated. Some men have a tendency towards monogamy. That doesn't mean they're undesirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:27 AM
2

Exactly. Men select too. Men may not be as selective as women, but they still tend to overwhelmingly prefer a small group of women just as women tend to overwhelmingly prefer a small group of men. Hinge stats demonstrate this pretty well. Women use 58% of their likes on the top 10% of men, while men use 46% of their likes on the top 10% of women. It's very concentrated at the top for both genders. A woman in the top 1% gets 70+ likes for every one like received by a woman in the bottom 50%, so i…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:23 AM
–

Perhaps, but men still tend to overwhelmingly prefer a small group of women just as women tend to overwhelmingly prefer a small group of men. Hinge stats demonstrate this pretty well. Women use 58% of their likes on the top 10% of men, while men use 46% of their likes on the top 10% of women. It's very concentrated at the top for both genders. A woman in the top 1% gets 70+ likes for every one like received by a woman in the bottom 50%, so it's not like men's preferences are that diverse or rand…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:19 PM
1

Attractiveness is subjective. Something that is objective has a right or wrong answer. If you say 2 + 2 = 5, that's objectively wrong. There can be no dispute, because it's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter of objective fact. Attractiveness isn't objective. You and I could rank 100 women by attractiveness and have differences in how we rank them. Neither of us would be wrong, because it's subjective. It's a matter of opinion. In general people have roughly similar opinions on attractiveness…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 08:04 PM
4

The average man earns, lives on his own, travels, will rarely have any chance at a relationship (LTR or NSA) According the the Census Bureau, the median American man is legally married or living with a partner by the age of 29. Average time from first date to marriage is nearly five years and from first date to moving in together is two years. Most men have met a woman they'll eventually marry or live with by roughly their mid 20s. According to every GSS survey in the past decade, the median 18-…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 09:53 PM
1

I'm guessing it has something to do with market demand. Most things do.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 05:03 PM
1

Exactly. The majority of Americans, even in the 20-29 age group, are overweight or obese. Lose weight is good advice for the majority of Americans.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 01:25 PM
2

The entire strategy men are going for in life is to trade women like pokemon cards. Most men don't execute on or even attempt this strategy. According to the Census Bureau, half of American men are married or living with a partner by 29. In general, both men and women are still relationship-oriented.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 01:20 PM
5

The United States Census Bureau. Specifically the 2024 American Community Survey with a sample size of 3.5M (though you can use any recent ACS year because the numbers barely move from year to year). It's the gold standard for US demographic data. You can slice it any way you want to on the Census MDAT site.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 01:08 PM
2

Yes, because my experience is the point. I'm not speaking to the experience of men in general on the apps. I'm speaking to the experience of the men who do well on the apps. The guy above is claiming that attractive men sleep with the same women as average men. My experience demonstrates why that's a silly claim. When presented with a lot of readily available options, most men will pick from among the most attractive ones. Swiping right < 3% gave me too many options. Let's say there's another at…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 01:05 PM
2

The point is, it's not the norm for either gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 11:53 AM
7

Of course you don't know about my experience. I don't know about your experience or the experience of any random guy on reddit. Most people only know about their own experience and maybe the experiences of some close friends. There's this silly incel myth that "Chad" is hogging all the average women, and it's generally a ridiculous view. As a guy who's done well with women, I think this view is absurd. Again, I swiped right 3%. Got plenty of matches. Further down selected and messaged less than …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:42 AM
2

Some certainly do, just like some guys certainly do. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. The average time from first date to marriage is about five years. From first date to moving in together is about two years. Those women met those men when they were 21-24 or younger. That's a lot of average women with a lot of average men at a young age.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:17 AM
6

No, generally they don't. Here's my experience. Based on my downloaded tinder data, I swiped right a little under 3% and matched 22% of the time I swiped right. I don't have my stats from other apps, but I swiped pretty similarly. Across Tinder and Hinge (and occasionally Bumble), I would get around 25-35 matches a week. On average, at least 1-2 of those matches would be down to just hook up immediately. Another 5+ would agree to have drinks. I narrowed down from there. Based on my tinder stats,…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 04:08 AM
6

Lots of guys are not out chasing the hottest women they could possibly get. You dont speak for the average man The comment you replied to wasn't about the average man. It was about attractive men. Attractive men generally date/sleep with attractive women.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:48 AM
7

Yes but also women who are unaspirational also pick the dream man Yeah, and I pick the NBA over my current job. Let's see how that works out for me. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be with "dream men" because there aren't enough to go around. They're rare. So no, most women can't pick those guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:18 AM
3

They generally don't, but there are exceptions to every rule. Some literally fuck dogs and corpses. But again, most don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:12 AM
20

OP's point is that undesirable men can't. But he's lying about that. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. There aren't enough desirable men for that to be true. Many are with men who aren't desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/06/26 03:10 AM
6

Even without the apps men can still see the kinds of guys are getting the most women and the dating app stats just reinforce what they can already witness. You mean men can see the kinds of guys who are getting the kinds of women most men want. Most women are average and are with average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 10:59 PM
5

Perhaps. When companies (and especially financial institutions) assess risks, they typically assign a likelihood score and an impact score (low, medium, high, critical). A likelihood score of low and an impact score of low is considered a low-rated risk. A likelihood score of low and an impact score of critical is considered a high-rated risk. The company then manages high-rated risks much more aggressively than low-rated risks. Even though the likelihood is low, the impact would be so catastrop…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 07:53 PM
–

Sounds like you need to do better.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:23 PM
1

Assuming we're not exclusive, we're both free to sleep with whoever we want. Once we've agree to become exclusive, that changes.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 12:47 PM
3

If I lived in a part of the world where the average height was 5’4”, I’d be “tall” and women would like me. If I lived in a part of the world where the average height was 6’4”, I’d be “short” and women probably wouldn’t talk to me at all. Only to a limited extent, because everyone in a frat or sorority didn't grow up in a frat or sorority. As I already explained, I know that the girls I was surrounded by were generally above average. That didn't cause the 50th percentile sorority girl to become …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 03:01 AM
1

It's not though. You're still aware that an outside world exists even if you're deeply embedded in Greek life. I recognized it and was thankful for my situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 02:26 AM
2

When I attended college for 4 years and Greek life was everywhere, I’m pretty sure the “average person” there was someone you’d call “Stacy” or “Chad”. The people I socialize with becomes what I perceive as “average” Even as a guy who spent four years in a frat, I recognized that the typical women I was meeting were far from average. I'm not saying it doesn't happen to anyone, but I think most people in that setting recognize that they're not working with a normal distribution.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/26 02:09 AM
-1

If you regularly made guys wait, then the reasonable guy will be fine with a similar wait, assuming you have a similar sexual appetite as him. I personally don't care how quickly a woman has slept with men in the past. That's completely irrelevant to me as long as she wants to have sex in a timeline that works for me. I couldn't imagine waiting past 2-3 dates, regardless of how quickly or slowly she slept with other guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:59 PM
2

The average American woman is overweight, but the average American woman in her early/mid 20s isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:26 PM
2

Back to my earlier point, bottom 25% of n count or bottom 25% of attractiveness? Two different things.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:05 PM
2

I didn't say those women were unattractive. The ones I've seen were generally fairly average +/- for their age group (American average). This guy was my roommate for a while so I got to witness this parade of mediocre women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 11:04 PM
2

While I agree there's a general correlation, exceptions abound. I don't know any women who are with a shorter man. Those exceptions obviously exist, but they're rare. I know a bunch of men who are exceptions to the general correlation. I know lots of good looking guys who have probably been with less than the national average of six women. In general these are guys who met a girl in college and are still with her. The example of the guy who met his gf first week of college is an extreme, but ple…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 10:26 PM
3

The bottom 25% of men tend to have 1 or 2 lifetime partners. The top 40% of men tend to have 10+ lifetime partners. While that may be true, the phrasing of "bottom" and "top" is a little misleading. That's the bottom 25% of men by partner count. A good friend of mine from college is probably in the top 1% of looks, but he's only been with two women. The first was his girlfriend from high school and the second was a girl (also top 1% of looks) he hooked up with first couple weeks of college. They…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 09:42 PM
–

So, I have several female friends, but I don't really think it makes a difference dating. Going to them for dating advice is rarely useful precisely because their perspective is so different. I've found that having female friends is a positive for dating, but it has nothing to do with advice. Practically speaking, having female friends expands and diversifies your social network. I've dated and hooked up with friends of my female friends who I otherwise wouldn't have met. In some cases, my femal…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:54 PM
–

Yeah, but knowing how to talk and socialize and be enjoyable around women is also step one for being friends with women. You're right that you can't completely separate cause and effect here. It's probably some of both. To your point, being able to easily socialize with women makes it easier to make female friends. At the same time, socializing with female friends probably further refines those skills.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:32 PM
13

But in that instance, you typically don't risk public humiliation or having your reputation damaged. The odds of being publicly humiliated are pretty remote. Like I could get robbed at gunpoint if I leave my apartment today, but I'm still going to leave my apartment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:24 PM
1

https://np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/a36cmh/will_dating_become_easier_or_harder_for_men_in/ One of the first results in my search. This sub is full of doomers and apparently has been for a long time. Despite all those predictions of things getting harder, coupling rates haven't fallen among young Americans and have actually risen slightly. If things have gotten harder, it's not coming through in the results. In general clicking through a few posts from about a decade ago, they all s…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 08:19 PM
-4

Women can get casual sex more easily, because of supply and demand imbalances between the genders. If anything, men can find relationships a little more easily, again because of supply and demand imbalances. Every time a heterosexual woman finds a relationship, a man finds one too. But there are fewer men than women seeking committed relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 04:20 PM
3

If you google posts from this sub and filter on dates from 2016 and earlier, there are tons of guys saying "yeah but in 10 years". When someone has nothing to back up their position, they fall back on future hypotheticals that can't be proven wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:27 PM
3

Most men who are in relationships and having sex are from 30+ years ago when women were still being indoctrinated into dating men. As of the latest Census Bureau data (2024), half of 26 year old women are legally married or living with a partner. They clearly didn't meet those men 30+ years ago. How about we wait 10-20 years and see what happens then. Coupling rates among young Americans fell sharply during the Great Recession, flat lined by around 2014, then started to rebound slightly by 2019.…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:25 PM
2

Monkey branching is just lining up a new option before breaking up with your existing one. I've done that multiple times. It's not a gender specific thing. Red and black pill guys lie about it just being a female thing. I've never not had orbiters or backup options. Right now there are women I work with, exes, etc. who still orbit even though I have a girlfriend. That's how it always is. I still get texts from old dating app matches asking to meet up and some of them don't care when I say I'm in…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 01:10 PM
3

The biggest difference is in a social setting like a bar/club/party. Women approach men too, but obviously men approach women way more especially in those settings. An attractive women can't go to a club without being approached multiple times. But men monkey branch just like women. Men leaving their wife for a younger woman is common enough to be a cliche. When I've seen "emotional cheating" at work, it's always been a man and a woman who were both in relationships. They were mutual backup opti…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:41 PM
3

Sure but in that case so do almost all men. If we make the definition broad enough then almost everything becomes cheating.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:24 PM
–

You can say that, but those Hinge stats on the distribution of likes came from a Hinge engineer. It's the best data point we have on likes distribution. And like I said, women swipe more selectively which results in a higher concentration of likes at the top among men. Part of the reason for the lower concentration of likes at the top among women is men who buy premium and like essentially every woman. Those guys flatten the curve for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:18 PM
2

It's an interesting concept. Based on those Hinge stats, it does seem like most men and most women largely waste their likes on people they have no legitimate chance with. If you were to only show them people near their attractiveness level, people in those lower rated cohorts would probably start getting more likes. The flip side of that is people might just leave the apps. People like swiping on attractive people, so if you suddenly remove the attractive people for most users, those users migh…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:24 AM
–

Depends on what standards we're talking about. A lot of men who aren't able to easily get casual sex would lower their standards for it pretty readily. There's far less demand for casual sex among women, so you're going to find far fewer women who would do that. But I think relationships are about the same. There's one man and one woman in every heterosexual relationship. If men were consistently lowering their standards, there would be a surplus of attractive single women. If women were consist…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 02:16 AM
2

If they're honest, how do they get laid? Past a certain age most women find that weird. I've been with dozens of women and n count has only come up before sleeping together with a small handful of them. That was mostly in high school. It's not the norm at all. Unless a guy discloses that he's a virgin, she's not going to know. He doesn't need to lie though. If there's no loneliness epidemic then sexless men with no options wouldn't exist. That's just not true. Men with 11 fingers exist too but t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 11:12 PM
2

Despite people saying they wanted highly compatible partners, their actual behavior showed that attraction was usually the first filter, with compatibility considered only afterward. There was no gender correlation here. Of course. People on dating apps are looking for sexual relationships and mutual attraction is what separates sexual relationships from platonic relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 10:20 PM
–

Do you have the same smoke for women who won't date men they can't find attractive? Absolutely. If someone is whining online about not being able to meet someone, they likely need to lower their standards. That goes for both men and women. If they don't want to lower their standards, that's fine too, but I don't want to hear any whining. They have options, but they're just not interested.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 09:49 PM
14

What's your personal theory on how these seemingly contradictory experiences fit together in Online Dating (OLD)? Here's my very long response. I don't think the two claims are necessarily contradictory. Men in general are more selective on dating apps than a lot of people assume. Men on Hinge use 46% of all their likes on the top 10% of women, while women use 58% of their likes on the top 10% of men. So while men spread their likes out more than women do, they're still very concentrated among t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 09:43 PM
4

I'm in a relationship now but up through a couple years ago, I had pretty good luck with casual dating through Hinge. Tinder was probably the best for it, but realistically plenty of people are looking for casual on Hinge. Same with Bumble.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 05:14 PM
3

Seems like he gave a pretty direct answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 05:04 AM
1

Yeah, I disagree. Personality isn't going to turn a no to a yes, but you can certainly fuck up and turn a yes to a no.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 04:07 AM
1

Depends on the person. The problem is, if apps work for you, then you are most likely somewhat blackpilled. The blackpill, in essence, is just “women will kiss you on dating apps if you’re pleasant & a bit more attractive than them”. Black pill is essentially "only looks matter". Everyone knows looks matter, but it's not only looks that matter in my view. Looks set your league but personality/social skills significantly influence how well you do within that league. I don't think that view is bla…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 03:40 AM
1

But you said blue pill people don't use dating apps. I don't think that's true. In my experience, most guys who naturally do well with women aren't raging red pill assholes. They're typically attractive, socially well adjusted guys and they most definitely use apps. *technically should round down to 6'3 but usually said 6'4 on dating apps since everyone else is rounding up
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 03:11 AM
1

Blue pilled people don’t participate in online dating and only observe how women they’re a bit more attractive than behave socially. I'm blue pilled, but I used dating apps extensively and met dozens of women through the apps. Not sure why you make that assumption.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 02:57 AM
1

Could I go and find a 600 pound burn victim to sleep with or date? Maybe, but we all know that looks matter. My standards, however, are far lower than most of my male friends. That's essentially my point. Those women are options for you, but realistically, you're not an option for them. And to your point, your friends have higher standards. When most men say they don't have any options, they mean they don't have any attractive options. But most people aren't attractive, so of course they don't. …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/26 02:46 AM
1

Partnering is not dating. A man may still have only one first date a year and still get married around 26. But dating is a step toward partnering. If a man is partnered with an average looking woman, he could have easily partnered with any number of below average women. He had options but picked the best one available to him. Second, women tend to partner with men who are older since they are wealthier. Meaning they ARE partnering a few percentiles upward Men tend to partner with women who are y…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 07:01 PM
1

Counting or not counting prostitution? About 1% of American men use prostitutes at least once in a given year. The percentage having sex with prostitutes multiple times a month is likely a small fraction of that amount. Those men are basically a rounding error. Besides, men often have sex with women they don't find attractive. Big goal post movement there. The point is, if they're having sex, they obviously have at least one option. Most men don't have zero options. The partners gender is not sp…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:10 PM
0

You thinking this as a level system, where when you are a certain level, you can get the lower level women. Its not like that in reality. It's generally like that in reality, but I agree it's not black and white. It's not like an average man can have any below average woman he wants. It's not mechanical like that. But in general, a larger percentage below average women will be interested in him vs. average or above average women. I've seen the likes that some of my average looking friends get on…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:21 PM
0

Again, most of them are average men with average women. If a guy can get an average woman, then he also has many unattractive options available to him. But average men generally aren't interested in unattractive women, so they don't consider them options. Likewise, a very attractive men generally aren't interested in average woman, so they don't consider them options. If you're competing for a relationship with someone at your ceiling, it's going to be competitive, regardless of where your ceili…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 02:04 PM
1

Sure, and I want to play in the NBA instead of doing what I do for a living. That doesn't mean I'm going to play in the NBA. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be with top 10% men. Most are fairly average women with fairly average men, because most people are fairly average.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:21 PM
-1

Most average men are paired with average women. That's because people generally form relationships with their best available option. Most people try to date at their ceiling, but it's very competitive at the ceiling. That means at any given time, most people have a limited number of options at their ceiling. The further down you go from that ceiling, the more options you have. Most people don't consider those good options though, so they tend to be sort of invisible.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:16 PM
0

90% of men have 1-2 options a month maybe even less. Options or good options? An 80th percentile man has tons of options among below average women, but he's not interested in them, so they're not good options. We all tend to ignore women who are significantly below our leagues, because we don't perceive them as options, even though many technically are.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 12:29 PM
5

It's applicable to more than the top 20% of men, because most men don't have zero options. According to every GSS survey in recent decades, the majority of 18-29 year old men are having sex at least 2-3 times a month. That means those men all have at least one option. According to the most recent Census Bureau data (2024), half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be with top 20% men, because there aren't enough of those men to go around. Most are …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 12:17 PM
-1

Source? Common sense. According to the Census Bureau's most recent data (2024), half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be way below average and the men they're with can't all be way above average. The numbers don't work. Most are fairly average men with fairly average women, because most people are fairly average. Any man who can get an average woman has any number of below average women available to him. Isn't it a common feminist talking point…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 12:07 PM
13

No, it's exactly the same as a woman who doesn't want to date men below her league. I regret to inform you that all those women who are rejecting you are out of your league.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:08 AM
0

The average 20-something man could date any number of unattractive, obese women. There are many, many of those women throughout the US. Those women are absolutely options for the average man. But he rationally doesn't select them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 04:06 AM
9

The average 50th percentile man could chose from any number of 10th percentile women, but those women are invisible to him. Similarly, a 99th percentile man could choose from any number of 60th percentile women, but those women are invisible to him. Excluding men in the lowest percentiles, men generally have lots of less attractive options that they ignore. By ignoring those options, those men are selecting too. We all do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:50 AM
-7

The average man has tons of options. He just might not be interested in them. For example, the average 50th percentile man could chose from any number of 10th percentile women, but those women are invisible to him.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:34 AM
13

the dating market is not symmetrical. One side largely competes to be selected. The other side largely decides who gets selected. You have agency bro.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 03:30 AM
6

Partnering with men less than when? Coupling rates among young Americans stopped falling around 2014, stayed flat for a while, then started rising slightly since 2019. Fewer are getting married but more are living with unmarried partners. They're still partnered either way though.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 03:12 PM
8

Also women: posts a photo wearing what appears to be 17% of an outfit, arched at an angle that violates several laws of physics, with the camera strategically positioned like it’s filming a luxury car commercial. The women posting those photos and the women saying "don't objectify me" generally aren't the same women. Different women have very different opinions, just as different men have very different opinions. Does that help?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 12:40 AM
–

Yes, The vast majority of men and women settle for someone who is less than ideal. Ideal options are exceedingly rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:38 PM
–

For example, what a woman may consciously merely consider to be a spontaneous desire to try a particular sex act, is actually her subconscious desire to please that man extra. You don't think women ever try a new sex act, because you know, they're curious and want to try it?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:34 PM
5

Women have high standards. Define high. As of the most recent Census Bureau data (2024), half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can't all be with "Chad" because "Chad" is rare. Most of them are fairly average women with fairly average men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 09:42 PM
–

Most people settle. People like attractive people but attractive people are rare, so most people settle for someone who isn't attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 08:48 PM
–

Typically if a woman has done something in the past and won't do it again, it's because she doesn't like it. Like she tried anal once or twice, hated it, and doesn't do it now. Women typically do the things like like to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 06:56 PM
1

OP believes men don't have agency. It's a theme here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 04:46 PM
2

For a man to get into a relationship, he has to harass women ... It doesn't apply to just cold approach, but any kind of advance that might carry the risk of making women uncomfortable. I met my girlfriend on a dating app. She messaged me first. Same thing has happened with other women I've dated in the past. I've also been with women who have approached me at parties, bars, etc. In high school and college there were also girls from school who expressed interest first. I agree men initiate more …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 02:33 AM
5

Preselection gets an overstated in TRP (women dislike hoes just as much as men do), but it is very real Massively overstated. Preselection is mostly conflation of cause and effect. A man ends up sleeping with lots of women because women like him and he's promiscuous. Women don't like him because he's slept with lots of women. You see guys here make this mistake all the time with, "women don't like me because I'm a virgin". No, women don't like you, therefore you're a virgin. If preselection were…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:12 PM
9

I'll repeat what I said in another comment: I've been with 50+ women. Almost none of them knew my n count before we had sex and the few who did were generally from high school when my count was zero to low. When I meet a random woman from a dating app, party/bar, etc. she has no idea what my n count is. It's not normally discussed. So women are fine with guys that have low n count but not fine with those that have high n count. Keep in mind, no one is saying all women take issue with high n coun…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:04 PM
4

I've been with 50+ women. Almost none of them knew my n count before we had sex and the few who did were generally from high school when my count was zero to low. When I meet a random woman from a dating app, party/bar, etc. she has no idea what my n count is. It's not normally discussed.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 07:03 PM
1

So while maybe men do go to singles events and night clubs as often, they use apps much for often. It's not that men aren't looking. They're just looking in their own ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:49 PM
1

So can a virgin have an n count greater than zero? Guess it depends how you count.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 06:48 PM
2

I certainly wouldn't count that as sex. When I was in high school, I had done that multiple times with my girlfriend before we actually had sex and I still considered myself a virgin. But I also don't count oral only and I've been told by some people here that I'm wrong on that, so the answer seems to be count however you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:01 PM
0

Dinner and movie dates are declining, singles events are mostly women, same is starting to occur in night clubs. But dating apps are overwhelmingly male.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 11:58 AM
6

because men have a low standard for sex Men still typically pick their most attractive readily available option. An attractive man always has multiple attractive options readily available for casual sex. There's never any need to sleep with an average woman, unless he lives in some really small town and has already slept with all of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 03:40 AM
6

A relationship no, but a date pretty much yes. If the woman is attractive enough and the man is single. Those are too pretty significant conditions, which are the same as the conditions a man faces when asking a woman for a date. I've rejected most of the women who have approached me, because most of them haven't met me threshold for what I consider attractive. I've also rejected women who I did find attractive when I've been in relationships. Most men won't go on a date with just any woman who …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 01:00 PM
–

I've read online about coffee dates as a first date, but despite doing a lot of first dates from the apps, I've never had a coffee date or had a woman suggest one. I've never heard of my friends doing it either. It might have to do with the fact that we're in our 20s though. I sort of get the sense that coffee dates are more popular with an older crowd.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 02:43 PM
2

They don't generally make it clear. Just because you've experienced women who have made it clear doesn't mean any woman who doesn't isn't into you. I guess it depends on how you define "into you". I'm sure there are plenty of women who have found me attractive but never shown interest. In my opinion being into someone is more than just finding them attractive. It's actually wanting to date/hookup with them. Like I could find my friend's girlfriend attractive, but I don't actually want to sleep w…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:49 PM
1

Its pure luck, there are guys who did nothing and still got laid. So it's not about having a perfect physique? It's about luck?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 04:32 AM
3

In my experience, it varies. Large population, varying preferences. Not much more complicated than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:47 AM
5

That's not the most common strategy. We know that the top 10% of women get 46% of all likes on Hinge. That's not possible if most men are swiping right 100%. Show me any stat that shows the majority of men are swiping right 100%.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:41 AM
1

Women are the sex that does the selecting in modern dating. Stop pretending men don't have agency. It makes you look low value. If a man isn't swiping right 100% on dating apps, then he's selecting too.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 03:13 AM
2

The majority of American men have sex by 17 and are married or living with a partner by 29. This is in a country with widespread obesity. I assure you, most of those men have far from perfect physiques.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:11 AM
1

That’s simply not true. Those comments about personality and character are made when a guy is spewing misogynistic nonsense and complaining about his dating woes. When someone comes off as a total piece of shit, he will naturally get “try not being a total piece of shit” in response.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:09 AM
0

I’ll give you an example of a guy with a skill issue. Out of all of the guys I knew in college, only one of them graduated as a virgin (at least I think he was a virgin). The guy was a solid 6+ but consistently only chased 9s and 10s. There were girls in his league who showed interest in him, but he had somehow convinced himself he was a 10. He had the same conditions for success as the guys around him. Same school, frat, socioeconomic class, gender ratio, etc., but he failed because he was wild…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:05 AM
5

Looking good enough to get dates is really hard for most men. And yet most men do. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. They can’t all be with attractive men, because attractive people are rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/26 11:52 PM
–

To be fair, most women’s profiles are either “still figuring it out”, “long term open to short”, or “short term open to long”. Only a small percentage have a clear short term or long term preference stated. So while the complaint is valid, I feel like that’s more just a dating app thing than a male thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 06:00 PM
6

I guess that’s always a possibility too. But I’ve read guys post about things like girls from school who had crushes on him but he never knew until he found out years later. In those cases it seems more likely that he was just missing signals.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:29 PM
12

Exactly. Women can be subtle about being into you, but generally they’ll make it pretty clear. I sort of wonder whether a lot of guys who struggle to see those signs are on the spectrum. I don’t mean that as an insult. It’s just something that can make it legitimately difficult for a person to read other people.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:20 PM
14

Yes, you are both 100% correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:13 PM
7

( The article is missing enough stats for women) Like where are the majority of likes distributing for women ? Like top 30%, top 50% etc. Bc women get a 23% match rate which means not everyone they swipe on likes them back. That article reads like AI slop that cobbled together fragments of Hinge information from various internet sources, often without citing them. For example, the likes distribution for men is pulled from this 2017 Quartz article. https://web.archive.org/web/20170821031825/https…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 05:06 PM
0

The top 1% of guys get 16.4% of all likes from women. The top 10% get 58% Those stats are from 2017. https://web.archive.org/web/20170821031825/https://qz.com/1051462/these-statistics-show-why-its-so-hard-to-be-an-average-man-on-dating-apps/ It’s also worth noting that the top 1% of women get 11% of all likes and the top 10% get 46% of all likes. The lesser concentration among women is likely due to a small minority of men who have premium and swipe right on everyone. If ~3% of men swipe that wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:26 PM
2

People like money.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:55 AM
–

The blue pill is the mainstream. The mainstream in the us is not leftist. It’s center right.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:52 AM
2

I’ll base it off my dating app stats. My tinder data shows I swiped right a little less than 3% on women in my preferred age range. I only swiped right if I would have sex with her. If you include women in relationships that I would hypothetically sleep with if they were single, then maybe it’s more like 5%. Of the women I’ve slept with, I’ve only dated a small minority. But that wasn’t necessarily because I wouldn’t date them under the right circumstances. I just went through long periods of no…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 05:13 PM
6

You still know who you’re taking to though. You obviously don’t know who they’re talking to, but you can control how many women you talk to at a time.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:06 PM
5

When I was in hs I’d get a girls number and I’d pretty much know for certain she’s the only one I’m talking to. Well yeah, if she’s the only one you’re talking to then obviously you know that. Same is still true today. You know who you’re talking to.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:46 PM
5

I'm only in my late 20s, but generally the guys from college who were very in shape are in the best shape today. A lot of guys who were skinny fat are already starting to get overweight. The guys who were lifting, counting macros etc. back in college are still in shape. Once you learn that lifestyle it just sort of becomes habit.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 09:02 PM
1

So the problem statement has shifted from "women are hypergamous" to "women don't want kids". Got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 08:57 PM
1

Yes, and you chose the wrong age range. There is no "wrong age range". 18-29 is the standard young adult age range. What range do you want to use? There's no right or wrong answer. You also chose non-marriage coupling, which isn't as meaningful. That's a fine opinion, but it doesn't relate to your argument that there's a lack of male opportunity. If a man manages to meet a woman, date her, and live with her, he obviously had opportunity. In my experience, it's typically the man who doesn't want …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 06:23 PM
1

OP alleges that there is a "lack of male opportunity" that is causing couples to form at a lower rate. We're not talking about fertility rates. That's a separate topic. I'm addressing the fact that coupling rates aren't actually falling.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 05:30 PM
4

There's literally an entire table of coupling rates from the Census Bureau in my comment above. Fertility is very different from coupling. People are still coupling but couples aren't having as many kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 02:10 AM
3

100%
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 11:21 PM
6

Therefore, whatever the strength of your variable, it is far weaker than what I demonstrated via the venues that people couple through. I'm not pointing to any one variable - only the end result. Despite the fact the online has become the most common way for couples to meet, the coupling rate has not fallen since Tinder was introduced in 2012. There are likely many variables that have contributed to that result. If there were a decline in male opportunity as you claim, I would expect to see coup…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 11:17 PM
11

I don't see women's pickiness and rights as the cause for the total downfall in the formation rate of couples Coupling rates among young Americans stopped falling by the time dating apps were widely adopted. More young Americans were married or living with a partner in the latest Census Bureau data (2024) than when Tinder was released in 2012. Coupling rates plunged during the Great Recession, flat lined in 2014, and started to rebound slightly by 2019. Despite your perceived lack of male opport…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 11:03 PM
5

So overall women are harsher about men's history than vice versa, yet convinced society they're the ones being unfairly judged. I think the difference is in how vocal people are. A lot of men are very vocal about disliking high n count women. Women tend to be fairly silent on it, which leads some men to incorrectly believe that women don't care. Silent preferences get far less attention than vocal ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 07:37 PM
1

What kind of cake?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:26 AM
2

That's both men and women. Men also rate high-n-count, high-mate-value women as far more desirable than low-n-count, low-mate-value women. N count matters all else being equal, but people generally don't care that much if you're hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:13 AM
7

If you were willing to try something with other men, you definintely it owe to the man you supposedly love No you don't. You don't owe anyone anything. When I was in college, I had a threesome with a girl I was dating and another girl. The girl I was dating was the one who wanted to try it. It seemed out of character but I went along with it. Things got really weird between us afterwards and I see it as the beginning of the end of that relationship. If my girlfriend today asked me for the same t…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 03:07 AM
3

I think I knew one guy in college who graduated as a virgin. He was a solid 6/10 but never managed to have sex (as far as I know) like every other 6/10 guy I knew. That's because he was only interested in women who were 9/10 or 10/10. Consistently shot way out of his league, but seemed genuinely convinced that was his league, despite the lack of success. He wasn't a morally bad guy or anything. If anything it was the opposite. He was just oblivious.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 02:42 AM
0

Here's the fact: men and women are pairing up less Less than when?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 02:28 AM
8

In order for near half of women being childless close to middle age to be a good thing we need to also assume that half of women don't want family and would be fine never having that. No one is saying 45% of women will never have that. This stat comes from an article titled "45% of Women Will Be Single and Childless by 2030, Per Recent Projection" in Evie, a far-right disinformation magazine for women. The article (incorrectly) describes the results of a Morgan Stanley study and contains a link …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 05:24 PM
1

Fair point although I'd say its all up for debate there isnt definitions of RP in some holy book. Agreed, but this is a debate sub with definitions for the sub. Debate is fairly pointless if people aren't using common definitions. It's just people talking past each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:38 PM
–

But I will tell the man "dude wtf, do this to please your wife, what's your problem?". I think you should WANT to do whatever will make your partner happy. But if that's your view, then why does it matter whether the man has used toys with other women in the past? Even if he hadn't used them in the past, wouldn't your advice still be the same?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:58 PM
–

What type of kinky sex are we talking about? Like let's say she tried anal once with a previous boyfriend and hated it. That doesn't really imply to me that she must have been more passionate with him or initiated more with him. The fact that she tried anal with him and hated it vs. trying it with you and hating it is really just a matter of timing. If you had met her first, she would have discovered that she hates anal with you and not him.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:47 PM
–

That is the point, what is the woman is not interested in anything like this. Then you're probably not compatible and should just move on. It's nothing to be angry at her about. If there are certain things that are important to you sexually, then just move on and find a woman who's into those things. No need to be mad at the women who aren't.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:40 PM
1

Pills are still not really mainstream and especially peoples understanding of them. The blue pill is literally defined here as mainstream views. It's just the default. The whole thing is a Matrix reference. Neo can take the red pill and see "reality" or take the blue pill and see the same thing as everyone else. The blue pill is just "everyone else" (e.g., the default).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:36 PM
–

You should be upset because you are not getting your wants met. I would go a step further and say that you shouldn't even be upset. Just move on. Most couples who start dating break up within a fairly short time frame. If you're not sexually compatible, it's not something to get mad about. It's just a reason to move on like any other form of compatibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:04 PM
4

the population falling is uncontrolled and will lead to negative impacts for the economy particularly for older people This assumes status quo, which is a bad assumption. In the next ten years, AI could eliminate half of all jobs. In that scenario, more people don't equate to more economic output. They equate to more unemployed mouths to feed. We are not going to have an issue of unfilled jobs due to lower population. Even with a falling population, we should expect unprecedented unemployment.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 02:49 AM
16

There is no way I'd risk getting pregnant in the USA right now. - the maternal mortality rate is horrid and getting worse, I can't be guaranteed care if something goes wrong during pregnancy, cost of medical care, no maternity or paternity leave, horrid and dangerous education system, no affordable child care, cost of rent/buying, cost of food, cost of just surviving, wars, the environment... the list goes on and on as to why people are choosing not to reproduce. Also, depending on which state y…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 02:45 AM
1

Probably depends on what flavor of casual sex. In general when a woman hooks up with a complete stranger she met hours/minutes ago, that woman has had at least some alcohol. But subsequent to that first time, many of those same women will continue to sleep with him sober. Sober sex with strangers is rare, but sober fwb, situationships, etc. are common.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 02:37 AM
1

Point being, he hooked up with his girlfriend drunk and was hit on by drunk girls at parties. None of them qualified for the sober part.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 02:11 AM
2

Doesn't matter. Getting casual sex (specifically, sober casual sex with attractive women) is the marker of whether a man is attractive. It's not the marker, but it's an indicator. I was friends with a guy in college who every girl absolutely loved, but he was never single. He hooked up with an extremely attractive girl (drunk) first couple weeks of freshman year, and then dated her throughout the rest of college. He's still with her almost 10 years later. This guy was in my frat and I watched ra…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:05 AM
1

Also you gloss over the fact that you 100% picked the guys to have casual sex with, you wanted them specifically. Before you even got drunk you picked people to be around, so it was never a random thing. Only in a very broad sense. For example, one time I hooked up with a girl I met at a pool party on spring break. In the broadest sense, it wasn't completely random, because she picked this particular island and and this particular pool bar before she got drunk. But there were hundreds of guys th…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:54 PM
–

No one ever claimed that women only have casual sex when drunk. There are exceptions to every rule in life. But alcohol is a significant factor, especially in hookups/ONS. If we're talking about a first night hookup with a stranger, then around 90% of women have been drinking and over 60% have been binge drinking. That's pretty consistent with my experience with sex on the same night I meet a woman. If we're talking casual sex with someone a woman already knows (e.g., an ex-boyfriend), then only…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:19 PM
–

There will be far, far more people than jobs in the near future. Each additional person an additional taxpayer. They're another unemployed mouth to feed.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:02 PM
–

Yes, but how much of it depends on your definition of "sober" and "casual sex". My ONS have mostly been drunk and my fwb/situationships have mostly been sober.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 10:57 PM
11

Hinge is the one dating app that does it right and severely limits the amount of likes men can send out (I think it's 8 a day), thus forcing them to be more selective. Yes, but what's interesting is how men choose to be selective when you limit their choices. Instead of using their few likes on women who are the most realistic options, they overwhelmingly save them for a small percentage of the same attractive women. It shows you which women the men are actually interested in. On Tinder and Bumb…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 06:51 PM
7

lf u look at the vast majority of couples, none of them came from aproaching I agree it's not a primary way people meet, but it certainly happens. At least 9% of couples who were engaged in 2024 met in social settings. That generally involves someone approaching someone. The percentage is likely higher, because there are other categories like at school, through work, friends in common, etc., that typically still involve approaching someone to express interest. It's just that those are more like …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 05:04 PM
12

First of all, dating apps. Men swipe right 60-70% of the time, women swipe right 5-15% of the time. And of those 5-15%, the same men get almost all the attention. The top 10% of men get 58% of all likes, while the top 10% of women get 46% of all likes. There are men with premium who get unlimited likes and like every woman, so obviously they reduce the concentration at the top among women. Likes are pretty concentrated at the top for both genders.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 04:52 PM
–

I think you have to consider why she's losing interest. For example, if it's because you've been ignoring her, acting like a total dick to her, etc., then perhaps it's worth considering not ignoring her, acting like a total dick, etc. I wouldn't really call that monkey dancing. It's more like doing the bare minimum to be a decent partner. On the other hand, if you're already fully engaged in the relationship and doing your part, then yeah you're probably not going to change how she feels.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 12:32 PM
3

Taller more attractive men are more higher valuable in the dating market than the shorter unnatractive man. Attractive women are more valuable on the dating market too, but OP doesn't acknowledge that. As for "taller", that's just part of attractive. Taller, more muscular, better facial symmetry, etc. are all just part of attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 04:23 AM
4

HVM apply ❤️TRP Attractive men who are naturals with women are the least likely to employ red pill tactics. It's not necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 02:49 AM
–

Most men don't make a six figure salary, but most find relationships. The average man ends up with a fairly average woman. If he can pull and average woman, he can pull any number of less attractive women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 02:30 AM
–

Many just pretend to be innocent and repulsed by things like sex Women generally like sex in my experience. Who are these "many" women who pretend to be repulsed by it?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:29 PM
8

Fair enough. Let me rephrase my "no one" statement. A very small percentage of people give a fuck who you date. It's not literally no one, because there are exceptions to every rule. Even if just 1% of people shame other people over who they date, that's still 80 million people. So yes, there are obviously exceptions out there in the world. Fortunately they're rare enough that I've never encountered anyone who's shamed me for my preferences. And if someone does shame me for my preferences, then …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 04:17 AM
12

You're making it sound like men are regularly shamed for their preferences. I'm saying that's bullshit. No one cares unless you're on the internet ranting that you can't find women who meet your preferences. At that point, you're no better than woman who are "where are the good men".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:46 AM
6

If that were true then an average man could create an account in any dating app, match with everyone and get consistent positive results. Men use 46% of their likes on the top 10% of women, even though the vast majority of men have no chance with those women. The average man isn't swiping right on 10th percentile women. See above. If what you said is true then all the average man has to do is get on tinder and find all those women that are in the 10th percentile matching him. See above. Correct,…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:43 AM
4

Most men will fit in the description used above. Only one woman interested in them at the time. But that's obviously not true. Let's use an average 50th percentile man as an example. At any given time, there are tons of 10th percentile women who would happily date him. But people tend to pair up with other comparably attractive people, so those 10th percentile women are invisible to him. He's competing for ~50th percentile women, but will only find a limited number of them interested in him at a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:20 AM
3

I like attractive women. Not ashamed to say I have preferences.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:04 AM
12

No one gives a fuck who you date. I've dated a lot of women and have never once been shamed for my narrow preferences. People just don't care that much.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 03:03 AM
4

I am talking about men with no options. Those men will take any. No they won't. Because they have no options, there are none to take. But I'm talking about most men. Most men pick their best available option.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:45 AM
11

Absolutely irrelevant. Men will accept ANY. It does not matter what they say in this sub. ANY. Which men? That hasn't been my experience. All people, including men, tend to pick the best available option.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 02:12 AM
3

the only socially accepted verdict is that he had this outcome planned from the start That's simply not true. I know tons of couples who have broken up after having sex and that hasn't been the narrative. It's completely normal to date for a little while then stop.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:54 PM
–

Yes, in fact many women especially on intertnet say that looks dont matter at all Many people say all sorts of things, because there are 8 billion people. Even if a tiny percentage of people believe something, that turns into "many" in raw numbers. Even if only 1% of women say that looks don't matter at all, that's still 40 million women. The point is, that's not a mainstream view at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/05/26 03:51 PM
3

Your example isnt very realistic though, both those twins are going to do better than a guy who is ugly but has the personality of the 1st twin. Of course they'll both do better with women than an ugly guy with a good personality. As I said, looks and personality both matter. Looks largely determine your league, but personality influences how well you do in your league. An ugly guy and an attractive guy aren't even typically competing for the same women in reality. You're generally competing aga…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 03:38 PM
8

I don't make the rules. This sub defines blue pill as mainstream views. You're looking for outliers and trying to portray them as mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:45 PM
2

The boring/pleasant/good looking guy will probably get chosen over the fun/unattractive guy. Of course. Like I already said, looks largely determine the ceiling for your options. No one is saying personality can make up for looks. But unattractive men still do get some matches and dates (look up success stories on the Bumble sub if you doubt this). The fun, confident, unattractive guy will have better success on those dates than a boring, unattractive guy. No one thinks personality makes up for …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:42 PM
3

Blue pill is mainstream views. What you're describing isn't mainstream and therefore not blue pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:20 PM
3

There could be other value someone derives from relationships which can motivate them to pursue a relationship even if there isn't a high sexual attraction for their partner. So beta buxx?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:18 PM
3

Only 1% of people think looks don't matter at all. It's not a mainstream view.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:16 PM
8

Looks don't matter or looks aren't the only thing that matters? I'm sure that there are people in this world who don't think looks matter at all, but that's not a mainstream view. There are also people who think the world is controlled by lizard people, but again, that's not a mainstream view either. People overwhelmingly believe that looks matter. Only 1% think looks don't matter at all. That's not mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:14 PM
6

However, good looks are objective & universal. Looks are not objective. Something that is objective can't be disputed. There is a right answer and a wrong answer. 3 > 2 is an objective fact. Anyone who disagrees is wrong. But I can think woman A is hotter and my friend can think woman B is hotter. Neither of us can be wrong, because it's subjective. People's subjective opinions tend to cluster, but that doesn't make them objective. Each person has subjective preferences which means they'll rank …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 02:11 PM
13

But who's saying that only personality matters? That's not the least bit mainstream. Your looks largely determine the ceiling for your options. Your personality plays a major role in how well you do at that ceiling. If there are two attractive twin brothers, the one who's confident, assertive, charismatic, funny, and sociable is going to do a lot better with women than his twin who's shy, awkward, and humorless.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 01:00 PM
41

Straw man. No one is claiming women only care about personality. That's not a mainstream view at all. The mainstream (blue pill) just believes that personality also matters, like looks, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 11:55 AM
0

Based on what data? I'm just seeing people share their personal anecdotes? You might be right, but the experience of you and your friend with the biceps is an anecdote, just like her waiting 6 years.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 07:56 PM
1

Within less than a week of the breakup she was already going out with/sleeping with other guys and 4 months later she was in a relationship with another dude. More women seek relationships and more men seek casual. There are obviously lots of exceptions in both directions, but I'm speaking generally. Personally, I generally haven't felt the need to jump right out of one relationship and into another, with the exception of one time in high school when I basically broke up with a girlfriend becaus…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 04:32 PM
–

You mean the guys you dated never shared their list with you? I thought that was standard first date protocol.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 03:17 AM
–

I never called them losers either. Odd comment. I'm just pointing out that most men and most women settle for someone who's far from their ideal. That doesn't make them losers. It makes them realistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 03:07 AM
–

That's not what you're talking about in your post. You're not talking about "good enough". You're talking about being "top of their list" and "her first choice". That's literally how you define mastering the game. Like men, very few women are at the "top of his list" or "his first choice". Like women, almost all men settle for someone who isn't their first choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 03:03 AM
–

One guy told me he waited in the friend zone for 4 yrs. And then married her? That's a crazy outlier, because I don't think I've ever heard of someone getting out of the friendzone. There are alot of married men and men in LTRs that are the 3 or 4th option for a woman after the guys she really wanted rejected her. Same goes for a lot of married women. Most people want an attractive partner, but most people aren't attractive themselves, so that's not realistic. The average man and the average wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 02:55 AM
5

But notice that whenever you call out red pill guys on a lie, they move the goal posts completely. Here's a common one... Red Pill Guy: Less than 1% of men ever date a woman or have sex. Me: According to the most recent Census Bureau data, half of 29 year old men are married or living with a partner. Red Pill Guy: Well those women aren't actually attracted to them and are all dreaming about Chad. Dead bedroom! Chad!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 02:47 AM
4

When I look at the rates single parenthood over the decades I have a hard time not laughing my ass off when I see women say shit like this. It's important to distinguish single-parent households from unmarried two-parent households. Cohabitation has been replacing marriage for decades (see figure 8), so more and more kids are born to unmarried parents. But two unmarried, cohabitating parents still form a two-parent household. Single-parent households peaked in the 1990s to 2000s and then started…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 12:15 AM
9

There's no such line for men or women. People are free to be as picky as they want to be. Others just aren't going to be sympathetic to someone who sets unrealistically high standards then complains about not being able to find anyone to meet them. Like I can say I'm only willing to take Fortune 500 CEO jobs, but no one is going to feel bad for me when I complain about being unemployed.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 10:40 PM
–

Define success. Who's more successful? A guy who gets married at 22 to his high school sweetheart or a guy who dates a series of women and eventually gets married at 30? Do the man's personal goals matter in defining success for him or do you and I dictate what success looks like for him?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 10:37 PM
-1

If we are going with this notion that male sexuality is scary and degrading. "If we are going with this notion that the world is controlled by lizard people..."
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 10:02 PM
–

Options are the people who are realistically available, interested, and willing to pursue you. Yes to realistically available and interested. No to willing to pursue. If a man was the one to pursue his wife, and not the other way around, they are still in fact married. That means she was an option even if she didn't initiate by pursuing him. If a woman has more men willing to date her, sleep with her, talk to her, or at least give her a chance, then she has more options at the entry point. As I …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 08:40 PM
2

Translation: I have no idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 08:26 PM
–

But if you don't encounter women like this in real life, then why complain about them on reddit? Clearly if you haven't met one in the wild, they're not that impactful to your actual experience as a man. Just seems like an odd thing to complain about, but I guess that's what reddit is for.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 08:24 PM
–

So yeah, heterosexual relationships end up numerically paired one-to-one, but the dating process before that is not equal. I agree men are typically expected to initiate and pay, which creates an unequal dating process, but that doesn't change the fact that men and women have the same number of relationship options. What you're discussing is the qualitative aspects of the process, not the quantitative number of options someone has. The fact that some men want casual does not erase the amount of …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 08:20 PM
–

Women have more options for casual sex because of supply and demand imbalances between the genders. Men and women have equal options for relationships, because every time a heterosexual woman finds a relationship and goes off the market, a man does too. If anything you could argue that a man has more options than a woman when it comes to monogamous relationships, because there are more men looking for casual only than women looking for casual only, which again creates supply/demand imbalances.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 08:04 PM
3

People are in fact having less sex, but it's not a uniquely male issue. There's a general rise in sexlessness among both men and women in the last decade, according to the GSS Data Explorer. Historically, the percentage of sexless men 18-29 has been higher than the percentage of sexless women 18-29, but there are occasional instances where that's not the case (2021 and 2022 being the most recent examples). Year Sexless Men 18-29 Sexless Women 18-29 Sexless Men per Sexless Woman 2000 16.4% 10.5% …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 07:55 PM
3

And what percentage of married women are posting about that?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 07:07 PM
–

Men and women have the same number of options for relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 06:05 PM
1

We're not talking about means here, which can be inflated by outliers. That would apply to something ling mean sexual partner count, but that's not what we're talking about here. As for self-reporting, there's very little evidence that people lie at scale on anonymous surveys. And do we really think people are lying en masse about marital status to the Census Bureau? Even if self-reported results are imperfect, they're still better than whatever a random guy on the internet makes up to align wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 06:04 PM
2

Even in mainstream social media more and more women are acknowledging hypergamy, flat out saying most men are chopped In other words, flat out lying? According to the CDC, most men have sex for the first time by 17. Most men are having sex in high school. According to every GSS survey from the past decade, the majority of men 18-29 are having sex at least 2-3 times a month. Most young men are having sex on a fairly regular basis or more. According to the most recent data from the Census Bureau, …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 05:37 PM
–

Men and women have the same number of options for relationships. Also not sure why you think men don't choose too. You seem to think men don't have agency.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 05:23 PM
–

To me, it's clear: first sign of abuse, and she's out. Yet, it happens very rarely. It in fact happens most of the time. The exceptions are the times when it doesn't happen, things escalate, and it ends badly. Dark triad in itself attracts women sexually. Successful and unsuccessful are relative terms. An attractive non-abuser will typically be more successful than an unattractive abuser. Pretty simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 05:19 PM
–

There's a reason for that. Online platforms allow small, like-minded communities to form. That's why things like the black pill, for example, took off when online social platforms were introduced. There had always been a small percentage of men who struggle with women, but they were all isolated. Even if only 1% of men are incels, that's still millions of men in a seemingly large online community. But someone shouldn't listen to those men online and walk away thinking that they represent most me…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 04:51 PM
–

Choosing better is holding these men accountable I'm talking about personal accountability for one's failings. Yet, abusers keep thriving sexually all over the globe. Attractive abusers are. Unattractive abusers aren't. Attractive non-abusers are. Unattractive non-abusers aren't. Attractive people tend to thrive sexually, regardless of whether they're assholes. That's just how it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 04:18 PM
–

so when a woman repeatedly chooses the same kind of toxic man Ironically, if these are the women you're encountering, then you also need to choose better.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 04:14 PM
–

Because OP believes that men shouldn't be accountable for their own actions,
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 04:11 PM
7

A need is something that will directly cause death if it's not met. Food and water are needs. Shelter and/or clothing to stay warm in the cold are needs. Those are things you can't live without. Sexual variety is not a need. Even sex is not a need. It's a very important want, but you will continue living without it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 02:13 PM
2

Hmm. I think you can ask questions to everyone in a discussion post. Maybe not.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 09:56 PM
2

Why just ask women? Seems like a relevant question for everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 08:26 PM
1

I don't know. To me it counts as a relationship as long as both people agree to be exclusive. For the amount I've dated, I haven't had that many relationships, but even so there are some that I barely remember. Like someone exclusively for a month 8 years ago, barely registers when I think about my relationship history.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 07:45 PM
11

You linked to a thread with 119 comments. Why don't you just link to one that shows an example of a woman complaining that her boyfriend controls what she wears but also complaining that her boyfriend doesn't care what she wears? Based on a quick skim, I didn't see one.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 06:22 PM
17

Sure, but generally speaking, this is just two different women with different views. I would love to see an example of the same woman complaining that her boyfriend controls what she wears but also complaining that her boyfriend doesn't care what she wears.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 06:10 PM
19

Women say that men should stop being insecure, and that women should wear whatever they want. But when a man has a indifferent attitude about what their girlfriends wear though. All of a sudden men get shit for being too "nonchalant" (with quotations marks). Those are two different women. That's why.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 06:03 PM
1

Makes sense. Lower-income people tend to sex sex at an earlier age and also tend to be more misogynistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 06:01 PM
4

At some point how does she know? Like say a guy was fat in the past, but then he lost weight and then started lifting. A woman who meets him today on a dating app only knows the present version of him. If she were to later learn that he was previously overweight, I have trouble believing that changes things much.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 03:04 AM
6

Walking up to a woman and talking to her isn't objectifying her. That's how approaches typically happen. It's just talking. What's this scenario OP is imagining? A guy walks up to a woman and says "nice tits"? Is that the type of scenario we're talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/26 12:00 AM
6

I've been lifting weights since high school when strength training became an expectation for my baseball team. I've never had a woman react negatively or weirdly to me going to the gym. All of the women I've had relationships with have also gone to the gym, so maybe that's part of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 07:47 PM
16

When he says "suddenly that same sexual attention becomes chemistry, tension, flirting", that's because the woman has decided to engage with the man. That's how flirting works. It's a two-way street in which both parties escalate. When a woman is engaging with you like that, you can escalate and get more sexual. She will typically do the same. It's a very different situation if a man walks up to her, starts talking sexually, she ignores him or asks him to go away, and he continues doing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 03:44 PM
1

Then comes the redpill, redpill says get jacked. Men do it, and they get success. This was already a mainstream view before the red pill even existed.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 01:01 PM
0

There is no requirement that it needs to be the same previously rejected man If that's the case, then his "you do not get to reject a man from the game, then draft him into the cleanup crew after the game goes badly" statement is silly. So if a woman meets a guy and immediately wants to date him, she doesn't get to because other women have previously rejected him? What does that have to do with her? There's nothing dishonest about my take, because his scenario only works if it's the same woman. …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 12:29 PM
1

So only 2 out of 1,000 people are an 8/10 or above? That's a silly scale, because measuring attractiveness at that extreme level is very subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:51 PM
1

Yes, ive seen many men done this. And I've never seen a man do it. I'm not saying pre-selection has zero impact in all cases. I just think it's an minor factor and that most of what people attribute to pre-selection is actually conflation of cause and effect. Not saying it never works though.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:46 PM
6

Another interview showed a similarly uncomfortable reality: many women would rather be involved with a high-status man, such as a famous NBA player, even in a less committed role, than be the wife of an average man. The women who are willing to be in a non-monogamous relationship are outliers. Celebrities have massive exposure, so it's easy for them to find outliers. Let's say you have a celebrity with exposure to 50M women and 0.1% of them are gold diggers who are willing to marry him in a non-…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 08:16 PM
2

I'll agree on the confidence thing, but only to an extent. It's not as simple as just sleeping with a lot of women. If those women are all very unattractive, for example, it's not necessarily going to build a man's confidence in his ability to be successful with women in his league. It's not just quantity, it's quality too. Hooking up with one 10/10 can give a guy a lot more confidence than hooking up with a dozen 2/10s. Pre-selection is mostly just men conflating cause and effect. They think wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 08:03 PM
2

The guy claimed you need to be really attractive to sleep with women at all, not just to have casual sex. That's what I was responding to. Also, keep in mind that many desirable men are in relationships. Even if you apply your standard of only being desirable if you can have casual sex, many men of have previously had casual sex are currently in relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 06:10 PM
10

If you have a friend, by some extension, youd care about their family, even if its low. not neccesarrily guilt but also remorse, empathy, sympathy. Sure but your post isn't talking about empathy/sympathy. It's talking about guilt. Do I feel sympathy/empathy when something bad happens to someone else? Yes, absolutely. Do I feel guilt? Assuming I had nothing to do with the bad thing that happened, the answer is no.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:54 PM
8

According to every GSS survey from the past decade, the majority of men 18-29 are having sex at least 2-3 times a month. Those men can't possibly all be really attractive. According to the most recent Census Bureau data, half of 26 year old American women are legally married or living with a partner. Those women can't possibly all be married to or living with really attractive men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:35 PM
8

Most men can, but not all men can get casual sex. You have to be extremely desirable for that, which I want to be. You don't have to be extremely desirable to have casual sex. Most sex with strangers involves a woman who's been binge drinking. Not saying that's how it should be, but that's how it is. Almost every guy I knew from college had at least one hookup (and most had multiple). A lot of these guys were fairly average to a little above average, because most people are fairly average. But t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:13 PM
2

Therapy won't make you desirable, but sleeping with as many women as possible maybe can. You have cause and effect backwards. Sleeping with more women doesn't make you desirable. Being desirable makes it easier to sleep with a lot of women. Sleeping with as many women as possible might not be the ego boost you think it is. A lot of men could casually sleep with a lot of women if they lower their standards enough. But sleeping with a bunch of women you don't find attractive probably won't actuall…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 04:04 PM
-6

I wasn't responding to OP. I was responding to the guy I quoted. But even so, that is what OP said.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 03:19 PM
-10

This is the verdict: "you do not get to reject a man from the game, then draft him into the cleanup crew after the game goes badly." This idea that a woman rejects a "nice" guy, dates other "bad" guys for years, then eventually settles down with the safe option she rejected previously is a red/black pill fantasy. I don't know of any couples who knew each other for years before they started. For the most part, they met and started dating almost immediately. So while I agree that you shouldn't dat…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 02:29 PM
1

Does anyone feel guilty for things done by other people that they have nothing to do with? Why would I feel guilty for what other men do? Right now there are men attacking Ukraine and trying to take Ukrainians' country away from them. I think that's terrible, but I don't feel guilty for it, because I'm not a Russian soldier killing Ukrainians for a paycheck. I've contributed to Ukrainian causes and vote for politicians who support Ukraine. There are men doing terrible things all over the world a…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 02:12 PM
4

30% of women under 30 are single. 60% of men under 30 are single. That's really bad data you're referencing. You're looking at a small Pew sample in which 47% of women 18-29 were married or living with a partner in 2022. It's a wildly unrepresentative sample. We know that because we have Census data showing that 33% of women 18-29 were married or living with a partner in 2022. Pew over sampled married/cohabitating women by 42%, which is an astoundingly bad sample. Women are seriously going for t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 10:07 PM
7

Reading this post, I had the same reaction. MAGA's entire philosophy is essentially "I hate you so much that I'll do anything to make your life worse, even if it makes my life worse too."
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 09:21 PM
1

It's so wild to me how both genders are adopting this sick my side vs yours type of thinking. Are they? I don't know anyone who thinks that way or talks that way in real life. I mostly see it from people on reddit or similar channels. I think people with that mentality have always existed, but now the internet allows them to congregate and provides a forum for their grievances.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 09:16 PM
–

Yep, people regularly disagree with each other. You're asking 4 billion women to come together and all agree on something. That many people are rarely going to agree on anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 01:33 PM
8

Then don't contribute money to NOW. It's simple. But to get back on topic, the point is, the voters who are keeping the draft all male are majority male.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:29 PM
4

Trust me bro...
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:25 PM
12

I regret to inform you that the NWO is not elected and does not vote in congress. It was, however, successful in lobbying Republicans to vote against expanding the draft. Also worth noting, that the NWO advocates eliminating the draft completely for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:24 PM
12

In the US most women vote for Democratic candidates. The Democratic party has proposed legislation to include women in the draft on multiple occasions, but the Republican party has fought them on it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:14 PM
6

Not sure what country you're in, but in the US most women vote for Democratic candidates. The Democratic party has proposed legislation to include women in the draft on multiple occasions, but the Republican party has fought them on it. The majority of men support the party that is fighting to keep the draft 100% male. Any man who supports the Republican party has no right to complain about unfairness in the draft. This is what you voted for.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:13 PM
-1

Women don't have more relationship options, unless you're referring to the small imbalance between male births and female births. The one exception to that rule is men and women under the age of about 23. Men generally prefer slightly younger women and women generally prefer slightly older men. That means a 19 year old woman can date a 23 year old man, but a 19 year old man can't legally date (and likely doesn't want to date) a 15 year old girl. So in the 18-22 age group, women genuinely do have…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 12:02 PM
–

but the thing is if you're avg. guy barely getting matches, even a small penalty could proportionally have bigger impact than someone with a popular profile. as i said If you’re an average guy who barely gets matches, then yes, being picky with your swipes will have a massive impact. But that has nothing to do with the algorithm. I’ve seen guys on Reddit claim that Tinder penalized them when they started being picky, because they stopped getting any matches. Well yeah, if you’re an average guy b…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:38 PM
1

That only applies to legal marriage. In the dating process relationships split fast enough where for example you could have one guy dating 3-6 women in a year while those women only only dated 1-2 men that. Nope, it applies to any monogamous relationship. Say there’s a hypothetical universe with five men and five women. Over the course of five years, one man dates all five women, each for one year, while the other four men don’t date at all. On average, both the men and women are in relationship…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 08:28 PM
2

I’m sure some guys do that, but no idea how many do it. That’s never been a relationship motivator for me. Sex is obviously really important in a relationship, so we have to be fully compatible sexually. That’s table stakes. But other factors are far more important in determining whether someone is relationship material for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 12:29 PM
2

I hear what you’re saying. But that renders all surveys on cheating invalid, not just the ones that you don’t like. So we he claims that 20% of women in relationships are being cheated on, that’s just as questionable as when I point out that 20%of men are also being cheated on. All of it is based on self reporting.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 05:01 AM
4

Setting aside high school, I’ve only been asked by a few women. Generally they’ve reacted poorly to my response. I’ve learned that if she’s asking, then it’s generally because high n count bothers her. People who don’t really care typically don’t ask.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 10:58 PM
3

Link? Obviously some people do cheat, but it’s worth noting that most recently surveys show women and men cheating at roughly equal rates. Some actually show young women cheating at slightly higher rates than young men. So while there are women unknowingly sharing men, there are a roughly equal number of men unknowingly sharing women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 10:17 PM
8

Of course they do. So do unattractive men. Your looks don’t determine whether you’re a decent person. I’m asking for stats that actually show attractive men are more dangerous.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 09:56 PM
3

Two major things determine your success with women: 1) how many women you’re exposed to, and 2) what percentage of women you’re exposed to actually want you. Celebrities are exposed to a massive number of women that most men can’t comprehend. A guy who’s exposed to 50M women and wanted by 1% of them has far more options than a guy who’s exposed to 1k women and wanted by 90% of them. So yes, for the piece of shit celebrity hundreds of women might be lined up, but his denominator is millions and m…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 09:54 PM
18

You said “Chad” is statistically more dangerous. Chad is generally understood to mean an attractive man, not necessarily a man who is in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 02:41 PM
15

Choose better is valid because most women have an abundant of options and men dont Women have far more options for casual sex, because of supply/demand imbalances between the genders. When it comes to actual relationships, men and women have the same number of options. Every time a heterosexual woman finds a relationship, a heterosexual man does too. The other thing that you’re missing is that men also select women. There’s this weird view among a lot of guys here that men have no agency. Every …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 02:27 PM
23

Chad statistically is way more dangerous. Link to stats showing attractive men are way more dangerous?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 02:20 PM
1

how do you know you weren't penalised and would have instead gotten >22% match rate if you weren't penalised? you don't. unless you can account for what happened with the other 78%. they either left swipe, or didn't see, you can't tell which. There's obviously no way of telling for sure, but I do have another data point. Bumble lets you see how many incoming right vs. left swipes you get. I had a Bumble account for a few weeks one time that I barely used, but downloaded the data to see how women…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 12:56 PM
2

From 18 to about 25, I slept with 50+ women with a few relationships mixed in. It was in fact amazing at first. Within a year of graduating from high school, I slept with around 20 girls. Then I was in a relationship for a while. Then we broke up and I had another run sort of like freshman year on a smaller scale. It was great but probably not as exciting as the first time. Then I got in another relationship. We eventually broke up, and the cycle repeated again. And again. Each time, it was less…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 04:02 AM
1

when you left swipe a lot there's a penalty for being very picky and so you will be show to people less Any actual evidence of that? My experience is mostly anecdotal, but based on my downloaded tinder data, I swiped left a little over 97% of the time and matched 22% of the time I swiped right. Given the 22% match rate, I sort of assume I was being seen by most women. I have no reason to think I was penalized for being picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:48 AM
2

Can't speak for her, but I'll give you my take. It's the most attractive and suitable for relationships. And yes, most of them are off the market before 25.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:26 AM
3

I enjoyed it a lot for years, until I suddenly didn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:21 AM
4

The difference is men don't have a bioligical clock. we can easily settle down mid 30s with a family, the same cant be said for women Women can absolutely settle down in their mid 30s and still have kids. Working in finance in NYC, pretty much every older man or woman I work with had kids when the woman was in her late 30s. Second half of the 30s is just when people in this socioeconomic class have kids. But that's sort of a moot point, because most people don't wait until mid 30s to settle down…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:17 AM
4

Just wondering, how old are you? In my experience, how amazing it feels changes with age.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:09 AM
15

A secure man breaks up with a woman when he wants to smash other women. He's confident that he can replace her with someone equal or better. An insecure man cheats, because he wants other things but is afraid to lose what he has. Cheating is an act of fear.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 03:04 AM
2

Lot's of advice is applicable to most men. Get/stay in shape. Eat well and stay pretty lean. Dress well. Be confident and outgoing. Those are just a few examples that will benefit most men to varying degrees.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 10:45 PM
13

As they always have. The issue is, only a relatively small subset of men can actually pull it off, so it's not great advice for most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:57 PM
–

Blue pill is just mainstream views. Going to the gym and dressing well is mainstream advice that was mainstream before the red pill even existed. Nothing wrong with doing those things. Learning game is dependent on what you mean. If it's just being charismatic and learning how to socialize, flirt, etc., then nothing wrong with learning game either. Those are good skills to have. If your definition of "game" includes manipulation through lying about intentions, etc., then most people with mainstr…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:35 PM
1

I won't evoke "no true scotsman" because that's pointless And because it's not a "no true Scotsman" fallacy. Words have objective definitions. According the the most authoritative American English dictionary, feminism is rooted in belief in and advocacy for equality. That's not up for debate, because again, words have definitions. I'm sorry, but at this point the number of "Feminism is for female advocacy only" misandrist feminists is a sufficiently large block that you do have to call them femi…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 06:05 PM
3

feminism doesn’t get reduced to every insane radfem or femcel take That's because feminism is literally just the belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. If someone is calling for women to be treated better than men, that's not feminism, because that's not equality. By definition, feminism requires belief in equality. Those people might claim they're feminists, but they're not. Just like you see black pill guys here claiming to be red pill, but they're…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:14 PM
3

If a guy has to raise LMS, learn game, build status, improve looks, improve money, improve frame, all just to get treated as a viable option A viable option for whom? Most below average men can improve to be average, which makes them a viable option for average women. Even if he remains below average, he's likely a viable option for below average women, setting aside extreme cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 06:08 PM
3

When I made out with a girl in middle school and put my had up her shirt, I certainly had sexual intent. Did I have an n count of 1 after that? Was I no longer a virgin? I considered myself a virgin until I had PIV in high school.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 04:23 PM
1

I said I would be hurt. Is hurt a happy feeling? A little emotional intelligence will tell you the answer is no. Let me ask a clarifying question. Which of these two scenarios are we talking about? My wife let me have sex with her when we were dating and in the early years of our marriage, but she never really initiated or seemed enthusiastic about it. Now we rarely have sex at all. I find out somehow that she's had better sex in the past, that our sex "doesn't do anything" for her, and that she…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 04:11 PM
1

Nope. I disagree that her threshold for good sex is the best she's ever had. But clearly her threshold is above where her husband is. You can keep saying I agree with you but I don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:57 PM
1

Kind of, yes. I'm agreeing that getting more experiences can raise your expectations for sex. Even if you've just been with three partners, the odds are your spouse won't be the best one. I'm disagreeing that it only applies to women, as a man who's experienced it myself. As I said above, the woman in the post made a mistake by not picking someone who was over her threshold. She didn't pick one who was good enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:53 PM
3

As a guy who's been with dozens of women, I can tell you that my bar for "good enough" definitely escalated dramatically over time. In high school, average was good enough. Now I would put the bar for good enough significantly above average, It's no different for men. Once you've been with women who are truly exceptional in bed, average doesn't really cut it. She doesn't need to be my absolute best, but she still needs to be really good.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:35 PM
1

I already answered it. Even though most people aren't their spouse's best, most people don't know that. If someone's spouse actually tells them that, then yes that's going to hurt. There's no way around that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:30 PM
1

It's not. Take a look again at the graphic. Among high-mate-value men, desirability scores for casual sex are almost identical for men with a count of 0, 1, and 12 (negligible differences). Among high-mate-value men, desirability scores are much higher for men with a count of 0 than they are for a man with a count of 12. Those men with a count of 1 are slightly more desirable than the ones with a count of 0, but the difference is negligible. Bottom line, women rate a high-mate-value virgins as m…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:29 PM
1

That's where the hypothetical kind of falls apart. Most people don't inform their partner that they aren't the best. The guy who's the subject of that post doesn't know either. She's anonymously telling people on reddit, not her husband. Most men and most women have been with someone who's better in bed than their spouse. The typical couple is made up of two people who have both had better. For the average person who's had 4-6 partners, there's a 17-25% that their spouse is the best one in bed. …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 02:05 PM
5

In this scenario, do I know she thinks that? Or does she tell me I'm her best and initiates enthusiastic sex with me regularly? Out of the dozens of women I've been with, some have been better in bed than my girlfriend. But she doesn't know that. I would never tell her that. Some of the ones who really stand out the most were short-term and weren't girls I actually wanted to date. I am 100% happier being with my girlfriend, and the sex is still really good. That's because my girlfriend is still …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 08:54 PM
4

The person you eventually marry isn't likely to be the best you've ever been with in every category. Even if you keep it simple and say that looks, sex, and compatibility are the only three categories, your eventual wife probably won't be the best you've had in all three. But she should at least clear the threshold in every category. That's where this woman messed up. She married a guy who didn't clear the threshold in one of the categories. Looks like there are a lot guys who are virgins than w…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 07:19 PM
1

Add women's unique dislike for low/zero n count https://web.archive.org/web/20250325155841/https://www.uncp.edu/sites/default/files/purc/posters/courtney_britt.pdf https://www.psypost.org/new-study-identifies-the-ideal-number-of-sexual-partners-according-to-social-norms/ Women don't dislike low n count. For casual sex and short term, a man with a count of 1 is just as desirable as a man with a count of 12. For long term, a man with a count of 1 is significantly more desirable than a man with a c…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:53 PM
1

You know non-Western women age too right? They're not younger.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/26 09:27 PM
1

If your definition was true, which it is not My definition is quite literally the definition according to the American dictionary of record. Words have meanings and they’re objective.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/26 04:41 AM
23

There were a few quality bits but the vast majority of responses were either decidedly non-specific, non-actionable The problem is, without know the specifics of what a guy is doing wrong it’s hard to give him specific, actionable advice. If I’m asked to give advice to men in general, then I can only give general advice based on what’s worked well for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 10:38 PM
1

that is famously not the case How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:31 PM
1

Why do attractive men still need some great personality to get and keep women? It depends on how you define "need". Like I said, looks determine your league and personality determines how well you do in your league. Let's say there's a set of identical twin brothers. Both are very attractive. The first brother is sociable, outgoing, confident, charming, assertive, etc. The other brother is shy, extremely awkward, insecure, and avoids social interaction. Despite looking identical, the first broth…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:24 PM
1

It's not a blind spot. It goes back to my earlier question. What's most important to you? What does dating success look like in your mind? Is it sleeping with women who are more attractive? If so, a guy who goes from 5/10 to 8/10 can do that by sleeping with 8/10 women, but it's going to be just as hard as it was for him to sleep with 5/10 women when he was a 5/10. Yeah as an 8/10, he could still sleep with the 5/10 women like he did before, but reality is, most people struggle to lower their st…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 01:55 PM
3

Someone who starts college at 15 and graduates at 19 isn't even at the age of consent for their first year or two in a lot of states. A 21 year old guy illegally fucking a 15 year old girl is going to draw some scrutiny. So yeah, it's going to change her college experience too. If someone went to college that young, of course dating is going to be challenging. Your experience is atypical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:50 PM
1

Damn.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:24 AM
15

He also explained in another comment that he graduated from college at 19. Assuming he's not talking about community college, he's an outlier who went to college very young. If that's the case, it makes sense his experience wasn't normal.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:18 AM
3

i graduated college when I was 19. What country are you in? If you graduate from college at 19 in the US, then you're going to have a very atypical college experience. That would make you 2-3 years younger than most of your peers. A man who's 2-3 years younger than the other guys in college is going to be less developed (likely still going through puberty when he starts college). If you're an outlier who graduates at 19 and went to college with a bunch of people who were older than you, then yea…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:15 AM
1

Indeed.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:08 AM
5

Why are you red pill? One of its core tenets is spinning plates. It's a hedonistic belief system that revolves around the idea that "she's not yours, it's just your turn". It doesn't sound like you're red pill at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 05:07 AM
14

He thinks anyone who claims to have had a different experience is gaslighting him.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:38 AM
2

Getting women is a numbers game to an extent. As he gains exposure to more and more women, the denominator increases. He can afford for a smaller percentage of women to find him attractive, because he's exposed to a massive number of women. A guy with 1% of 50,000,000 women liking him will have far more options than a man with 90% of 1,000 women liking him. Even if you lower your success rate, you can increase your raw number of options through exposure. Increasing your exposure gives you more o…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:35 AM
4

Sorry, what country are you in?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 04:07 AM
13

Ask any woman how many men they find attractive. It is under 50 percent for sure. Translation: I lied about 80/20 rule in college being studied "over and over again".
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:59 AM
15

Oh, it's 80? And 20? Perfect Pareto... you'll have to share those studies. So interesting!! You missed my broader point. I'm not gaslighting you. I'm disagreeing with you. Beyond myself, the vast majority of guy I knew in college had more exciting sex/dating lives then than they do now in their mid/late 20s. There are some exceptions, but they're exceptions. Again, this is the point. This is my personal experience. It's obviously different than yours. That's not gaslighting. I've noticed a theme…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:42 AM
5

I’m I dating a 19 year old now. When I was 19 I slept with a bunch of 19 year olds. It's easy for a 19 year old guy to sleep with 19 year old women. Yeah you can find 19 year old women who will sleep with much older men, but most are sleeping with men within a couple years of their own age. Yes, an older guy can use his money to compensate for his lack of attractiveness (especially in the passport bros situation you describe), but that doesn't mean he's desirable. He's just a "beta bux" who's pa…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:34 AM
33

Girls will actually agree to go on dates with me. In high school no one would even be friends with me or be seen with me let alone go on a date with me, same thing in college. Someone disagreeing with you isn't gaslighting. College was by far the easiest time for me to date. Insanely easy. I still did fine after graduating and dating into my nid-20s, but it was nothing like college. Being in that environment and surrounded by that number of attractive options made sex and dating absolutely effor…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:27 AM
9

Nope. That's not peaking. That's compensating. My peak was probably late teens/early 20s. I was in the best shape of my life and could effortlessly get attractive women in my general age group. I didn't have any money, but I didn't need it. I could get by purely by looking good and socializing. I'm in a relationship now, but lets say ten years from now I find myself single in my late 30s. I should have plenty of money by then, and could probably still leverage that to find a younger, attractive …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:19 AM
9

Money can compensate, especially with impoverished women in developing countries. But would she prefer a 45 year old man with a US passport and a couple million dollars or a 25 year old man with a US passport and a couple million dollars. For the vast majority, it would be the 25 year old man. That man is more likely at his physical peak. He looks better and has higher inherent value to her. But 25 year old men with that amount of money (and also shopping for a bride in a developing nation) are …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 03:05 AM
-3

Nope. Improving your looks changing your league. Generally speaking, no matter how attractive you are, it's challenging to land someone at the upper limits of your league. Obviously at the extreme upper end in the top 1%, no one is really at your upper limits, but that's an edge case. A 50th percentile guy will have to try just as hard for 50th percentile women as an 80th percentile guy with have to try for 80th percentile women. Looks change your league but personality allows you to be more suc…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:57 AM
1

I don't even think it has to be 30. I would set it around 22 or so. If a woman has reached post-college age without having sex, I would assume there's a reason. Maybe she's really religious, or asexual, or anti-social, etc. I'm not going to judge necessarily, but I'm not interested in a woman with any of those traits, so she's probably a no.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:50 AM
-1

Want better looking women? Looks. Want more of the women in your league? Personality. What's most important to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:40 AM
12

I don't necessarily believe in cancelling anyone, regardless of how abhorrent their views may be. I'm for free speech. At the same time, someone's view can cause me to conclude that they're a piece of shit. So in this context, it depends on the guy's view of men's rights. If he thinks men and women should have equal rights, that's perfectly fine. If he thinks only men should have rights, then I'll conclude he's a piece of shit. What you're describing here sounds fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:00 AM
–

the only option most dudes end up with is being beta bux or settled for once chad chasing is done with The majority of 17 year old American men have had sex. The median age for virginity loss is between 17.0 and 17.4. So no, most men don't only have the option you're describing. Most men have sex in high school.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:23 PM
7

He's not going to get great answers because this is the flaw in his post. He's using "short term fun" vs. "long term" incorrectly. That or he seems to be assuming that all people in long-term relationships tend to wait a long time to have sex. My post-high-school LTRs have all started as hookups or sex on the first date, which then evolved into a LTR. It doesn't qualify as short term fun if you're together long term.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:09 PM
10

If it's a woman I'm attracted to, then I'm not "helping" her. I'm doing it for myself because I want to sleep with her. Women do the same thing. If they're attracted to a man, they want to sleep with him. It's something they do for themselves, not to help him. So no, I can't imagine because if I wanted to sleep with her, I would have tried to sleep with her (assuming we're both single).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 03:19 PM
7

Men with rosters don't expect exclusivity. I agree. I think most of the men I'm talking about have never had a roster and have this idealized vision of it. In that vision, the women are all exclusive to the man while he sleeps around. In reality, that's not what happens and it's not even an expectation.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 02:59 PM
10

I think it's biologically hardwired in most people. If a woman I'm clearly not attracted to wanted me to sleep with her to "help her", I would have a "this is weird" reaction as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 02:20 PM
28

And it goes beyond love. There's also a red pill fantasy that there are these top tier men who have a roster of women, while all the women on his roster only sleep with him. In reality it's very rare for a woman to be exclusive with a man unless he's exclusive with her too. If you're in a "situationship" and sleeping with other women, you should assume she's sleeping with other men too. Very few women are okay with one-sided open relationships, even in the early stages of dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 01:56 PM
0

It's incorrect to say most women don't care about height, but that doesn't make it gaslighting. If that man actually believes that most women don't care about height, then that's not gaslighting. It's just a man who's wrong about what women think. Gaslighting requires intent. You have to know that what you're stating is untruthful and continue to repeat it. If you're just wrong, that's not gaslighting. The other day there was a guy here claiming that most Gen Z and Millennial women require a man…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 11:16 PM
0

Some men care about breast size and others don't. If you made a post asking men who don't care about breast size why they don't care, obviously the men who respond are all going to say they don't care about breast size. Because you've targeted that question at a specific subset of men. Same concept in the post you linked to where a question is targeted at women who don't care about height.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 11:00 PM
-4

I looked through that post and didn't see anyone claiming that no women care about height. There's one man claiming that most women don't care about height. The post is asking women who don't care about height why they don't care. Of course women who do care about height aren't responding to it, because the question isn't applicable to them. That's not an example of gaslighting.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 10:58 PM
3

This was school, I'm talking in the real world, not school Someone asked you how men lose their virginity and you said they lose it "because they lie about their sexual past to get into bed with a girl or sleep with an escort". Most men lose their virginity in high school. The median age is 17. I was describing the scenario that applies to most men losing their virginity. Most women do not want men with a lower body count than theirs Most women don't know or care. I've slept with dozens of women…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 09:38 PM
3

Or they just sleep with a woman who's relatively inexperienced like themselves. The first girl I slept with was a girlfriend of mine in high school. We were both virgins and honest with each other about it. I had friends in high school who also had sex for the first time around 16-17 and slept with girls with a n count of 1. When you're that age, most people are in the 0-2 range. No one expects a 16 year old to have a high body count.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 09:17 PM
4

Looks determine the ceiling for your options. Personality determines how well you can do at that ceiling. If you want to date more attractive women, you need to become more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 09:08 PM
4

You have an example of this gaslighting? I see women say things like "I don't care much about height" or "I just want a guy who's taller than me", but that's not gaslighting. The degree to which women care about height obviously varies from woman to woman. If someone says "there are no women who care about height", that's gaslighting.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 09:05 PM
3

No matter how much women try to gaslight us, "men's looks matter" has been considered crazy talk up until very recently. What's "very recently"? You can still find examples of women saying looks don't matter today, but that doesn't mean it's a mainstream view.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 09:02 PM
2

Right, but there is nothing that establishes a noncausal relationship either. Correct. I'm saying we have no idea whether the law caused the change in divorce rate. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't but we have no way of knowing. However, you would need to apply this demand of rigour uniformly on yourself, as well. Which is exactly what I'm doing. I'm arguing that we don't have the data to prove or disprove a causal relationship. We just don't know. There's too much noise when there are examples of …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 08:56 PM
5

Divorce rates have been dropping in general in the US, but Kentucky has been outpacing the national average. Sure, but there's nothing to demonstrate a causal relationship between the Kentucky law and KY's above average decline in divorce rate. Some states were above average and others were below. That's how averages work. KY passed a 50/50 law in 2018 and its divorce rate fell 24% from 2016 to 2023. IA passed a 50/50 law in 2018 and its divorce rate increased by 46% from 2016 to 2023. DC doesn'…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:42 PM
1

Meanwhile very few women are actually feminist in terms of gender roles Feminism is just the belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. A person can believe that men and women should have equal rights and still want to get married.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 07:17 PM
6

Kentucky's divorce rate fell 24% from 2016 to 2023. Its 50/50 custody law went into effect in mid-2021. Most of the decline occurred before the law went into effect. In 2016 the divorce rate was 3.8. By 2020, it had fallen to 3.1. As of the most recent data (2023), it was at 2.9. The drop largely occurred before the law took effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 06:54 PM
1

Feminism is just belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 06:33 PM
–

The variable explains the timing, but it does not erase the fact that different men get different responses. The timing was your whole point. No one is claiming that alcohol causes women to sleep with men at random. Women generally sleep with men they're attracted to. Alcohol is a major factor in explaining why women sleep with some men they're attracted to faster than other men they're attracted to. If she's not attracted to the man, then she's probably not going to sleep with him drunk or sobe…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 03:29 PM
1

Feminism is belief in and advocacy of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes. That's literally the definition of feminism. Words have objective meaning. We don't get to make up our own definitions.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/26 01:52 PM
–

Most men aren't mean to fat women, but there are many shitty people in the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 01:31 PM
1

That example is an outlier, not a rebuttal. It's not. Almost 90% of hookups involve a woman who's been drinking and the majority involve a woman who's been binge drinking. People rarely fuck strangers sober. Not saying it doesn't happen, but it's not the norm. It's a fairly common scenario where a woman has only dated seriously (always waited for commitment, always waited until the third date, etc.), but has had a drunk hookup. I know plenty who fall into that category. It seems much more rare f…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 01:27 PM
–

Link to a specific comment. Show me. Or are you lying about what women said?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:44 AM
–

Okay, but I asked for an example. If this is an issue worth complaining about, there must be numerous readily available examples. Assuming you're not lying, you should be able to show a few examples from today where women make that claim. But you're probably lying. You'll probably respond "go find the examples yourself". Because you're lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:42 AM
–

The birth rate debate always fascinates me as liberal women refuse to accept that some cultures are diffeent than others. Can you provide an example of someone claiming there are no differences between cultures? Feels like you're tilting at windmills.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:30 AM
1

The “waiting for sex” example proves this. If a woman delays sex with one man but not another, that difference signals something about desire Maybe, but it depends on context. Say a woman has been with five men. With four of them, she didn't have sex until she was in a committed relationship. But one time in college, she was blackout drunk and hooked up with a guy she met at a party. The variable in that case isn't desire. It's binge drinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:23 AM
5

I'm just curious how many women are completely honest when it comes to body counts to their partners. I suspect it's something most couples don't discuss with specificity. Of all the women I've been with, only a handful have asked. The ones who do ask tend to react negatively to it, but I think that's because the ones who don't really care just don't ask.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 03:11 AM
–

Yes, that among other things. Having children requires larger housing, and housing prices have been rising at unsustainable levels for decades in many places. There are obviously other costs as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:27 PM
–

Some will, some will not. More than enough will go away to more than address any birthrate concern you have. New jobs will appear to replace the old ones. It happened during Industrial Revolution and any other tech revolution. Someone will have to tune AI and clean up it's mess. The difference is pace of change and technological capabilities. The jobs going away will be be replaced at anywhere close to a 1:1 ratio. This is going to happen at a pace that will make the industrial revolution look q…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 05:25 PM
–

rising numbers if immigrants to revive workforce Most jobs are going to go away in our lifetime. We won't need immigrants. There won't even be enough jobs for most Americans. You're asking who will do all the jobs. You should be asking what will all the people do.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 04:56 PM
–

LLMs are primarily developed and trained by LLMs at this point, with each generation able to create a more advanced new generation. There will still be humans needed in roles where robotics are not capable, but the number of humans needed will be negligible compared to today.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 04:14 PM
–

Okay, but would the rates have continued to decline if they hadn't put the incentives in place?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 01:14 PM
–

No it's not black and white. It's often not just "do I want kids". It's "am I willing to pay X to have kids". It's the same for any product. I want to have a boat, but I'm not willing to pay for a boat because boats are expensive. It's not that I don't want it. If boats suddenly became cheap, I would buy a boat. Lowering a price increases quantity demanded all else equal. It's some econ 101 shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 01:13 PM
–

When the population pyramid becomes inverted and the economy goes to shit Why would the economy go to shit? Because there aren't enough working age people to produce the economic output needed to sustain an aging population? That's where AI comes in. There are going to be far fewer jobs in the future, so we don't need as many people to fill them. You're concerned about there being too few people, when you should be worried about there being far to many people in a world where companies largely d…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 01:07 PM
–

People don't not have kids because it's too expensive, they don't have kids because they don't want them. Yes, but many of them don't want kids because it's expensive. It's not literally too expensive for them. They could afford kids, but they can't afford to maintain their current lifestyle while paying for kids. To your point, it's a choice, but the financials are a factor in making that choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 12:45 PM
2

But if it doesn't bother anyone and we collectively decide it's okay to saw the branch we're sitting on... Well, what can I do? No one wants to saw the branch. Birth rates aren't falling to zero. A better plan is to climb down the tree in a controlled fashion, and governments should be planning for that descent. It's more feasible than ever now. One of the biggest challenges historically was a small workforce to support a large retired generation. Now we have AI (which introduces other problems …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 11:54 AM
1

The ideas are not exclusive to the red pill but the willingness to boldly state them basically is, as blue pillers are arguing against such action. That's nonsense. There may be some fringe people out there who claim looks don't matter, you shouldn't work out, confidence isn't important, etc., but that's far from the mainstream. As someone who's blue pill, I'm happy to emphatically state that looks matter immensely, as do confidence and assertiveness. The fact that I'm outgoing, 6'4, and fit wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 04:04 AM
1

looks have nothing to do with the quality of sex Never said they do. That's why I put looks in an entirely separate category. My point was, no one person is likely to be the best you ever dated in every single category. Also agree that looks are subjective. So all that matters is your opinion of your partner's looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:39 AM
1

Feminism by definition is just the belief in equal rights for women. Yes, the mainstream believes women should have equal rights. So sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:36 AM
1

A blue piller believes the red pill is false. A no piller has no opinion. So where do I fit in? You claim "naturals and blue pillers aren't the same thing", but I'm a natural who doesn't believe in the red pill. I believe in all the universal common sense (blue pill) things that the red pill claims as its own (fitness, confidence, etc.), but I don't hate women. Misogyny is the main feature separating red and blue pill. A person who overall acts red pill but isn't misogynistic is blue pill. Techn…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/26 03:34 AM
5

Naturals have no specific pill but behave like red pillers. No specific pill is blue pill. Blue pill is just "not red pill". The whole thing is a Matrix reference where Neo can take the red pill to see reality or the blue pill to see the same as everyone else. Blue pill is just everyone else. The reason naturals "behave like red pillers" is because the red pill attempts to mimic them. The point of the red pill is to help non-naturals replicate the success of the naturals. So it's not exactly tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 01:43 PM
2

Any one person is unlikely to be the best in every category. Even if we just simplify it down to three categories (looks, sex, compatibility), it's unlikely that the woman you end up marrying will be the best in all three categories among the women you've dated. You have to decide which factors are more important to you when picking someone who you'll spend the rest of your life with.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 01:23 PM
1

MDAT is ugly from a phone. Play around with it from a laptop when you have time. It's by far the most comprehensive dataset on this topic.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 03:02 AM
7

Those numbers don’t lineup with how many men identify as single, though. They do. These are "the numbers". The Census Bureau is the most authoritative source for this data. It's what's self-report by men and women. They survey hundreds of millions every 10 years and 3.5 million every other year. It's by far the most reliable source for this information. Keep in mind, half of 29 year old men are legally married or living with a partner. Nearly 2/3 of 30 year old men are married or living with a p…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 02:36 AM
2

Yes. According to the Census Bureau, half of 26 year old women were legally married&vv=AGEP(1:26:26)&wt=PWGTP) or living with a partner&vv=AGEP(1:26:26)&wt=PWGTP) as of 2023. Those women were born in 1997, which makes them Gen Z. Nearly 2/3 of 30 year old women were legally married&vv=AGEP(1:30:30)&wt=PWGTP) or living with a partner&vv=AGEP(1:30:30)&wt=PWGTP) as of 2023. Those women were born in 1993, which makes them Millennial. Obviously we'll get more data on Gen Z as more of them get to marr…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/26 02:26 AM
4

This mostly applies to older generations, with rates for younger generations having diverged. No, the rates I cited are rates for Gen Zs and Millennials. According to the Census Bureau, half of 26 year old women were legally married&vv=AGEP(1:26:26)&wt=PWGTP) or living with a partner&vv=AGEP(1:26:26)&wt=PWGTP) as of 2023. Those women were born in 1997, which makes them Gen Z. Nearly 2/3 of 30 year old women were legally married&vv=AGEP(1:30:30)&wt=PWGTP) or living with a partner&vv=AGEP(1:30:30)…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 11:01 PM
9

Marriage rates are going down because people are choosing to cohabitate rather than marry. It's been happening for decades. Also, this is a theme I notice about a lot of red/black pill posts. They point out that only a small %, men are having sex, dating, marrying, etc. Then when someone points to stats demonstrating that their post is nonsense, the argument changes to "yeah but those women don't actually like those men, because I say so and there are no stats on it to prove me wrong". No true S…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 10:47 PM
14

OP is claiming that women only fall for a minority of men and that other guys won't even be allowed into their social circle. That's the claim I'm addressing, and it's wildly untrue.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:34 PM
42

for women it means they will only fall for guys from the minority Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26 and almost 2/3 are by 30. They can't all be with this minority of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 08:09 PM
2

Agreed. People typically end up with high n count because they aren't inclined to commit. People who are inclined to commit tend to sleep with someone, form a connection, and continue sleeping with that person. People who aren't inclined to commit move onto the next partner. Someone who doesn't naturally want commitment is probably statistically more likely to struggle with maintaining a committed relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 07:30 PM
–

though personality isn't abt being a piece of shit or a good person, that doesn't matter for dating I disagree. If an average looking guy is spewing toxic bullshit about legalized rape, government issued girlfriends, women being subhuman, etc., like incels do online, he's almost certainly going to struggle more than a normal guy who looks just like him,
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:40 PM
1

It's that simple. Meet for coffee, if things go well take a walk, then ask her on a activity date. I think it might depend on what you're looking for in dating. When I was purely dating casually, drinks were my go to date, and I would guess that those first dates ended with sex at least 70% of the time. It was never expensive, and it was easy to cut the date short if things weren't going well (unlike a long dinner). I can see your approach working for someone who's dating more seriously, but if …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 01:46 PM
6

That's fine. It's just not the topic of this post. He's talking about the price of dates and you're talking about who pays. To OP's point, a $300 first date is unnecessary. That's true even if the bill is split, but again, that's not the point of the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 01:27 PM
5

You can. but that's not the topic of this post. The post is about men complaining about expensive dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 01:23 PM
–

For most men, attitude can absolutely be the reason. A very small percentage of people are hot. Maybe low single digits. That goes for both men and women. Hot people are outliers. If a guy is one of those outliers, he can easily get laid despite a shitty personality. He might not do as well as he would with a decent personality but there's enough demand for him that some women will always overlook it. It's basically a numbers game. But if a guy isn't one of those outliers, then he can't really a…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 01:20 PM
4

On the deepest level, I feel there is a fundamental disconnect between the kind and amount of relationships and sex men and women want. Sex yes, relationships no. Polling generally shows a greater percentage of women than men seeking relationships and a greater percentage of men than women seeking casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:51 AM
0

A small percentage of people are hot. Those who are generally aren't incels.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:38 AM
1

Why so? Honestly I don't really know because it's generally not well articulated.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:37 AM
2

No hot incels either.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:26 AM
3

No they don't. This has come up on this sub before and plenty of guys are very anti-travel. Some women are too. Yes, I have plenty of money to travel. I'm more constrained by time than money, but I make it work and will continue to make it work. Counting work travel, maybe 4-5 months a year? I never said travel should be someone's only interest. I just said if they're not interested in traveling, then I'm not interested in them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:23 AM
3

I don't hate travelling or people who travel, but it's a moot point But it's not a moot point in dating. I really enjoy travel and wouldn't marry a woman who won't travel with me. I understand that everyone with money can do it, but that doesn't mean everyone with money will be willing to do it. I want someone who is.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 02:06 AM
3

It's weird how many guys here have a visceral reaction to travel. I honestly don't get it as someone who really enjoys traveling. edit- Certain types of travel only. Flying across the country to sit in a conference room and then flying home sucks. That type of travel is painful. But traveling to new places to experience different cultures, foods, natural environments, etc. is one of my favorite things to do. Even when it comes to business travel, I've been able to add on stays before or after in…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 10:48 PM
1

I'm more picky when it comes to LTRs too, but not when it comes to looks. That bar is the same for both short term and long term, but other factors like overall compatibility, life goals, etc. are far more important in a LTR vs. something casual. All that really matters for casual is her appearance as long as we can tolerate each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 10:40 PM
1

That's not what the data shows in the US. Can't speak to the French data, since the article didn't provide references.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:21 PM
8

Exactly my question as well. Since the article provides no reference to the French survey data, we can't really analyze it to answer the question. We can however look at US data for both women and men in the GSS Data Explorer. There's a question in the GSS that asks how many men and how many women a person has been with since turning 18. While that isn't exactly the same as total sexual partners, it does allow us to calculate a minimum percentage of people who have been with 10 or more partners.…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:19 PM
7

The issue isn't so much the source in my opinion, but the lack of context and references to the actual surveys. Also, it would be helpful to know what % of men have been with 10 or more partners, but it's absent.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 06:00 PM
8

National Survey of Family Growth 2017-2019.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 05:41 PM
2

I've hooked up with a lot of women, and all of them have been attractive enough to date. My threshold for attractive enough to date is, do I want to sleep with her? If so, she's attractive enough to date. Given I wanted to and did sleep with the women I hooked up with, they were all attractive enough to date. There were various reasons I didn't date them, but looks was never it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:58 PM
3

If a person has sex for the first time at 18, they'll hit 100 partners by 26 if they sleep with one new partner per month. That's pretty feasible with dating apps. But in reality, most people don't want to do that. Most people look for relationships, even if they are short-term, serial monogamy, etc., so they don't end up with n counts like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:38 PM
1

Whether its in dating, where the majority of men are not getting sex, and the women lose out on commitment. The majority of men are having sex. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26 and nearly 2/3 by 30. Half of American men are legally married or living with a partner by 29 and nearly 2/3 by 33 (older than women due to average age gaps). When you make claims like the majority of men not having sex, you lose credibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:17 PM
2

Question for you btw: when dating casually, are you very nonchalant about letting women go? Even the higher quality ones? If yes, why? Yes, when I was dating casually, I was definitely nonchalant about letting women go. I would say all of them were high quality (at least physically), so that wasn't really a major factor. I just had zero interest in a relationship at that time, so moving on was never a difficult decision. As I got a little older, I went through a time period when I sort of regret…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:03 PM
1

It's like saying one person getting shot in the head is better than two people getting shot in the head.... which is accurate. Fewer people getting shot is better. Fewer people getting divorced is better, and that's what the data reflects.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 01:37 PM
2

it doesn't really matter since women have free selection of high count or low count partners So do men. Every time a heterosexual woman gets married, a man does too. It's a 1:1 ratio where they both have to select each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 03:01 AM
1

There is no significant difference It's fallen from 22.6/1000 in 1980 to 14.4/1000 in 2023. The divorce rate was 56% higher in 1980 than it was in the most recent data. Most people would call that a significant difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:59 AM
1

It's weird to not be able to admit that there's diversity in experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 02:53 AM
1

They're still at their historical highest That's objectively false. They were notably higher several decades ago, which means they're no longer at historical highs. the question is also how many men are in horrible, abusive, exploitative relationships, but can't leave because the courts will take their kids away, or financially ruin them I can barely see the goal posts anymore!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:57 AM
1

Even they have to put in some work. Not really. It was pretty easy for me, even when I was a skinny, poorly dressed teenager. It really doesn't require that much effort from some guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/26 12:55 AM
1

It's easy for some guys too. Don't assume they all had to work for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 09:36 PM
2

What do you mean? And why does that matter?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 02:09 PM
2

Also I’ve had girls whom I told explicitly early on I was not interested in anything serious and 2 months later they would cry over me not committing. The issue is, you're sleeping with the same woman for way too long. My n count is a lot higher than yours, but that's because I'm always explicit about being casual up front and never lead anyone on. Then one of us move on before there's attachment. Some of it may also come down to how you're selecting. Especially when I was 18-22 or so I found pl…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 02:04 PM
0

I can't find the numbers you posted. Which of those links are they in?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 01:56 PM
2

What were the results for men?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 01:55 PM
3

divorce rates are skyrocketing Divorce rates in the US are the lowest they've been in decades.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 01:44 PM
5

From the article: But the number was much higher among Gen Z, at a whopping 93 percent compared to 80 percent for millennials. Not great journalism there. I think most people would say 80% constitutes a vast majority as well. And when measuring at the 18-29 cohort level, the survey likely has a 5-10% margin of error, it's hard to call 93% "much higher" than 80%. My takeaway is that people cheat and that's nothing new. It was pervasive and perhaps has become more pervasive.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:25 PM
0

Most women prefer a man who's taller than themselves, but that wasn't the claim. The guy was focused on women requiring a man to be 6'+. That's what I was responding to.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 08:35 PM
2

Nope, anecdotes vs. facts. We know from government statistics on marriage/cohabitation and height that most women in relationships are with men under 6'. There aren't enough 6'+ men in the US for the majority of married/cohabitating women to be with one. Not even close. So no, most women don't require a man to be 6'+. That's not based on personal experience. That's based on data.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:52 PM
6

We have government statistics on marriage and cohabitation. We have government statistics on height. We know from those statistics that most women in relationships can’t be with men over 6’, because there aren’t enough men over 6’. There’s nothing disingenuous about pointing out that most women don’t require a man to be 6’+.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:35 PM
5

This is ridiculous. According to the Census Bureau, half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26 (and half of men by 29 due to age gaps). Some additional % at each age are dating but not married/living together. Only around 15% of American men are 6’ or above. Clearly most American women don’t require a man to be 6’+. If they did, only 15% of Americans would be in relationships. Most women in relationships are with a guy who’s less than 6’.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 07:32 PM
10

You're supporting her point when she says "red pill creators carefully pick which women they want to represent 'women'". Most women don't require a man to be 6' or taller. You're focused on the ones that do and portraying them as "women".
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:49 PM
1

Twenty years ago or so, we were definitely told that, lest we give the girls anorexia or bulimia. I started high school 14 years ago, and we definitely weren't told that. Maybe it was an early 2000s fad?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 08:11 PM
1

One swipe does not force her to like him, obviously, but being able to act still gives men more possible paths than a system where they just wait to be chosen. What additional paths? Right now the only path to a match is both people swiping right on each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 08:03 PM
1

I had a really cheap tinder gold promo one month, so i tried it out. Out of thousands of likes it seemed like almost all were from women I had already swiped left on. Tinder just keeps them in your likes after you swipe left to keep that number inflated. It was sort of useful for new likes though. I could just open the app a few times a day and sort through the likes I got rather than swiping hundreds of times. Ultimately though that's not really something worth paying full price for in my opini…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 02:58 PM
3

Old shows you first the people who liked your profile. That's why the first time you open an account it'll show you all the chads You think the Chads get shown first because they're the ones liking women's profiles? You have that backwards. The most attractive guys are skewed towards the front because they're the ones receiving likes from women. The apps do the same thing when men swipe. When you first sign up (or when you travel to a new city), the deck is skewed towards attractive women. Over …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 02:53 PM
13

People struggle with the concept of large denominators. They also fail to take into account how social media algorithms work.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 02:44 PM
–

It does not make unattractive men become attractive. Of course it won't, but that's not the claim people generally make. It absolutely can make an unattractive man more successful in dating unattractive women. Personality improvement isn't going to upgrade his league, but it can improve his performance in his league.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 02:39 PM
3

but the man loses all ability to expand his side of the funnel. Right now he can at least cast wider, create more possible match path That doesn't make sense. Let's say a man lives in a city with 1,000 female dating app users. He swipes right on all 1,000 of them. His net is 1,000 women wide. Now let's say OP's idea is implemented. The man's net remains exactly 1,000 women wider. There's no expanding from that, because it's every woman in the city. it just makes their success even more dependent…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 11:51 AM
2

Right now men can at least swipe widely and try to create more overlap or more possible match paths. But that's not accurate. Today you can swipe right as much as you want (within limits), but it's only a match if she also swipes right on you. OP is proposing that you don't swipe at all and it automatically becomes a "match" if she swipes right on you. In this model, there's no need for men to "create overlap". They already overlap with every single woman on the app who swipes right on them. Tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 05:05 AM
1

it just removes whatever chance you had to get seen at all I don't understand what you mean. OP is proposing that women do all the swiping and then men/women can message if the woman swipes right. How does that remove your chance of being seen? Today a woman swipes on male profiles. Some of those men have already swiped on the woman and others haven't. With what OP is proposing, it would be the same way, except none of the men will have already swiped on the woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 04:52 AM
1

Therefore, men on dating websites shouldn't have the option to swipe left or right at all. So if we can't swipe, how do we get matches? Or could any woman who likes me just start messaging me if she wants to? That's not something I would want.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 03:46 AM
0

You: No, they won't. Also You: If it's a pattern of behavior, then yes, you are to blame. There are tons of men saying that the victim is to blame if there's a pattern of behavior. Not the perpetrator, the victim. I believe that the perpetrators of bad behavior are to blame for bad behavior. The fact that people know about your past, doesn't mean that you're not the one to blame for your future actions. And like I said, that's where we don't see eye to eye.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 03:23 AM
2

Let's use a relationship example. A woman and a guy are dating. One night the couple is out at a bar, the guy ends up exchanging words with another man at the bar and gets into a fight. Now he has a history of violence. Something similar happens another time a couple years later. Five years later they're married, and he comes home late one night and murders his wife in her sleep. A lot of men here will claim that the woman, not the man who murdered her, is to blame for her murder because she mar…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 03:18 AM
1

If it's a pattern of behavior, then yes, you are to blame. Nope. Even if Person A has a pattern of bad behavior and Person B marries them, Person A is still to blame for additional bad behavior after the fact. It's natural to be less sympathetic to Person B, as they knew about that pattern, but Person B is not to blame for Person A's subsequent bad behavior. Person A is to blame, even if Person B is a less sympathetic character.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 03:00 AM
–

So it seems like every man likes what is deemed as conventionally attractive then also likes some who are their type. Not exactly. There’s no scenario where “every man” or “every woman” does anything. I would put it differently. Men generally use most of their likes on conventionally attractive women then also use some on less attractive women. Women generally use most of their likes on conventionally attractive men then also use some on less attractive men. A significant portion of the lesser c…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 09:34 PM
–

You using numbers that a random guy on the internet admitted to making up without any evidence. I can make up numbers without any evidence, and they’re literally just as good as the numbers the other random guy made up. Actual data points on the distribution of likes are scarce, but the best comes from a Hinge engineer and was published on Hinge’s official blog. He explains that half of all likes go to the top 15% of men and half of all likes go to the top 25% of women. https://web.archive.org/w…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 08:34 PM
–

Data consistently shows that the bottom 80% of men are essentially invisible to the top 78% of women, who are all competing for the same 20% of men. You’re referencing a Medium post in which the author acknowledges he has no data on the distribution of likes and simply made those numbers up.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 08:20 PM
9

You’re working under the false assumption that people’s future behavior can be predicted with absolute certainty. While past behavior can be predictive, there are plenty of cases where people have done things that are completely out of character. Saying that a person’s partner should have been able to predict these types of scenarios is unrealistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 07:50 PM
8

There are more single women than men looking for a relationship. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2020/08/PSDT_08.19.20_dating.relationships-012.png
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 07:07 PM
8

Men don't tend to have options. They take what they can get. Heterosexual relationships are 1:1. Every time a woman is selected for one, a ma is too. Setting aside gender ratio imbalances that vary by age and geography, men have just as many relationship options as women. Women have far more casual sex options, because of supply and demand imbalances between the genders. When it comes to actual relationships, both genders are equally “taking what they can get”.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:55 PM
2

If you failed your vetting process, then it is entirely your fault. Entirely? So hypothetically, say a woman marries a man she’s known since childhood/high school. They dated exclusively for years. She knows his is family and all about his upbringing. One day he loses his job to AI, has a mental break, comes home and shoots his wife and kids. You’re really claiming that’s entirely the woman’s fault? Isn’t the man like, you know, somewhat at fault for murdering his family?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:50 PM
-1

Woman can read minds and tell if you are nice only for show becouse you only want sex Are these women in the room with us right now?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:40 PM
1

In reality you’re both partially right. Two things are true at the same time: Attractive men are nearly always able to find women who require very little effort (i.e., “no hoops”). Many women still require effort even from attractive men. So on any given day, an attractive man with dating app accounts in a big city can have effortless sex with some attractive women. But that doesn’t mean he can pull that off with all attractive women. Varying degrees of effort are required. The idea that all wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:35 PM
2

Average guys have to jump through many hoops and go thirsty According to every GSS survey in recent decades, the majority of 18-29 year old men have sex at least 2-3 times per month. Average men don’t go thirsty. There are definitely men who genuinely do go thirsty, but those men are typically below average.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:15 PM
2

In that case, there are no hoops to jump through.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 06:11 PM
–

I guess I’ve just never befriended a woman I wanted to sleep with, so it’s a little hard to relate to. A guy who does that really has no one but himself to blame. If you’re interested, you have to shoot your shot.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:21 PM
1

I honestly don't understand why a grown man over 30 who really has access to pretty women and has active life would ever waste time on dating apps. I’m not over 30, so I can’t speak to that specifically. For me, the apps were a productive numbers game. I used them some in college but I had a social circle with lots of attractive women. Being in a frat, we hung out with sororities, which tended to include girls who were far more attractive than average. Meeting women in person was very easy becau…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:17 PM
1

But if you have a normie appearance and yet you're somehow surrounded by pretty women (because you know where the best parties are, for example, and can get girls backstage, and know people, etc.) then you will also pass the first filter. But in this example, it’s not actually being surrounded by pretty women that lets you pass the filter. It’s your access to parties, backstage passes, etc. being surrounded by women is the effect. Access is the cause. I say that as a guy who was in a frat. We ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 03:09 PM
1

Primary is the factor that carries the greatest weight. At least that’s my take. You should ask the guy who made the claim, not me. The primary factor is a person’s appearance.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:14 PM
1

Preselected guys do not go on apps. They don't need to. Most of the guys I know who are most popular with women also use dating apps. And they also do well on dating apps, where as I already pointed out, there’s no preselection. The guys who do well in person and on apps are generally the same guys. That’s because preselection isn’t a major factor. Appearance is, both in person and on apps.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:13 PM
–

Neither are most men. Single isn’t the same as sexless.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:44 AM
1

I’m not denying that preselection is a thing. I’m disputing the claim that it’s the primary factor women use for selecting men.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:43 AM
–

Almost all women interviewed are in the same situation Then it seems that she targeting a specific type of woman, right? Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by 26. It’s almost 2/3 by 30. Seems like she’s French, so maybe it’s different there. Women are NEVER alone. This is an interesting point, they claim that they are single since a long time, but a few minute laters, they would say that they had ONS or short relationship with dozens of men in the meantime, but t…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:34 AM
1

I understand what preselection is, but again, it’s not the primary driver of female attraction. Dating apps make that pretty clear. On the apps, success is even more concentrated among men who are already successful with women than in real life. Those men are successful with woman because women are attracted to them. Women aren’t attracted to them because they’re successful with women. That’s not even known on apps. You’re confusing cause and effect. If preselection were the primary factor, an u…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 09:10 AM
–

Women: No, Chads only According to Census Bureau data, half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by the age of 26. Surely all those men can't be Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 02:59 AM
2

They swipe on men who seem the most preselected based on their looks, profile etc. In other words, you have cause and effect backwards. Women don't like a man because lots of women like him. Lots of women like him because he's attractive. The extreme concentration of likes on dating apps demonstrates that pretty well. You're effectively claiming without evidence that when women see a hot guy on dating apps, they think "other women must like him, so I guess I like him". Applying Occam's razor, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 02:48 AM
2

Even "Hey men, sorry for demanding that you needlessly scrutinize your beauty standards. They are now considered personal preferences with no moral implications, and we will never bother you about them again" would have been tolerable. Different groups of people. There were always women who said men need to reexamine their beauty standards, but that wasn't all women. It was mostly women who didn't meet traditional standards. Most women never cared. Similarly, there are tons of men now (including…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 01:37 AM
–

the remaining men are angry at the women for this not the men that created the issue I personally had a pretty great experience with dating apps and I'm not angry at anyone. But yeah, some guys are angry with women. app companies, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:33 AM
3

I found that it works well though. especially when dating in your social circle where there can be drama if you're not up front about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 12:11 AM
–

9% have sex 2-3 times a month. 55% have sex at least 2-3 times a month, which is what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 10:29 PM
–

Let's just discount gay and men who have sex with men... I wondered the same thing, so when I ran that tabulation, I also did it for straight men only (no gay or bi men). It's still 53.8%, because gay men just aren't plentiful enough to change the figures that much. <image> The cohort above and below "2-3 times a month" are roughly the same size. When I said "many of them" is meant many of that majority. I see how you took it differently. The point is, over half of men are having sex on what I w…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:49 PM
–

And different from medians. The median 18-29 man has sex 2-3 times a month.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:33 PM
–

Sex isn't a relationship and also excludes anyone who pays for it. Only around 1% of men pay for sex in a given year, so it's not enough to really move the needle. I agree that sex isn't a relationship though. I've been single for around half of my adult life, but I haven't gone more than a few weeks without sex since high school. Sex and relationships aren't the same, but both typically involve a woman who's attracted to the man. Its disingenuous to claim the majority (54.7%) are having a certa…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 08:31 PM
2

I don't assume Austin doesn't want to sleep with her, but I don't assume he does either. Knowing nothing about the situation, I assume nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:13 PM
–

Go to the GSS Data Explorer and sign up for a free account. Then you can create cross tabulations from the datasets. <image> edit- The GSS screenshot I uploaded just shows up as "comment image". I'll try again later.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 07:08 PM
2

Stop acting like you don't want to fuck. I want to fuck hot girls and have always had that option fortunately. I've had female friends, but I don't befriend women I'm attracted to. If I'm attracted to them, I try to sleep with them, not befriend them. I've had female friends try to hook up with me and turned them down, because I have no interest in sleeping with a girl I'm not attracted to.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:46 PM
11

women don't tell you on date 1 "hey I want to get married, have kids, and am evaluating you subconsciously to see if you are a good fit for that." Right, because that would be weirdly specific. Usually people just ask "what are you looking for". Then the answers are, something serious, something casual, etc. So yes, plenty of women will tell you they're looking for something serious. Personally I found that being up front about just wanting casual worked well and avoided the drama that happens s…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:43 PM
3

I've 100% tried to keep female friendships platonic and they start asking for things I would NEVER ask my male friends for. That's interesting and hasn't been my experience. If anything, I would say my female friends have generally put in way more effort than my male friends. Multiple female friends have bought me birthday presents. One female friend in college cooked for me a couple nights a week. Another one drove me around more most of a school year when I didn't have a car. I think in genera…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:39 PM
2

My first thought was, why are we assuming Austin wants to sleep with her?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:33 PM
12

Putting a woman in the friendzone is the male equivalent of being friendzoned. Rejecting someone romantically while offering to be friends is not deceptive. Lying to get someone to sleep with you is. The two are not at all the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:27 PM
–

Harsh but I could really care less about what your personal anecdotes tell you because usually a woman is going to date men that are desired by other women According to every GSS survey in the past couple decades, the majority of American men 18-29 are having sex at least 2-3 times a month (with many of them having sex more frequently than that). Clearly most men date and/or have sex. If women only date men who are desired by other women, then that's a pretty broad cross section of the male popu…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 06:23 PM
–

Men outnumber women 5-1 and if the dating apps were successful, they wouldn’t have any clients. You're assuming everyone on dating apps is looking for a relationship. For someone looking to date casually, the apps can be great. I've met a lot of women from dating apps, who would never have been options without the apps. I remained a customer for years because the apps were successful. If I never met anyone, I probably wouldn't have stuck around as long.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 05:42 PM
3

No women prefer assholes because they display behaviors that indicate they have the main thing driving female attraction: preselection. Preselection isn't the primary driver of female attraction. Dating apps demonstrate that point well. If preselection were the primary driver, a man who struggled dating in his social circle, school, etc. could get on a dating app and do better. According to the concept of preselection, the women he knows personally aren't attracted to him because he's unsuccessf…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:28 PM
3

There are different phenotypes of men who do well with women. Men who do well with the baddies and get lots of casual often are actually assholes. Like I said, this hasn't been my experience. You certainly don't have to be an asshole to have lots of casual sex with attractive women.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 12:54 PM
3

The problem is it’s not actually men as a whole it’s the sub set of the male population that women can’t stop fucking. So sexually unsuccessful men = good, sexually unsuccessful men = bad?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:29 AM
1

Women often hate other women and will absolutely go after them. In some ways, I think women are more competitive than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:20 AM
1

My take is that when people film staged ragebait, they should be okay with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:16 AM
1

Saying "your personality is bad and is actively repelling women" is not the just world fallacy. Exactly. I don't think OP understands what a just world fallacy is. It seems like he's essentially arguing that people shouldn't suffer repercussions for being total pieces of shit. And, that if anyone points to their being a total piece of shit as their reason for failure, then it's a just world fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 03:11 AM
1

A woman is never not ready for a relationship, if the right guy comes along they will give themselves up to him. What I mean by that is they'll make it easy for him, laugh at his dumb jokes, try to spend as much time with him as possible and also reply to his texts faster. If they are truly attracted to you and you shoot ur shot you're most likely secure them. Not my experience when I was younger. Back when I was in college, I absolutely found girls who didn't want relationships. There were a co…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 02:59 AM
3

You're talking about a non-virgin woman who wouldn't hook up with a particular man. I'm talking about a non-virgin woman who wouldn't hook up with any man. For example, say a woman was a virgin who didn't believe in hooking up. She meets her husband and they only have sex after they're engaged, married, whatever. A couple years later, husband gets hit by a bus and dies. So now she's single again and still doesn't believe in hooking up. Does that really mean she can never have a healthy LTR? She …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:15 PM
1

Depends on how autistic we're talking right? On one extreme end of the spectrum. there are people who are essentially nonverbal. On the other extreme, there are people that you would probably never guess are autistic, even after extensive interaction. Those two people are in entirely different situations, and there's a ton of middle ground between them.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:07 PM
2

Sorry, let me rephrase that. So a woman who just doesn't believe in hookups and therefore would hook up with anyone can never have a healthy LTR?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 06:00 PM
6

It depends on how you define success and failure, but I would say there are two major reasons. The guy misjudges his league. Either he overestimates his own attractiveness or he underestimates the attractiveness of the women he's interested in. I remember a while ago there was a post here (maybe in the looks thread) where people were asked to post photos of the "average man" and "average woman". Most were pretty reasonable, but a lot of the women were way more attractive than average. I'm talkin…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:57 PM
3

So any woman who never hooks up can't have a healthy LTR?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 05:41 PM
4

It's not that women prefer misogynistic or violent jerks, but humans created a world where the ones at the top are way more likely to be ruthless assholes. There's a weird assumption from guys on this sub that men who do well with women are assholes. In my experience, most of the guys who do well with women casually are actually pretty well adjusted, sociable, likable guys. That's part of why they do well.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:28 PM
5

All men should only date women who would “hookup” with them. There are women who won't hook up with anyone. It doesn't mean they're not attracted to anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 03:25 PM
1

Again, I'm not talking about casual. A "situationship" is just another form of casual, non-exclusive relationship. Usually both people in a situationship are also seeing other people. Those women are single. Some attractive women date men who are older/wealthy/powerful rather than attractive, but not a meaningful number. Men who are truly wealthy or powerful are very rare, so the impact is limited. And most people date within 2-3 years of their own age. Anecdotally, I was in a frat and knew doze…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 01:28 PM
–

Yes, people generally pair up based on attractiveness, but extreme wealth creates exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 03:45 PM
4

Because at the end of the day, several hundred times more matches are several hundred times more matches. Assuming we're talking about heterosexual dating only, women and men get the same number of matches in total. Every time a woman gets a match, a man gets a match as well. But if there are something like 2-4x more men on dating apps, so those likes are spread more thinly. If the gender ratio on dating apps were 1:1, men and women would get the same number of matches per person, but as well al…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 12:12 PM
–

If they don’t want to settle, that’s ok, and that circumstance is in and of itself a valid thing to be dissatisfied with. I think that's the part we disagree on. Let's say the only job I want is NBA basketball player. The problem is, I'm not good enough to be an NBA basketball player. That job is out of reach for me, but rather than settle for another job, I've decided to just be unemployed and bitter. That's my choice and no one can stop me from doing that. At the same time, very few people are…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 12:05 PM
–

Conventionally attractive women typically pair up with conventionally attractive men. Height is just part of looks. There are plenty of conventionally attractive women who aren't with rich men, because there are far, far more attractive women than rich people.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 11:58 AM
2

In the short run, maybe. In the long run, all relationships take work, so you might as well be with someone you're attracted to. Also, most people struggle to date down and actually attempt to date up. It comes through in Hinge swipe stats where the top 10% of men get 58% of all likes and the top 10% of women get 46% of all likes. People talk about how selective women are on apps (because they are), but even men save most of their likes for women that most of them have no chance of matching with…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 11:55 AM
–

I think we can all agree that it’s better to have the relationship/partner that you actually desire rather than lower your standards too much and settle for being with anybody. And as the other guy he was responding to, I also agree with that statement. That said, if you refuse to lower your standards to a realistic level, I don't think you have the right to complain about not meeting anyone. In reality, a person in that situation has made a choice to remain single rather than date their equal.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:18 AM
–

That person and I disagree about the degree of settling at which it becomes unreasonable to expect people who are unable to find a partner to accept it. I don't think we disagree on that. The answer is whatever works for that person. That's how much they should settle. Where we seem to disagree is on how someone should respond. I believe that if someone refuses to lower their standards to a functional level, that's perfectly fine, but they have no right to complain about failure. You seem to be …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:16 AM
2

He isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/04/26 02:12 AM
–

I think it's fine if someone doesn't want to have realistic standards. But I don't want to hear them complain about failing to have their unrealistic standards met. Rather than complain, they should do what everyone else does and adjust.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 11:59 PM
–

I don't really know how reasonable it is to expect people to lower their standards. I just know most people lower them until they reach the point that they're successful. Nearly everyone likes the most attractive people, but very few people can have them. So they continue on down the line until they find people they can have. It makes sense, because humans are animals with an urge to reproduce.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 11:12 PM
–

The people who have X standard likely have it because they meet enough of other people’s standards to still have options after applying that filter. Yep, that's the way the market works. If people fail to meet partners who meet their standards, most people start to drop some of those standards. The ones who never adjust are the women and men you see ranting online about "no good men", "no good women", etc. Some people struggle with the idea that their standards aren't attainable for them and tak…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 10:12 PM
–

**So we should stop pretending as though the existence of a minority of women or men, who *don’t care about X standard*, invalidates or even alleviates one’s concern about/lamentation of their difficulty/inability to meet X standard But in a lot of cases, it's only a minority of men or women who have a given standard. People get very worked up about these minorities. For example, only a minority of men require a woman to be a virgin, but you see women here complaining about those men. Only a min…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:57 PM
1

Nope. You're misrepresenting an article that misrepresented a study. The article you're referring to is likely this one in Evie, a far-right disinformation magazine for women. It's headline reads "45% Of Women Are Expected To Be Single And Childless By 2030" and it (incorrectly) describes the results of a Morgan Stanley study. The body of the article contains a link to the actual Morgan Stanley study, which is worth reading. The headline is false on two fronts, and misleading on another point. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:41 PM
1

The guy doesn’t say he’s above average But often he does. There have been many times when guys on this sub have claimed to be 6/10 and unable to ever date or have sex. The bluepiller is not willing to entertain that some folks are cooked due to looks, unable to pass the initial bar for the rest to matter. Again, they blue pill is just the mainstream. Most people know that some people are cooked due to looks. The difference is, the mainstream doesn't think that average men or above average men ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:15 PM
1

Yes?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 09:10 PM
17

OP's whole post revolves around a goomba fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:05 PM
2

bluepillers who insist that inceldom = bad personality The blue pill is just mainstream beliefs, and I don't think that view is mainstream at all. Typically when you see a people on reddit point to a guy's personality as his problem, it's in the following type of context... Guy claims to be average or a little above average looking. Guy complains that he can't date, have sex, etc. There are two major possibilities: He's misjudging his own attractiveness or the attractiveness of the women he's pu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 07:00 PM
1

Dating as we know it and marriage for love are recent inventions. Those specific things are recent inventions, but it doesn't change the fact that people primarily selected mates for physical characteristics throughout human history. Keep in mind that civilization is a relatively recent development for the human species. Humans have been around for about 300,000 years, while civilization has existed for a few thousand years. For most of our existence, humans essentially selected mates like anima…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 04:36 PM
0

Maybe that reflects shifting reddit demographics? Even when I was in high school back in 2012-2016, everyone knew looks mattered to the girls. It didn't seem like a recent development either. Throughout history, any man with half a brain could simply observe that attractive women end up with attractive men and draw the conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 04:07 PM
5

There are two different equations. The first equation determines your options. Looks are close to 100% of that equation, setting aside edge cases like extreme wealth, fame, etc. The second equation determines how well you do with those options. Things other than looks, like personality, OP's banter example, etc., largely determine how well you do with those options. Want better options? Improve you looks. Want better results with your current options? Improve your game.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:46 PM
3

Most men date below their looks match. If that were the case, we would have a surplus of single attractive women. We don't. In fact I would say that attractive women are the least likely to be single. They love being able to fuck chad a few times to get it out of their system. Attractive women have that option. "Chad" doesn't need to fuck average women because he always has attractive options available for casual (unless he lives in a small town with limited options).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:42 PM
2

I've also watched movies where Santa is real, but I have the cognitive skills to separate entertainment from reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:34 PM
2

The claim was that stuff such as being kind and polite will make up for not being hot. Ironically, you're being disingenuous. No one is claiming that being kind and polite "makes up" for not being hot. People are claiming that being kind and polite will make you more successful in dating. Your looks largely determine your options. If you want to date hot women, you need to be hot.* If you're not hot, then no amount of kindness and politeness will make up for that. If a guy is a 4/10 and wants to…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:27 PM
2

Actually there's approx 7 billion people out there who say "women arent visual" No there aren't. Thinking that women don't care about looks is a fringe view.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:13 PM
2

I reject women for a lot more than that and so do most guys I know. Swiping right on dating apps <3% of the time, most of the women I swipe left on aren't fat and don't have kids. I'm in NYC where obesity rates among young adults are fairly low and single mothers seem to be almost nonexistent in my age range. But I swipe left for plenty of other reasons: Don't care for her face/skin/hair/teeth. Skinny fat, not toned/in shape. Thin but plain/not hot. Not among my racial preferences. Too short. I'…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 01:04 PM
3

You know that's your algorithm right? If you watch something, it feeds you more and more of the same. I've literally never seen that in my tiktok.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 02:57 AM
15

this idea that women will cold approach men extremely directly is a fantasy that will never happen. Never happen or never happen pervasively? I've been approached very directly a number of times. The vast majority of women won't do it in the bast majority of cases (or ever for many women), but it does happen. The world is a big place and there are numerous exceptions to every rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 02:44 AM
1

Sure, but that scenario can’t exist in reality because we can’t know that and it’s impossible to do outreach to every single one. I also think that a lot of incel violence would have happened even if the guys weren’t incels. They were violent, unstable individuals who would have latched onto some other violent, toxic ideology if they weren’t incels.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 11:54 PM
34

You're 100% right it isn't going to happen. Only way it ever could happen is if women vastly outnumbered man which we know they do not. College is sort of a microcosm of this. I definitely got approached way more in college than outside of college. My university was around 60% women (two men for every three women). Not sure if that’s just the nature of college/that age group or if the gender ratio is a factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 11:18 PM
3

But even with the churn, my point holds true. Let’s say we have a world with five men and five women. Only one of the men successfully dates, while all of the women successfully date. Over the course of five years, the man dates each woman for one year. In total, the men spend 20 person years single. In total, the women spend 20 person years single. Four of the men spend five years single while unsuccessfully looking for a partner. All five of the women spend four years single while unsuccessful…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:42 PM
3

Again, I’m talking about relationships, not casual sex, hookups, fwb, etc. I agree women can find those things more easily. Most women, even on dating apps, are looking for an exclusive romantic partner. Every time they find one, a man finds one too.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:24 PM
3

For which part?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:11 PM
7

What makes you think women in general have an easier dating life? Women looking for casual sex certainly have it easier than men, because of supply/demand imbalances between the genders. But most women aren’t looking for casual sex most of the time. When it comes to actual dating, finding a relationship is just as hard for a woman as it is for a man. Every time a heterosexual woman finds a relationship, a man does as well. One can’t happen without the other happening.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:07 PM
6

In isolation that’s fine. But when you combine it with a laundry list of other items some guys want (under 25 when he’s much older, 19-21 BMI, virgin, etc.) in combination those standards become high. To be fair, you see men here cite those standards every day. I’m pretty sure OP was illustrating some common ones. At the same time, OP doesn’t seem to be all there. She/he is claiming men have high standards in the post, then questioning men who admit to having high standards in the comments. So w…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 09:34 PM
11

She’s criticizing men who complain about women’s high standards while having high standards themselves. Notice “contradictory” in the title. No one likes a hypocrite. I’m open about having high standards, but I also think women’s standards are fine. I’ve never been criticized for that position.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 09:27 PM
12

I’ve never been attacked by a woman for having standards. I’ve openly said on here multiple times that I swipe right less than 3%, because those are the women I find attractive enough. Never once have I been criticized for it. I’ve also said I wouldn’t date a woman with kids, no college degree, etc., and again, never been criticized. Women don’t actually care about men having standards. When I do see women here criticize men’s standards, it’s when a man is talking about his standards and whining…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 09:19 PM
9

In your post you imply that men have high standards for excluding so many women from consideration. Now when a guy admits to having high standards, you don’t believe him. I’m not really sure what your position is.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 09:10 PM
4

Yeah, no evidence of that. During times like the Great Recession, when the economy was most challenging, coupling rates actually fell. Cohabitation replacing marriage began over 35 years ago, long before any housing affordability crisis. The trend line has moved pretty consistently during that time (other than the Great Recession).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:26 PM
2

More women are LGBTQIA+ and/or choosing to be single than ever before. And yet, a greater percentage of men in the 18-29 age group are coupled today than when that age group was all Millennials. So despite those factors (to the extent they’re true), men are having more success. As far as those factors, the second one isn’t true unless you define “single” as “unmarried”. Like men, more 18-29 women are coupled (married + living with a partner) today than when that age group was all Millennials. So…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 07:12 PM
2

Most men get what most men of the previous generation got. Coupling rates (married + living with a partner) have actually risen in the 18-29 demographic as Millennials aged out of it and were replaced by Gen Z. That’s clear in the Census Bureau data. People have always paired up with the most desirable options available to them. Assortative mating is a pretty well established theory. Most people aren’t attractive though, so most don’t end up with an attractive partner. That goes for men and wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 06:49 PM
7

Women’s liberation happened long before any boy today was born. The parents of today’s children are mostly Millennial with some Gen X and Gen Z. They all grew up in a world where women were fully liberated. I work with a guy who has a 7 or 8 year old son. He and his wife met on tinder (while obviously using a smart phone). I think you’re dramatically overestimating how much the game has changed. Millennials weren’t dating in some ancient environment.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:53 PM
1

Nah, ONS happen. I hooked up with two girls on spring break when I was in college. They were from different schools. Never saw them again. Living in NYC, I’ve also hooked up with women who were just visiting. Those things happen. There are other scenarios out there like she had a boyfriend but she was drunk and slept with another guy. Once sober she didn’t do it again.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:24 PM
2

We should teach boys that since many of them are the direct result of matings which would not have occurred under the current conditions What conditions are those? People are still pairing up and having children. The main difference is that fewer are getting married and more are choosing to live together unmarried.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 05:15 PM
12

You’re right that there is an asymmetrical trade-off: women face the high cost of objectification and physical risk, while men face the high cost of total invisibility and selection pressure. I think what you’re missing is that women also have the same selection pressure. When you say women “have more choice and therefore more leverage in who they date, have intimacy with, and ultimately build a life with”, only a fraction of that is true. Women have far more options for casual sex because of su…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 04:27 PM
31

Women don’t collectively do anything. Neither do men. In a world of 8 billion people with differing opinions, nothing is done collectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 02:04 PM
1

That’s a silly response. The most attractive women are typically in relationships. If she’s in a situationship, she’s single. I’m taking about actual relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:42 PM
3

Exactly. So this means that if on average men are punching down and dating less attractive women, there is a surplus of attractive women as the other user said. I’m the guy who pointed that out. there’s no surplus of single attractive women, so clearly men aren’t punching down on average.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:29 PM
9

This is always what women default back to Right, because women don’t want to be approached by guys and who act creepy. They keep saying it because that’s how many women feel.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:27 PM
1

No becuase single attractive women are already a very small minority to begin with. This point backs up my theory It doesn’t. If the most attractive women (let’s hypothetically say the top 10%) are rarely single, then who are they in relationships with? Is it the top 10% of men?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:21 PM
2

Yes, attractive people in general are a minority. I’m measuring based on what I consider attractive. Everyone’s measurements will be somewhat different.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:16 PM
1

Well i think a large percent of younger men are single relative to women. That’s due to age gaps and it’s always been the case. In totality, the number of heterosexual men and women in relationships is equal. It’s a 1:1 ratio. By when you draw a line at any given maximum age there will always be more women than men in relationships. Women prefer slightly older men on average and men prefer slightly younger women on average. I dont habe direct proof of this but my guess is many guys are having to…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:36 PM
5

Most women have had at least one hookup in their lives. So do most men based on what I've observed.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:29 PM
3

Again, averages mean nothing if you're using means. That's why the CDC and other sources use medians.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:26 PM
4

The average that's always published is a median. It's far more meaningful for describing the "typical" person than a mean, which is skewed heavily by outliers in a sample. If one guy reports a million partners, that dramatically changes the mean while essentially leaving the median unchanged. Men and women can have different medians and the same mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 06:25 PM
1

Some go through a lot of short-term relationships, but I know others who were just in one or two really long-term relationships and almost never single.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:24 PM
2

It's also Jim and Pam from the Office. I think it's fairly common for two coworkers to meet and immediately find each other attractive, even if one or both are in a relationship already.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:22 PM
1

Nope, it's just mainstream views. For example, it's a mainstream view that looks matter a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 01:16 PM
–

Women are more likely to have freaky exciting sex with casual flings and hookups and boyfriends from their youth than their quite homebody loyal husbands. Not sure why you think that. I've hooked up with a lot of women and done some kinky things with some of them, but most of it was pretty vanilla (PIV, oral, etc.). The women I've had relationships with have generally been more experimental in bed. Not necessarily when we first met and started sleeping together, but as they got more comfortable …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:44 AM
-4

Blue pill is just mainstream views. Neither of those views are mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 03:29 AM
8

Women: many short-term relationships = failure / good long-term partner = success Depends on what the woman wants. I knew a lot of attractive girls in college who basically had a series of short-term relationships throughout college. They would date a guy exclusively for a while, break up with him, then immediately start dating another guy she already had lined up. A lot of young women actually do want sexual variety, and this is a way to get it without engaging in hookups. If that's what she wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:40 AM
5

In cases where I have seen that happen, the pattern was pretty consistent. She had a boyfriend and became "friends" with a new guy. They legitimately just hung out and never hooked up or anything. Eventually she broke up with the boyfriend and immediately started dating the "friend". In reality, she always wanted him but took time to breakup with the boyfriend. I also saw the same thing once, except the guy was the one who had a girlfriend who he eventually broke up with. In all these cases, the…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:31 AM
1

That model made sense maybe in environments like college or in-person office jobs, where you saw someone consistently and attraction could build naturally over time. But most people don’t live in those environments now and even then people are growing away it. Among couples that were engaged in 2024: 40% met through dating apps/social networks or in social settings. If you consider social settings to be places like parties and bars, then those fall into the category of one-time/occasional intera…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 12:20 AM
5

Looks are by far the most important factor in determining your league. Other factors are far more important in determining how well you do in that league.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 05:23 PM
2

It's not disingenuous. The other guy pointed out that the distribution for men is heavily skewed, while the distribution for women is normal. That second part is 100% false, which is what I was replying to. The distributions for both men and women are heavily skewed and nowhere near normal. The table in the article shows the 0-49th percentiles for both men and women. The bottom half of men get 4.3% of all likes, while the bottom half of women get 7.9% of all likes. As I already pointed out, ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/26 03:52 PM
2

Men’s attractiveness to women takes the form of a heavily skewed Poisson distribution whereas women’s attractiveness to men is relatively normally distributed. Not really. Take Hinge swipe statistics for example. The top 10% of men receive 58% of all likes, while the top 10% of women receive 46% of all likes. So yes likes are more concentrated at the top among men, but likes sent by men to women are far from a normal distribution. It's a huge blob at the top. Some of that difference between 58% …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 08:55 PM
1

That’s interesting. I feel like 3% is unsustainable for regular hookups unless you’re bordering on model territory. I’m just thinking about the match percentage, conversion rate, and the vetting process It's basically all a numbers game. Across multiple apps, I managed to get around 25-35 matches per week on average. That's an estimate because I only have my data from tinder. I found that in a typical week, maybe 1 or 2 of those matches would be down to hook up. That's somewhere around 5%. That'…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 07:24 PM
3

Arranged marriage is a bad idea for many reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 03:11 AM
1

I live in NYC, but also used it in other cities while traveling. Based on my tinder data, I swiped right a little under 3% and matched 22% of the time I swiped right. Other apps were probably similar but I don’t have my data. In my experience, there was never any reason to consider an average woman or even a woman that wasn’t genuinely attractive. My tinder data shows I exchanged messages with less than half of my matches and that was still enough to always have attractive casual options. I get …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 01:35 AM
1

Looks obviously matter, but a lot of people who focus on how much looks matter fail to understand how they matter. Your looks largely determine the ceiling for your dating options. If you want to date more attractive people, then you need to improve your looks to get to the level of those you want to attract. Looks set your league. How well you do within that league is largely dependent on other factors.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 11:44 PM
1

Attractive men have their pick of the litter on dating apps This was my experience as a guy who did really well on dating apps. But because I did have my pick of the litter, I picked attractive women. Swiping right less than 3% gave me more options for both hookups and actual dating than I could have needed. The idea that attractive men are hogging all the average women on dating apps is a silly black pill talking point. An attractive guy in a city can swipe right on just the top 1-5% of women a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 11:31 PM
6

Appearance doesn’t matter. That’s not a mainstream belief. There was a YouGov poll a few years back that asked Americans how much looks matter. Only 2% said they don’t matter at all. The majority picked the opposite extreme and said looks matter a great deal.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 08:11 PM
3

It could also be argued that the right woman didn’t show up at the time, but they met your standards as you matured and got older (not just a man thing either) The right women showed up when I was younger, but I wasn’t interested in being with anyone. Like I said, I went through a period of time when I had some regrets about just hooking up with some of the girls I probably should have pursued for relationships. It just wasn’t what I wanted at the time though. As I got a little older and most of…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 07:38 PM
2

I don't share the opinion that men effortlessly sleep around with the most desirable women they can get. Yeah obviously ideally they want to sleep around with the hottest women, but unfortunately that takes considerable amount of effort and investment. As you point out though, exceptions exist. It’s a numbers game and if a man has enough options, then those exceptions appear on a regular basis. Based on my tinder data, I swiped right less than 3% of the time and matched about 22% of the times I …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 02:33 PM
–

Definitely no surplus of attractive women anywhere I’ve lived. Sounds like any guy who’s looking should consider moving to wherever you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:18 PM
14

If a woman he really wants comes along the next day, he'll commit quite easily to her. As a guy who ho spent most of college and my early 20s without really committing, I disagree with that take. There’s this weird view among a lot of guys here that whenever a woman sleeps with a guy who doesn’t want commitment, it means he’s out of her league. That wasn’t my experience at all. Most of the hottest women I’ve been with have been I casual situations. It’s not that I wasn’t into them, but at the ti…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 01:15 PM
7

OP gave the example of a woman married to a doctor. That seems to be how he’s defining “achieved”.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 10:57 PM
2

Guys current leagues ARE dating down. If that were the case, we would have a surplus of single attractive women, because the women at the top are left out when men all date down. But there’s not a surplus of attractive women. Attractive women are the most likely to be in relationships in my experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 10:55 PM
11

Because blue pill by this sub’s definition is just “not red pill”. It encompasses every belief system other than the red pill, and there are a variety of beliefs among the world’s 8 billion people. When you realize the blue pill is every belief system other than the red pill lumped into one, of course there is no common set of beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 10:44 PM
2

There are actual CDC statistics on overweight and obese prevalence. It’s still rising, even young men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 04:12 AM
0

That resentment exists mainly among the chronically online. In real life, I don’t know anyone who hates the other gender.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/03/26 03:28 AM
10

There is no gender war.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/26 04:33 AM
7

Looks largely determine your options. Game, personality, etc. determine how well you do with those options.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/03/26 07:08 PM
4

Trend? People have been going out for drinks as a first date for decades.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 09:31 PM
6

I’ve seen no correlation between attractiveness and kinkiness among the 50+ women I’ve been with. There are kinky 10s and vanilla 8s. Mostly seems random and not necessarily who you would expect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 09:30 PM
4

I’ve never dated a woman who took more than a few hours for me to kiss. I’ve never dated a woman who wouldn’t choose me from my pictures. I’ve never dated a woman who wouldn’t sleep with me off the internet. Of course the women who do want to date you do those things. They want to date you. And the women who don’t want to date you don’t do any of those things. But obviously the women who are into a guy are into him. Guys aren’t the ones who control who women choose to sleep with. Women hold 99% …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 01:03 PM
8

So there is an element of fairness you believe in where just because someone can get away with something and it’s not technically illegal doesn’t mean you should. The phrase "get away with something" indicates that it's wrong. I don't believe that casual sex is wrong at all. If someone want's to do it, they should do it, safely and respectfully.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 03:17 AM
6

That sounds like a golden age fallacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 05:22 PM
13

If you had a son or a nephew who was a total poonhound and wasn’t treating his female peers with appropriate respect. Those are two different things. You can sleep around without treating anyone with disrespect. If my son or nephew were doing that, I'd just encourage him to do it safely. If he was treating women disrespectfully, I'd coach him on that. I believe that you should treat everyone with a base level of respect. That goes for men and women. Don't be a total piece of shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 05:22 PM
1

She has the absolute freedom to choose to do it and not to. I have the freedom to stay or go. I agree, but in your example, why does it matter if she's done anal before? The real question is whether she is willing to do anal with you. If that answer is no and anal is important to you, then you're not going to get what you want regardless of whether she's done it before.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 02:44 PM
3

All she needs to do is meet ONE guy who breaks her mold and changes her world. Of course there are exceptions, which is why I said "generally". I can't personally think of any exceptions in my personal life, but obviously there are exceptions to every rule, hence my wording. The world is a big place.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 01:29 PM
2

Are you a moron, I never wanted to get married. I am literally deciding whether or not I will get married this year. Sorry, what country are you in? That statement makes me wonder. I find that a lot of times and guy will say things on this sub that sound ridiculous, but then I realize he's from a non-Western country. The sub is primarily focused on Western dating culture, so that's the perspective from which most people are talking.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 01:23 PM
2

So if someone ever tries something and decides it's not for them, they're obligated to continue doing that thing for the rest of their lives? I don't follow that logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 12:46 PM
1

If a man found out that his wife did sex acts with other people, he will be wrong to force or coerce her into those acts, but he has every right to bring a consenting, preferably hotter and younger woman to his marital bed and perform those sex acts with her. There are things I've done with other women that I haven't done with me girlfriend, and I don't particularly want to do with my girlfriend. Does she have the right to go do those things with other guys?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 12:42 PM
2

Depends on the woman. On the other end of the spectrum, there are religiously conservative women that even wait until marriage. Then there are those in between. Most human behavior is a spectrum, with people clustered in certain parts of the spectrum.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 12:30 PM
–

I think it's very similar to what makes a man high status.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 04:21 AM
-1

If anything, I think what preceded the market framing was unhealthy. How long ago are you talking about? The whole concept of leagues is a market-based view. It's been around since at least the 1950s, according to google AI. When was this time period when there was no concept of market value/leagues?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 04:14 AM
1

I'm saying that women are generally expected to perform in bed too. Not saying there aren't exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 04:07 AM
3

Not sure how that relates to my comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 04:06 AM
1

If she's experienced, she's also expected to use her experience to help get a man off. She's also expected to use it to behave pleasantly and avoid icks. The first point is a little different, because women aren't generally expected to initiate. But that's not a matter of experience. A man is generally expected to initiate, regardless of his experience. Obviously there are exceptions and women initiate on a regular basis, but I'm speaking in generalities.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 03:15 AM
2

If a looks oriented high libido woman “settles” for an unattractive guy to have kids, then I don’t think it’s going to work out in the long term. That's a big "if" that wasn't included in the scenario he laid out, so there's no reason to believe that's the case. Let's say that's not the case. Every guy she's been with is equally attractive, but the guy at 23 meets her while she's looking to get married. It's just a matter of timing. Now that I'm in my late 20s, I look at the girls who I knew in …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 03:10 AM
1

What type of "work"?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 02:59 AM
1

Takes a bit of work surely. Not really. I'll give you a couple examples. In college I hooked up with a number of girls I met at our parties. In that setting where everyone has been drinking and many are looking for sex, it's not that hard. When an attractive girl approaches you, starts dancing with you, or whatever in that type of setting, it really doesn't take much work to close the deal. The other example is dating apps. The "work" is just exchanging a few messages, so it really doesn't get m…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 10:07 PM
1

Yes, hookups are "free" by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 09:45 PM
1

I'm almost 6'4 and in good shape, and that's enough to have casual sex with hot women. You don't need to be rich and famous. You do need to be hot. Hot people generally have hot options available, so they're not going to pick someone who isn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 08:55 PM
3

Well, every time I had a thing with a hot girl she’d be like “we have to get married”, or “we aren’t being friends with benefits” or a lot of other things. Hot women hook up too. Where I went to college, the hottest girls were generally in sororities. As a guy who spent four years in a frat, I can tell you that a lot of the hottest girls in those sororities engaged in hookups. Some engaged in many. It's an environment with attractive people and a lot of alcohol, which leads to plenty of casual s…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 07:34 PM
2

I doubt there are many guys who “value experience”. Virgins, low N women, and high N women seem really similar during first impressions. Some of the most experienced women are low n. A woman who spent years in a relationship with one man and had sex 1,000+ times with him is far more experienced that a woman who's had a few ONS with a few different guys. She's also more likely to have experimented with kinky stuff if he's had a long relationship because people tend to do more of that in relations…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 03:41 PM
3

Lower percentage of Gen Z men having access to the available women Coupling rates have started to rise as more Gen Z Americans have entered the 18-29 cohort. In the latest Census Bureau data (2024), the coupling rate for 18-29 year olds is the highest its been since 2009. That 2024 cohort is mostly Gen Z. Only the 28 and 29 year olds are Millennials. Gen Z is coupling at a high rate than Millennials were 10 years earlier.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 03:06 PM
4

It's reasonable for any person to not date or break up with any person for any reason. It's not reasonable to go on the internet and bitch about someone not doing something they hate just because you want them to. That person has done absolutely nothing wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 02:49 PM
2

My claim alteast covers the sexual / hookup phase. Well yeah. Because those hard limits apply to relationships, not hookups. No one (women or men) really care about compatibility in a hookup. All you really need to a base level of physical attraction. When women say they wouldn’t date a broke guy, they mean they wouldn’t DATE a broke guy. Hookups aren’t dating so that doesn’t matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 03:44 AM
3

If you have never had casual sex but your spouse or girlfriend etc. has done sexual favors for another man without any strings attached then it’s not really a balanced relationship. If having casual sex is something that matters to you, then it’s something you should have done before your relationship. But what you did or didn’t do before the relationship doesn’t make the relationship unbalanced.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:07 PM
5

How so? Most of the time people don’t even know if someone is having casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 09:04 PM
2

Most women have had at least one casual sex experience, and the guys they sleep with are usually more attractive than the men they enter relationships with, except for some rare exceptions. Any data to support that claim or is it entirely anecdotal? Because my anecdotal experience is very different. There’s a weird assumption that men have to “sleep down” for casual sex. As a guy who’s had far more casual sex than average, the women I’ve hooked up with have been just as attractive as the women I…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 08:53 PM
1

Showing she's willing to hook up with us before a relationship is the only proof we get that she thinks of sex as inheritably worthwhile without all the bonuses attached. There’s a difference between a hookup and sex before commitment. A hookup tends to be spontaneous and there is implicitly or explicitly no expectation of future interaction. Sex before commitment is just regular dating. Most couples have sex by the third date, even though commitment typically comes later.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/26 10:27 AM
6

I got turned down when I caught feelings for one of my fwbs back in college. It happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 05:00 AM
5

All of the above. If you can get a ONS, you have a plate. If you have a plate, you can instantly evolve her into a LTR at any time if you should choose to. Sometimes in my experience. When I was in college I hooked up with plenty of girls who didn’t want a relationship including a few who I tried with. They would sleep with me repeatedly, but just didn’t do relationships (with me or anyone else). You’re generally right though if you’re talking about women more than a year or two out of college.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/26 04:59 AM
3

I had the same reaction. I was at two when I turned 18 and three when I started college. Then freshman year happened and that number rose dramatically.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 09:32 PM
0

Median isn't very useful in isolation. It would be more meaningful with standard deviation included.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 09:29 PM
4

Yes, sexual jealousy is human nature and both men and women prefer lower n count partners. From the Buss & Schmitt 1993 study that's the source of that stat: Although men have a slight preference from promiscuity in a short-term mate, it is seen as undesirable in a long-term mate (women, in contrast, rate it as undesirable in both scenarios).
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 08:14 PM
5

That's completely normal at 19 for both women and men. There's a range of what's normal but 3 at 19 seems firmly within that range.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 07:50 PM
–

Male-model-tier guys generally aren't fucking a 5/10 woman. As someone who's always done well with women but isn't model tier, I can tell you there's no reason for him to consider it. Based on my tinder data, I swiped right a little under 3% and matched about 22% of the time I swiped right. It was probably similar on other apps, but I never downloaded my data. That gave me more than enough matches to literally always have multiple casual sex options available. These were all conventionally attra…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 05:25 PM
1

the more men she had in her life, the more chances there are that one of this relationship is not settled and will come back to bit us in the ass someday I disagree with that logic. Let's say there are two women: The first woman has been with one man before you. She was with him for five years and envisioned spending her life with him, but one day he cheated on her and left her. The second woman has had ten ONS before dating you and never had an emotional connection to a man until she met you. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:26 PM
2

There's no way every guy I know is among the most desired men, unless you believe just being a relatively healthy weight is all it takes. None of they guys I'm talking about were overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 04:14 PM
1

Most hookups involve a woman who's been binge drinking. As a guy who partied a lot in college, pretty much every guy I know had at least a hookup or two. None of them were below average looking, but most weren't "hot" either. Most were what I would describe as a little above average, but they spent a lot of time in settings where people hook up. Identical guys who stayed home and played videos games instead of going out wouldn't have experienced hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:21 PM
3

Women mostly only have casual sex with hot guys. That hasn't been true in my experience. In four years of college, essentially every guy I knew had at least a hook up or two, and some many times. They weren't necessarily the best looking guys either, but they were all guys who partied a lot. Lifestyle choices like that are a major factor, since most hookups involve binge drinking. The guy with the highest n count I know is fairly average. He's slim, which is above average in the US, but he has a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 03:07 PM
1

Your reading comprehension isn't the best. I get that if you take any given "useless" activity in isolation, then only a small % of people do it. That's true for golfing, snowboarding, etc. Likewise only a small % of guys spend money on useless activities like guns, hunting putting lifts on their pickup trucks, etc. that people at lower levels of income tend to do. Even more useless are things like gambling or paying Only Fans girls, but some guys do it. Any one of those things individually only…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 10:09 PM
1

I see the issue, please don't bother replying. It's not just an affluent people thing. I have cousins in rural PA. They and their friends are all blue collar (not high-end trades or anything) and all generally make well below average. A bunch of them also have giant gun collections. It's shocking how many guns some of these guys have, including expensive assault riffles, etc. Between that and what they spend on ammo every month, they could probably fund a golf hobby. You could argue that guns ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:49 PM
1

You don't. Just pointing out that people spend disposable income on all sorts of things that are "useless". The guys I know who do beach vacations tend to be older guys I work with who have kids.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:39 PM
1

My point is that money isn't the primary factor in getting women and getting women isn't the primary motivation for making money. In my experience the two things aren't strongly related, so I don't believe that getting women is really men's motivation for "excess labor".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 09:33 PM
0

Some men "in your league" will try to pump and dump too, or maybe the relationship will just natutally fizzle out in the early stages, but it's much less likely than if you only try with men way out of your league. Not exactly in my experience. I agree there are plenty of highly desirable men looking for monogamous relationships and I agree that they tend to quickly pair up with highly desirable women. That's all true. But there are far more highly desirable women looking for monogamous relation…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 07:30 PM
5

Yes, I can think of a few times I've expressed some form of that opinion in front of women. I've never been criticized for it. It was in the context of acknowledging I'm picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:22 PM
2

I was a broke kid at a school full of very wealthy students. I worked and paid for a lot of my school with loans and a small scholarship. Most kids were loaded with plenty of cash, nice cars, etc. My most long-term girlfriend's parents were absolutely loaded and had multiple vacation homes including an absurd house in Vail. Easily a $15M vacation home. She was a user on her parent's credit card and absolutely wasn't broke. As someone who grew up middle class, it was stunning to me how many stude…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 05:19 PM
6

Not necessarily. If a woman in your social circle invites a guy from tinder over to her place one night, you're not going to know about it. If a woman in your social circle is someone you didn't know if high school or college, you have no idea what she did previously. As an adult, there are relatively people in my social circle from college or high school. I graduated from college and moved to a city like nearly everyone else I know. Most people don't perpetually hang out with the people they kn…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:55 PM
2

Or to take their kids and spend some time with them away from work.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:50 PM
5

Your n count isn't tattooed on your forehead. Your n count is whatever you say it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:32 PM
2

Most guys waste money on useless shit. Like golfing. A lot of guys spend money of a beach vacation. Those things are "useless".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:27 PM
9

How are n count and sex drive related? A woman who's been with one long-term boyfriend who's had sex with him 1,000 times may have a much higher sex drive than a woman who's had sex with 10 men once each during that same time period. The people who have the most sex are people in relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 01:34 PM
8

And I'm saying it's not asymmetrical. Your experience isn't universal. You've been criticized for preferring fit women. I never have. You've been criticized for being in shape. I never have. You've been shamed for being single. I've never experienced anything remotely like that, despite being single for like half of my adult life. Even when talking about my standards on this sub, where I might expect women to criticize me, I've never been criticized. Most women don't care about men politely havi…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 01:25 PM
2

Men broadly don't care if women have standards. Red/black pill men on reddit certainly do, but that's far from most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 01:20 PM
16

When men say “I’d prefer someone fit or without kids,” suddenly it’s a system of oppression. Also the claim that men’s standards are “invisible” is hilarious. Men get dragged constantly for them. The moment a guy says he prefers a fit woman, half the internet acts like he’s committing a human rights violation. I think you're misinterpreting why those men are getting "dragged for their standards". The standards typically aren't the issue. Usually it's one of two things: The way the guy communicat…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 01:03 PM
7

For women it’s standards as a group for men it’s standards as individuals. That's a silly argument. Women clearly don't all have the same standards. Half of American women are legally married or living with a partner by the age of 26. Those women range from extremely attractive to well below average. Do you really think the extremely attractive women would swap partners with the average women? They wouldn't, because they're generally with extremely attractive men. That's because their standards …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 12:33 PM
2

That's kind of the point. Money isn't generally what makes it easy to meet women, unless we're talking about the extremes of wealth and fame.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 12:19 PM
5

Yeah, having fun is totally pointless. Maybe it depends on your social circle, but it seems to me that most guys do. I feel like almost every guy I know at work plays golf. If you add up all the greens fees, equipment, travel for occasional golf trips, country club dues in some cases, etc. over the course of the year, it's far more expensive than my occasional snowboard trips. I don't golf and snowboarding is my only hobby that really involves spending any notable amount of money. I think a lot …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 12:16 PM
1

I said "typically". The extremes of fame and wealth are absolutely exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 12:07 PM
11

I produce an excess of labor so I can have do things like snowboarding in Jackson Hole when I want to. The easiest time ever for meeting women was when I was a broke college kid.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 03:26 AM
1

Sounds good on paper right? WRONG! If you looked at most of the complaints with the app it was mostly the same things men getting matches and the women not initiating any conversation. But it's really no different than tinder. Matching is just the first step. A match means "maybe I would consider you". On tinder if you message a woman you matched with and she never responds, that means she considered and the answer was no. On bumble if you match with a woman and she never messages, that means sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:52 AM
1

I haven't been asked, so I haven't lied, but I don't quite know how I would respond if I were asked right now. I don't think anyone is entitled to know every detail of anyone's life. A lot of it is irrelevant and I'm not inclined to share it. Like if she wanted to know about the details of my morning bowel movement, I wouldn't be inclined to share it either. That's something I'd prefer to keep private because I don't think anyone needs to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/26 02:39 AM
–

What? It's mostly red and black pill guys here who claim men have to sleep down for casual sex. I've pointed out many times that attractive women have casual sex too.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 02:17 PM
–

Again, the red pill's "looks matter" was always a widely held belief. It's not unique to the red pill. Say I make up a new pill called the yellow pill. It has two beliefs: You shouldn't set yourself on fire. You should only fuck your siblings. There's also the orange pill which is just "not yellow pill". Are you yellow pill or orange pill?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 01:41 PM
–

By the sheer definition of blue pill, the "advice" they give is: Looks doesn't matter Again, that's not true. The mainstream view is that looks matter a great deal. The blue pill is mainstream views. Sure, but when blue pill states it's "not red pill", then what else can be said? The blue pill doesn't state anything. It's not a belief system like the red pill. It's just the default. The red pill came along and claimed a bunch of things everyone already believed. The vast majority of people alrea…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 01:34 PM
–

I know every single blue pill hon reddit has this mythical janitor friend, who is short, bald, fat, but is slaying it with these model girlfriends simply because he is "decent", but come on...really. That's not a mainstream view at all, which means it's not blue pill. Only 2% of Americans believe that looks don't matter. The majority believe that looks matter a great deal. The people who think that looks don't matter are fringe outliers, not mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 01:24 PM
–

No true Scotsman, right? Most of the red pill isn't uniquely red pill. It states obvious widely held beliefs: looks matter, work out, be confident ("hold frame"), etc. Then it sprinkles in misogynistic nonsense like "women are hypergamous subhuman adult children". That last part is really the only thing that separates the red pill from the mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 01:17 PM
-1

Nope. Just pointing out that 6/10 men will typically fail with 9/10 women. 3/10 men will typically fail with 6/10 women.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 12:45 PM
7

Attractiveness absolutely doesn't have to be perfectly matched. People pair up and pair down slightly, so there's far from a perfect correlation. But if you consistently shoot only for people far out of your league, you're likely to struggle in some way. If you're in the giant blob of fairly average people under the bell curve, it's hard to land someone who's an attractive outlier at the tail. edit- But obviously not impossible. There are exceptions.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 04:45 AM
10

"Having looks" isn't binary. Looks are a spectrum and where you fall on that spectrum largely determines who's an option for you. Someone who recognizes where they fall on that spectrum and calibrates accordingly will have far more success than someone who doesn't. I was in a frat in college and almost every guy I knew hooked up and dated at some point during his four years at school. One friend of mine was an exception. He was probably a 6/10 or 7/10, but he only ever went after girls who were …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 04:20 AM
–

Yeahhh but not the degree of current gen Z come on I'm Gen Z (27) and used dating apps extensively. Tinder was around for four years before I was even old enough to use it. I don't think someone three years older than me had a fundamentally different experience. The people who were using tinder in their early 20s back in 2014 are in their mid 30s today. Also you said 30+ years olds, that includes way more, way older people He said "most men over 30", which just means over 50%. That's true, but u…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 03:05 AM
1

In a relationship they both matter equally. In hookups/casual, pretty much only physical matters within reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/03/26 02:28 AM
1

The concept is called 'monkey branching' and it is almost exclusively a dating strategy available to women. Men leaving their wives after falling for a younger woman is common enough to be a trope. The red pill believes that men should never be accountable for their actions, so they claim men don't do it, but that's a lie. It's also absurd to claim that it's a strategy almost exclusively available to women. I "monkey branched" in high school and have had plenty of opportunities to do so in other…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:50 PM
5

But that correlation isn't linear. For example, women with 6-9 premarital partners are less likely to get divorced than women with 2 premarital partners. Having more partners up to a point decreases the probability of a divorce. It's not until you get to 10+ partners that the divorce rate rises above the level of a woman with 2 premarital partners. In reality, that tipping point is likely well above 10, but they've lumped everyone 10+ together, so that bucket includes women with very high counts…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 09:45 PM
1

The fact that you're already planning your hypothetical future casual sex is kind of telling.. it sounds like you aren't really serious about committing to a lifelong relationship such as a traditional marriage. Not planning at all. At this point it's my longest relationship and I don't see any reason why it would end, but hypothetically if it did, I would probably have casual sex again in the future. I'm just self-aware enough to know what I do when I'm single. I hope to not be single again. wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:50 PM
2

An expression that gets used that I happen to agree with is: the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. So take my past behavior as an example. I've been with a much higher number of women than average. Most of them were casual, but that also includes a handful of committed relationships. I've never once cheated in a committed relationship. So if I use that past behavior as a predictor of the future, it's highly unlikely I would cheat on my girlfriend, but very likely that I'll go h…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:10 PM
6

It's a fair point, and I should clarify. Past behavior can help predict future behavior. If a person murdered someone in the past, it's fair to predict that that person is more likely than average to murder someone in the future. Being murdered would absolutely change my future outcomes. I'll apply that same logic to sex. I've been with a much higher number of women than average. Most of them were casual, but that also includes a handful of committed relationships. I've never once cheated in a c…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 05:02 PM
1

I assume most people went to school at some point. If they finished school without meeting someone, then that option was on the table for them but no longer is. Options include: Dating apps Through friends Social settings Social networks Other You could also choose to date coworkers. I know lots of people who have, and most companies only prohibit dating when there's a reporting relationship. If you choose to take that off the table, you just have to accept that it narrows your options. It's wor…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:40 PM
6

The other thing with street interviews is that the denominator is unknown. The creators might interview 50 drunk women and then use the 5 with the most controversial takes. They're meant to be rage bait.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:31 PM
15

It's like asking whether or not someone wants to have children/how many. Not exactly. That's asking a question about the future, not the past. If I lie to the woman I'm dating about the number of women I've slept with and tell her half of the real number, that in no way changes our future outcomes. I do want to know that she's free of STDs before we go raw, because getting an STD would change future outcomes (also fair for her to want to know that from me), but that's the only way sexual past ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 04:28 PM
11

The women you notice get plenty of attention. The men women notice get plenty of attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:08 PM
2

I'm not idealizing anything. There's nothing ideal about the current state. I just think that perhaps lawless anarchy isn't entirely preferable.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:03 PM
4

According to this survey, 27% met through dating apps and 16% met through friends, but meeting through friends was just one of many ways people met through people they know. For example, 23% met through some form of school, which is people the know in an academic setting. Another 10% met through work, which is people they know in a professional setting. Others met as children or through church, which are almost certainly people you know. Networks of people you know can be divided into several ov…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:01 PM
2

You're idealizing the past. Most of human history occurred before organized religion and formalized law. Disputes were handled through brute force. Maybe her brothers got involved if her husband got violent, but maybe her husband and his brothers responded by murdering her whole family. If the husband's family was the largest and strongest in the village, they were able to act with impunity because there was no rule of law.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 12:17 PM
2

You fail to mention that for the vast majority of human history, courtship involved the family and the church. No it didn't. The vast majority of human history happened before the church existed. A lot of mating historically wasn't even consensual. Invading army showed up, killed all the men and boys, then took the women and girls as sex slaves. Genghis Khan didn't sleep with thousands of women because he was a player. He slept with thousands of women because he was a prolific rapist. Most of hu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 02:59 AM
1

Very many redpill dudes walking around wearing crosses and espousing conservative views, but ruthlessly sleeping around and not really committing. So to my previous point, the red pill is anti-commitment. Those men aren't more likely to get married, because as you acknowledged, they don't commit. Makes total sense when they follow an anti-commitment ideology. They are conservatives, unless you want to pull a 'no true Scotsman'. No true Scotsman isn't applicable in the case of hypocrisy. It's lik…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:10 AM
1

The redpill heavily, heavily overlaps with conservative values. The red pill is a hedonistic value system that in no way aligns to conservative values. Having casual sex and spinning plates are not conservative values whatsoever. A conservative value is waiting until marriage for sex or at a minimum only having sex in a committed relationship, which the red pill is inherently against. If you happen to know any practicing Mormons, they're a good example of men with actual conservative values, but…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 10:22 PM
0

Don't conservatives tend to marry more often and have more kids What does conservatism have to do with red pill/blue pill? which is statistically what young men are more likely to want? More likely than who or what?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 08:31 PM
0

Bluepill success stories are from old people or chad it is not applicable in todays age. The average man in the US has sex for the first time at 17. According to every GSS survey this decade, the majority of men 18-29 are having sex at least 2-3 times a month (with many having sex more frequently than that). Those men aren't old. They're Gen Z and the youngest Millennials. The majority of men also can't possibly be Chad. So unless the majority of young men are red pill and successfully applying …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 01:59 PM
-4

Bluepill success stories are literally "my girlfriend goes to another school"-level. Blue pill is just regular mainstream views. The guys who are most successful with women tend to be blue pill. They didn't need the red pill because meeting women came naturally to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 01:47 PM
2

Naw if women naturally come with ease, then no real skill is needed. So, men who learn how to develop skills are the ones that are likely to have actual skill. This post is about the truth of female attraction. The men who understand it best are likely the men who have the most experience with women. It has nothing to do with whether it was learned or natural. Also, that angry incel thing is silly it’s a term that’s thrown around any time a man might be critical of women, especially in regards t…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 12:56 PM
4

They can if the hearsay is from people that are actually successful in the dating game. The men who are most successful in the dating game tend to be blue pill guys who figured it out naturally. As someone who's been successful in the dating game since middle school, I've noticed that most red pillers don't actually want to hear from guys who have been successful. They want to hear from angry incels to reinforce their own beliefs.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 02:56 AM
2

A man that is wont get very much interest, even from other big women. Men and women in the US are overweight at roughly the same rate. Men and women in the US are married or living with a partner at roughly the same rate. (Though men leg women by ~3 years due to age gaps. Half of 26 year old women are married or living with a partner, while half of 29 year old men are married or living with a partner.) Those stats indicate that overweight men and women are finding each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 02:49 AM
1

Link?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 05:27 AM
1

No more delusional than we are my man. Dating apps and social media have changed things. Lots of options today. At the same time I think most people take a balanced approach. No one is ever going to be the best in every single dimension, so they pick the one who’s best in most dimensions.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 04:31 AM
1

Are there any that say it’s bad in women and not in men? Or are you including studies that only looked at women?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 04:30 AM
1

It’s really no different for men. I’ll tell you as someone who’s been with far more women than average, there’s a vast disparity in how good women are in bed. My girlfriend isn’t the best I’ve ever been with in bed, but she’s still really good in bed. That’s one dimension of a relationship but it’s far from everything. I would much rather be with her over some vapid nightmare of a woman who’s marginally better in bed. There’s a threshold and once someone is over that threshold, being incremental…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 03:59 AM
1

Still don’t understand how that relates to casual sex. Say you have two women. The first dates five guys for one year each. The second has five one night stands. One has had casual sex and the other hasn’t, but their odds of encountering a guy with a big dick are the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 03:38 AM
1

Guys with big dicks also sleep with inexperienced women. I get that the probability of encountering a guy with a big dick increases the more times you roll the dice, but plenty of women end up finding one very early on.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 01:18 AM
1

Not sure how casual sex relates to dick size or dead bedrooms.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 01:13 AM
1

Some cases?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/26 12:54 AM
3

Likewise for the women. If she’s highly sought after by men, she doesn’t have to do anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 04:53 AM
2

What do you think will be the result? Fewer people would be in relationships. Right now in the US most women end up married or living with a partner by 26 and most men end up married or living with a partner by 29 (difference due to age gaps). If either men or women collectively raised their standards above market equilibrium, there would just be fewer couples.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 04:47 AM
8

What does success in dating look like for women? For hetero monogamous women, that should mean finding a quality mate to commit to them. Why do you feel entitled to dictate what success should look like for women? Success is achieving whatever a given woman wants to achieve. There were plenty of girls I hooked up with when I was younger who only wanted to keep it casual, including some who rejected me when I tried to make it more than just casual. For them, success was an ongoing casual arrangem…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 05:20 PM
6

Still waiting for someone to claim that high body count results in better outcomes. You're tilting at windmills.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:28 PM
7

If the women responding haven't struggled with dating, why should they be held accountable for a lack of success when they've had success?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:25 PM
29

OP didn't present any data on the topic. Did you ask him the same question? I can't seem to find it anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 03:27 PM
0

Being drunk doesnt excuse most of the other things people do I don't think casual sex requires any excuse. I'm just pointing out that it's mostly drunk people hooking up. This was your quote: If your date isnt willing to have sex with u even after 4 or 5 dates even though she has had one night stands and casual sex in the past, then it is a major indicator she isnt attracted to you. If she only had casual sex while drunk and she always waited to have sex with every other guy, the variable is alc…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 02:11 PM
3

Most women and men screen for vanity metrics first. The options who clear those screens are further screened for compatibility. There's no reason to consider someone you don't want to fuck. That's why vanity metrics matter. You can make a quick assessment and weed out a lot of options. From there, screening for compatibility takes more effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:48 AM
3

Why are you capitalizing random words? It's hard to read.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:45 AM
1

Do you/I have a right to feel like there's a disparity between outcomes taking context into account? Maybe. A girl who's blackout drunk at a frat party is in a very different state than the woman who's had a couple light drinks with you on a first date. There were guys in my frat who managed to hook up with some very drunk girls who were way hotter than any girl they actually dated. Those girls weren't super attracted to those guys. They were just very drunk and shit happened. Not condoning it, …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:40 AM
2

Was she always very drunk in those hookups? Was she generally sober on those 4-5 dates? I've known drunk girls to do things they never would have done sober. That includes ONS, threesomes, making out with another girl, etc. There were guys in my frat who managed to hook up with drunk girls who were way hotter than any girl they ever actually dated and never could have pulled sober. Very drunk guys do the same thing. Blackout drunk people do stupid shit. Just because someone got blackout drunk an…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 04:30 AM
6

I think that perception is skewed by this sub. Most guys here with red pill flair come across as angry about their lack of success with women. I would also argue that most of their content is a lot more black pill or tradcon than than actual red pill, which further drives this perception. In reality, we have no idea who red pill guys are asking for advice irl. It could actually be men who are successful with women, to your point. But online, it often seems like a giant circle jerk of unsuccessfu…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 06:52 PM
1

What you're missing is that a lot of it is contextual. In college, I had drunken hookups with girls I had just met minutes to hours ago. If I had met those same girls when we're both 27 and working together in the same office, I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have been down to fuck in the supply closet an hour after we met. In that scenario, I'm the same guy and the attraction is the same, but the context is different. Sober people who meet at the office aren't operating in the same context as drun…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 05:22 PM
3

Potentially resentment, if she had more casual affairs while he was stuck with standard dating. You're assuming that men with low n counts are never that way by choice. I knew some very good looking guys in my frat who basically had one (very attractive) long-term girlfriend throughout all or most of college. Those guys would get hit on and had plenty of opportunities for casual sex, but they were monogamous. A few cheated but most didn't. While men in general prefer variety, some prefer monogam…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 02:45 PM
4

Men want sex (and sexual variety) more than women You're taking generalities and trying to apply them to every single relationship. In general, men prefer more sexual variety than women, but that doesn't apply to 100% of men or 100% of women. If a man strongly prefers monogamy, there's nothing wrong with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 02:40 PM
4

Why do people on here think it's "insecurity" for a man to want a woman he's dating to be attracted to him? Where is anyone saying that it's insecure for a person to want their partner to be attracted to them? Any examples of it?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 02:26 PM
1

Taken has nothing to do with n count. There was a guy in my frat, really good looking guy (looks like a 6'4 Scandinavian model) who met his 10/10 girlfriend at the beginning of freshman year. They were together throughout college and still are today. Girls hit on him constantly, even though a lot of them knew he had a girlfriend. But I'm also guessing he had an n count of 2 (high school girlfriend and college girlfriend). Girls didn't hit on him because of his high n count, because he didn't hav…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 02:23 PM
5

And the results make perfect sense. Any man who's dated a lot of women know that women can be just as possessive as men. Of course women prefer a 10/10 guy who's all theirs to one who's promiscuous. I've noticed a lot of guys here really struggle with cause vs. effect, especially guys who don't have a lot of experience with women. Desirable men rack up high n counts because they're desirable. They're not desirable because of their high n counts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:18 PM
8

high body count men are undesirable That's supported by studies and is completely intuitive. All else equal, women prefer men with low n count over men with high n count. However, women strongly prefer high-mate-value (i.e., attractive) men with high n count over low-mate-value (i.e., unattractive) men with low n count. In other words, attractiveness is far more important than n count when it comes to a man's desirability. Among men of the same mate value, women prefer a man with lower n count, …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 08:14 PM
7

You're conflating cause and effect. If women desire you, you will never have a problem finding sex or a relationship, which makes it easy to rack up a high n count.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:54 PM
0

In that case, pretty much every relationship starts as casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 07:53 PM
1

Because saying "I want sex" will get people dumping you not even because the feeling isn't mutual, but because it demonstrates extreme lack of social awareness and tact. If you use those exact words, then yeah it's an issue. But if a woman asks you what you're looking for and you say "I'm not looking for anything serious" or something to that effect, it works fine.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:47 PM
0

I don't think there's much consensus on that. To me that's just normal dating, but some people think any sex outside of a committed relationship is casual sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:38 PM
1

Where did she say the guys are Chads? Most guys I know aren’t Chads, but they still prefer women who don’t make them wait around for sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/26 09:07 PM
2

If a guy has a 10/10 girlfriend and other attractive women hit on him regularly, he likely knows he’s desirable.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 10:04 PM
1

I work in finance and I know plenty of people who have dated coworkers, including some who are now living with or engaged to those same coworkers. This is all in the past 5-6 years. Most companies don't have a policy against dating other employees unless there's a reporting relationship. That's obviously something you want to avoid completely.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 02:26 PM
1

no one sees the full catalog That's 100% speculation. In a small town with a few hundred people on dating apps, it's almost certain that everyone sees everyone. You see the people who are deemed the "best" first, but you'll see everyone, then you'll run out of people to swipe on very quickly. In a big city, most people can't swipe through all their options, and the algorithm determines the order in which you see people. Personally, I appreciate that, because I live in NYC and didn't want to see …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:21 AM
-1

No proof of that. 100% speculation.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:16 AM
1

So what's your point? The point is, you're introducing a confounding variable. You're asking whether a good person or bad person would be better at dating, so you've created a scenario with two twins -- one good and one bad. That part makes sense. But then you throw in another variable by saying that one twin is shy while the other isn't. That other variable has nothing to do with whether someone is good or bad, but you've added it in an attempt to skew the responses to your question. If you wan…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/26 05:13 AM
–

Not sure exactly. Probably around a couple hours.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 08:11 PM
1

We went out for drinks. I agree with you that's just normal dating, but I've had other people claim that any sex outside of a committed relationship is casual.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 03:34 PM
–

What's an example of a rage bait study that the RP posts?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 02:51 PM
4

That sort of depends on how you define casual sex. My girlfriend and I met on a dating app and were both looking for/open to a relationship. We had sex on our first date and now we've been together for a year and a half. So was that casual sex or is it not casual because things ended up working out between us? Or just because we were dating with the intent of finding a relationship? If things hadn't worked out between us, would the answer be different? I think people have varying views on what c…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 02:47 PM
8

Getting casual sex doesn't require lying. Lying is just going to cause drama, especially if you date within your social circle. Beyond lying, even not being explicit that you only want casual can cause drama. Early in college, I hooked up with a couple girls who got mad and talked shit about me when I told them I wanted to keep things casual after we had hooked up. In both cases we met when we were drunk and hooked up that night without ever discussing what we wanted. In my mind, there's no expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/26 02:42 PM
2

You know how women behave if they’re attracted to you lol. They just do not fucking care At a macro level, you're right. Women generally don't care about n count if they think you're hot. Men are actually the same way. Looks are far more important than n count for both genders. Both men and women strongly prefer a high-mate-value (i.e., attractive) partner with high n count to a low-mate-value (i.e., unattractive) partner with a low n count. The desirability scores are driven much more by attrac…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 01:42 PM
–

Putin disagrees with you and says the Soviet Union was historical Russia under a different name. He calls the breakup of the Soviet Union the "greatest geopolitical catastrophe" of the 20th and was a KGB officer for the Soviet Union. Russia inherited the vast majority of the Soviet Union's military and intelligence, as well as associated doctrines. When Russia's dictator claims the the Soviet Union was Russia, it's a pretty good indication that the change is nothing more than a rebranding. That'…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 09:42 PM
8

I think it comes down to the definition of "incel". In this context, I think you're just referring to men who are involuntarily celibate and peacefully going about their lives. Women generally aren't judging those men or even thinking about them. Often those men aren't even on women's radar, which likely contributes to their celibacy. When women judge incels, I believe they're typically referencing the involuntarily celibate men who spew misogynistic rants online, call for raping women, etc. And…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 06:27 PM
2

yes, theres women who care, whoever they arent vocal about it The men who are most vocal about it tend to be guys who want to have casual sex but haven't been successful. The guys who want to have casual sex and have been successful are far less vocal. There aren't many women who want to have casual sex but haven't been successful, given supply/demand imbalances between the genders.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 02:35 PM
1

Maybe it's about rejection for some, but I also think it's paradox of choice for a lot of people. Dating apps have made it easier than ever to meet a large volume of new options on a consistent basis. It can be hard to walk away from that to be exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 02:17 PM
3

I think that if I asked an early 20s woman in NYC to be exclusive on our third date (even if we had already slept together), she would look at me like I'm crazy. Culturally it's just not the expectation and I think it would be seen as clingy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 02:11 PM
2

I don't have an opinion on right vs. wrong. I'm just stating what I've observed to be the norm (at least in a large US city).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 12:49 PM
5

In my view, a committed relationship is when two people have agreed to be exclusive, which almost never happens by the third date. Sex typically comes before exclusivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 12:42 PM
9

Doesn't seem that crazy. I consider it a relationship if the couple has agreed to be exclusive. I had seven relationships from 16 to 26 (two in high school, three in college, two after college), even though I spent the majority of the time single and went through long stretches of only doing casual. If someone isn't open to casual, it's easy to see how they could have 10 relationships in a decade. Relationships tend to be short in high school and college.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 03:49 AM
3

I would argue that someone isn’t really a stranger after a few dates. That’s why the three date rule is a thing. Most people get to know someone well enough by the third date. Even first date sex is very different from a straight up hookup/NSA situation. With a first date, you meet the person in a public setting, get to know them a bit, then you can decide whether you go home together. True sex with a stranger is more like going straight to someone’s place who you met on a dating app. It’s somet…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 02:30 AM
9

I think you’re missing the most common one, which is sex by the third date. It’s the middle ground between sex only in a committed relationship and sex with a stranger who you just met on tinder and invited over. It seems to be the most common way of dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 12:10 AM
5

I’m not sure how to categorize that, or how common it is to wait a month for online dating It doesn’t have to be online dating. It could be two people who met through common friends at a party. It could be two people who work at the same company and start dating just after they meet. It could be two people who met at a coffee shop. Online dating is the most common way to meet, but only around 30% of recent marriages originated from online dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 12:06 AM
0

how would you know whether you were allowed to or not unless you wanted to? Wanted to and attempted to with this woman. Like did the guy in this scenario ask to just hook up and keep things casual? If not then he has no idea whether the woman would have said yes. This guy seems fixated on a very specific scenario where he meets a woman and asks her to just have casual sex. Then she says no but agrees to date him and eventually becomes his girlfriend. It’s an oddly specific scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 07:29 PM
3

He doesn't have to be fine with it. Not getting the option to reject it himself is still problematic. But if he’s not okay with casual sex, then he’s not going to seek casual sex. A guy who never attempts to find casual sex because it’s something he objects to can’t really claim to be locked out. You don’t know whether the door is locked until you try to open it, which he never did. If the guy tried and failed, that means he was okay with casual sex and is more compatible with women who are also…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 07:22 PM
2

But his own girlfriend also not allowing him to do something she did with others His girlfriend doesn’t allow him to do what? If she’s his girlfriend, then she’s obviously more than just a hookup. I’ve had lots of hookups, but my girlfriend is my girlfriend. She isn’t just a hookup because we’re in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 06:59 PM
1

In my experience, plenty of attractive women are very easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 03:45 PM
2

Based the wording “locked out”, it sounds like the guy in this scenario is fine with casual sex but never got to try it. In terms of compatibility, his attitude towards sex is consistent with others who are okay with casual sex, regardless of whether or not they ever engaged in it. So it depends on why his girlfriend never had casual sex. If she also tried and failed, then they’re compatible. Their attitudes towards sex are similar. They’re both promiscuous people, regardless of the lack of succ…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 03:42 PM
2

Why is that specific scenario an L? If a guy wanted to experience hookups and never did, that sounds like the L to me. What anyone else, including his girlfriend, did seems sort of irrelevant. The core issue is that he wanted to experience hookup culture and didn’t. That issue doesn’t go away if his girlfriend has never hooked up.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 03:27 PM
–

But you can’t say that something is prevalent for that reason either. That’s what OP is doing when he says he’s noticed everywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 12:42 AM
0

That's why I said "or". If you're approaching, then the most attractive women you have success with are roughly your league. If you're being approached, then the most attractive women who approach you are roughly your league.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 05:17 AM
-3

I've had lots of girls approach me or DM me, which helped give a sense for my league. Most of the time it was girls who were less attractive, because most people aren't attractive, but sometimes they were very attractive. The most attractive women that approach you are roughly your league. That was my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:58 AM
–

And men here do the exact same thing to be fair. It's reddit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:41 AM
4

What was her cut?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:36 AM
0

males have to approach both upwards and downwards of their own desirability to get a sense of who their match could be Or observe who approaches them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:15 AM
11

His scenario is extremely specific, so yeah, that's fairly rare. But more generally, there are plenty of highly attractive guys who are monogamous. I had a bunch of good looking guys in my frat who spent most of their college years in relationships (with very attractive girls). They would absolutely get hit on and had opportunities with other girls, but they were monogamous. It's not that uncommon. Casual sex can be validating, but it's not the only way to know you're desirable. If you have a 10…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 08:53 PM
4

Most women say they would not have hooked up with their husbands or boyfriends Where are most women saying that? For most of my friends who are in relationships, those relationships started as hookups. So not only would those women have hooked up with their boyfriend, they did hook up with their boyfriend. Every relationship I had from 18 through my early 20s started as a hookup. Hookup guys and relationships guys aren't two distinct groups, and sometimes they're not even distinct for an individ…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 08:45 PM
0

A lot of the casual sex I've had was because I was in the right place at the right time. The right place is typically somewhere where alcohol is served, and it's the right time for a subset of the women in that place. Almost 90% of sex with strangers involves a woman who's been drinking and over 60% involve a woman who's been binge drinking. Some additional % involve a woman who's been using other intoxicants. If you're socially active and frequently in settings where alcohol is served, you'll l…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 08:36 PM
6

OP seems to think that if he declares that this goomba fallacy isn’t a goomba fallacy, then it somehow isn’t one. Unless the same woman is crying about being approached and also complaining about to being approached, it’s not cognitive dissonance or hypocrisy. Maybe he has examples of the same woman doing both, but he doesn’t provide any. To your point, that would be an extremely rare combination.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/26 05:57 PM
1

Knowing that hvm expect to have sex by 3/4 dates Nearly everyone in the US has sex by the third date. The "three date rule" is a very real and pervasive thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/26 03:38 AM
–

It is interesting that some men maintain that sex is 'just pleasure' or 'just carnal' while also placing so much worth, emotional security, and sense of identity onto it. Perhaps there are differing views in a world of 4 billion men.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:08 PM
1

Men will string certain women along and commit to others But OP says the man has committed in this scenario. They're exclusive and he calls her his girlfriend, but only views her as temporary. It's a weird scenario. If the guy could actually do better, he would already be doing better and not committing to this woman. But for some reason, he's decided to be exclusive with her for now and thinks he'll somehow be able to do better in the future. It feels like a very niche case.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/02/26 05:05 PM
5

I've never strung a woman along. I've had casual relationships like fwbs, but those were always explicitly nonexclusive. I don't really see the point of having a "temporary girlfriend" and doubt it's that common. If the guy could do better than a given woman, he would probably already be with that better option. People tend to go for the best option they can get.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 11:56 PM
9

Exactly. It's no different than going to a dinner with coworkers, clients, etc. Sometimes it's interesting, other times it's not, but you use basic social skills and remain polite.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:49 PM
2

It doesn't matter if she wants the D absolutely or conditionally. I think she's saying in this case she doesn't want it at all. She wants companionship and is willing to have sex with a man who she has absolutely no desire for in order to get what she wants. She doesn't want his body or D at all and may actually be repulsed by it. It seems like a fringe case that's not representative of most relationships, but I think that's the scenario she's describing. In the vast majority of cases, there's m…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:15 PM
2

So there's a few thousand pro athletes at any one time. If a pro athelete was doom swiping on Tinder, it's possible that they could match with an average woman. There are some ugly pro athletes too.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:13 AM
10

I'm no Brad Pitt, but if an average 5'4 170 lbs American woman hit me up on instagram, that would be a very easy no. My girlfriend is a much, much better option. Even when I was single, I always had options that were much, much better than the average woman. Sleeping with an average woman one night would mean forgoing sex with a much more attractive women. Contrary to popular belief here, most men won't pick a significantly less attractive option over other readily available options.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:07 AM
–

Most people want an attractive partner, but most people aren't attractive. So most settle for an average partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 12:45 AM
0

When I have swiped IRL in real time with girl friends they literally gloss over guys they have passed their checklist: taller than her, doctor, same race, same age, not too far. Pass for some random fucking reason like he was at "this" restaurant. That's because picking dating options is subjective and goes way beyond the bare minimum requirements of a checklist. As a guy who swipes left over 97% of the time, I can tell you the "checklist" is just determines whether you're going to get evaluated…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 10:19 PM
1

he met her to get laid. men tend to enjoy sexual variety and even very attractive men don't have very attractive women lined up 24/7 willing to sleep with them casually. Yes they do. If a man has to sleep with average looking women to find easy casual sex, he's not all that attractive. This wasn't always the case, but it is in the age of dating apps and social media. Based on my Tinder data, I swiped right a little under 3% and matched about 22% of the time I swiped right. I don't have my data f…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 09:32 PM
16

I think a lot of men confuse the average woman with the average woman they see on instagram.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 03:37 PM
–

Half of American men have had sex by 17.2 years old. The vast majority have had sex by 20. Those men can’t all be attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 12:10 PM
–

Huh? I just started being explicit if I was only open to casual to avoid drama. Everything else about myself remained the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 11:59 AM
–

There were a couple girls I hooked up with freshman year of college who had reactions to me just wanting casual. In both cases we were drunk when we met and hooked up that night without ever discussing intentions. There was no lying because there was never any discussion. We made out and a party and went home together. That was it. After that I started being very explicit when I only wanted casual. I haven’t experienced that issue since.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:33 AM
–

It really is important to keep your intentions obscured when dating as a man. Disagree. In my experience that just causes drama. I feel like putting short term fun on my tinder profile did a good job of filtering out women who weren’t okay with casual. So even if my match volume was slightly lower, it’s still more efficient, because you don’t spend as much time messaging matches that aren’t going to meet.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 07:02 AM
5

Twice? I don’t think I know anyone who’s waited more than a couple dates to have sex, let alone waited while the other person maintained a fwb. Shows the disparity from one social circle to another.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/26 12:03 AM
3

Yes, should have clarified I’m talking about the US. If you’re in a country that’s very different from the US, you obviously might have a very different experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 03:15 PM
6

Daily reminder: high bodycount women are more likely to cheat and divorce you than women with lower n. Women or people?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 08:18 AM
4

You’re unlikely to be anyone’s best in every conceivable category, even if they’ve only been with a couple partners. There are also degrees of settling when it comes to sex. In my view, if you think someone is outstanding in bed and you consistently want to have sex with them, then it’s not all the important that they aren’t the absolute best you’ve ever had. It’s sort of splitting hairs at some point. Entirely different story if they’re bad in bed or even not good. That would be problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 01:15 AM
3

Outside of Mormons, conservative Muslims, and ultra-orthodox Jewish communities, you’re not likely to find an adult virgin woman. The women in those communities will typically only marry you if you’re of their same religion.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/26 01:08 AM
3

Wouldn’t it make sense then for women to preferrelationships with the most sexually satisfying man they’ve ever experienced? On the surface, that concept makes sense, but sex is just one element of a relationship. I’ve been with 50+ women and my girlfriend isn’t the absolute best in bed I’ve ever experienced. She’s really, really good, but there are a couple others that stand out. But there’s a reason I’m not with those other women. They weren’t women that I would want to spend my life with. I w…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:24 PM
2

You going to convert to Mormonism for her?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:17 PM
10

Women, even if you successfully delude a man into thinking past doesn’t matter, deep down it always will on a subconscious level. Why is this directed towards women? They care about men’s pasts just as much as men care about women’s.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:16 PM
3

Men and women have roughly the same amount of options for relationships. They’re 1:1 so every time a woman gets a relationship a man gets one too. There are billions of meh women in relationships with meh men. Most people are meh.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/26 01:08 PM
6

The wiki isn't incorrect. That's how the term is defined in this debate sub. Debate is pointless if everyone can make up whatever definitions they want for any term. Without definitions, it's just people talking past each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 07:34 PM
1

If he can't regularly get top 5% women to just hookup without any effort beyond sending a few messages on a dating app, he's not Chad. Full stop.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 10:17 PM
1

If he can't get easy sex from attractive women, he's definitely not Chad. That' my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/26 08:27 PM
4

That makes sense that you know plenty of guys who didn't have sex in high school. We don't have the exact data, but given 50% of men have sex by 17.2 years old, I'm guessing somewhere around 30-40% haven't had sex by the time they graduate (usually at 18 years old). That's a lot of guys who aren't having sex and it makes sense someone could know a lot of them, but the median guy has had sex by 17.2.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 07:25 PM
3

A lot of relationships start as hookups. In college most of my hookups didn't turn into relationships, but all of my relationships started as hookups. When that happens, it's both people catching feelings. I also had a couple hookups where i wanted more and they only wanted casual. It happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 07:21 PM
2

If you're a woman, sleeping with a man almost always means that you want a relationship with him. That absolutely hasn't been my experience, especially in the younger age group like 18-22.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 07:18 PM
3

I think it likely depends on your social network. Most of my friends in high school had sex by the time we let for college. In college I knew maybe one guy who hadn't had sex by the end of freshman year. So everyone has their anecdotes, but the stats are probably more helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 07:13 PM
5

Keep in mind that median age of virginity loss for American men is 17.2 years old. That means the majority of 17 year old guys have had sex, including the average 50th percentile guy. How many of those guys go on to marry the girl they slept with at 17? The overwhelming majority go on to date and sleep with other women. Most of those guys probably aren't even still with the first girl they slept with when they graduate from high school.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:47 PM
2

But is this hypothetical man making it clear that a relationship is the goal? Or is he too scared to be forward and befriends her instead. My approach has been pretty simple. I've had a lot of female friends over the years, but I've never befriended women I wanted to sleep with. If that's what I wanted, then I shot my shot. Sometimes it worked and sometimes it didn't. If it didn't I just moved on. But I never heard a woman reject me and say "let's be friends instead".
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 06:32 PM
2

Pretty much all I learned on Tinder was how to leverage looks and realize the woman I’m talking to is a woman less/equally attractive as I am that chose me because she’s ovulating & horny, instead of a woman more attractive than me that considers me “relationship material” I guess I haven't necessarily seen that same pattern. A couple of the most attractive women I've ever slept with were from Tinder and both of those were basically just hookups. Some of the other best looking women were girls I…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 02:18 PM
–

I went to college 2016-2020, and it's hard for me to imagine a better dating environment. Post college was fine, but college was the best.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:21 AM
2

Edited for you bud.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 04:13 AM
2

Why are you asking women? As a man I could give you a list of things women have done wrong, Women who do things wrong likely don't know that they're wrong. You're basically asking a fish how to catch fish here.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 03:59 AM
2

Oh.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 03:51 AM
3

Just that men will fuck a woman much less attractive than the least attractive woman they are willing to commit to. Some men will, but it depends on how easily he can get casual sex. I'll give my perspective as a guy who has always managed to get casual sex easily. Based on my tinder data, I swipe right a little under 3% of the time and match 22% of the time I swipe right. It's probably similar on other apps, but I don't have the data. That would typically give me around 25-35 matches in a week,…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 01:52 AM
7

26% of women and 28% of men consider themselves above average. Most women don't think they're above average, let alone top 10%. The results for both women and men form reasonable bell curves.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 01:26 AM
4

The dilemma being presented is that a 6/10 woman will chase a 9/10 Chad who is willing to sleep with her but not commit, while ignoring her 6/10 "looksmatch" who would commit. If a guy has to sleep with a 6/10 woman, he's not a Chad by definition. In the age of instagram and dating apps, there's literally never a night when a top 5% woman isn't available with little to no effort. I'll make an exception for a guy in a really small town with very limited options, but if a guy in a big city has to …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 12:01 AM
2

Women and men both prefer lower n count partners. https://www.psypost.org/new-body-count-study-reveals-how-sexual-history-shapes-social-perceptions/ https://www.psypost.org/new-study-identifies-the-ideal-number-of-sexual-partners-according-to-social-norms/ https://web.archive.org/web/20250325155841/https://www.uncp.edu/sites/default/files/purc/posters/courtney_britt.pdf I've been rejected for a relationship a by a girl in college because she thought I was a fockboi based on my body count. She wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 11:12 PM
1

Sure, in a world of 8 billion people there are exceptions to every rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 04:46 PM
2

He has no decency, no self-respect, he's a nobody. To add to that, he's never even given her an orgasm. Not sure what this guy has going for him.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:19 PM
1

And not just in modern times. Assuming we're not talking about arranged/forced marriages, conventionally attractive women have always paired up with conventionally attractive men. Those conventionally attractive men typically don't struggle with girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:17 PM
29

trying to pretend like you can decide if someone is “kind, caring, attentive, humble, etc etc etc” is meaningless on a first date. One date isn’t enough to determine that someone is all those things, but it can be enough to determine that a person isn’t those things. I’ve had some first dates where enough red flags were flying that there was no reason for a second date. Like okay she’s hot but has nothing else going for her. So really to start vetting on the first date, then you vet more on the …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:40 AM
–

Most men certainly don’t know what it’s like to sleep with someone they’re utterly attracted to either. Attractive people are rare and typically selective. The vast majority of people settle for people who aren’t attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:21 AM
–

So you’re saying if you were to significantly lower your standards, then paid attention to that woman for a month, she would almost certainly be willing to have sex. That night be true, but what would be the point? Sounds like a significant time commitment to sleep with a woman I’m not interested in sleeping with.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:19 AM
–

You may not be attractive to everyone, but you will almost certainly be attractive to everyone healthy who “looks like her” within 3 hours of hanging out alone with them (about equivalent to one date). You can leverage this pretty hard. I think you’re underestimating how variable success can be with different comparably attractive women. I downloaded my tinder data and it showed I swiped right a little less than 3%. That means all those women were within three percentiles of each other. I matche…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 12:03 AM
3

I pretty much agree with that. I’m not sure what I would actually change that can be changed. I could say “magically make more women want to use dating apps”, but I can’t really think of anything major realistic changes that would improve the user experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 11:17 PM
2

Might just depend on your social circle. The majority of my friends in LTRs met their girlfriends on apps, so 30% actually sounds low. But it’s probably better than my anecdotal experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 10:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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