TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

theother-side Archive

View 5 posts and 539 comments by theother-side on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

for people who like Frank Ocean and the soul revival happening rn
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/17 10:20 PM
1

a lot of women that I know end up dating guys who look exactly like their father, which is...weird?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 12:23 AM
3

like it's been posted before, sluts are typically good LTR candidates for 'the elusive Chad Thundercock.' they have similar experiences, mindset and normally, they've both been part of whatever Alpha Pi Alpha Gamma Beta fraternity/sorority. 'the elusive Chad Thundercock' won't delve into her sexual history, and he won't be repulsed if he finds a 50+ partner count. but i don't think they're good LTR candidates for others for a variety of reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/17 01:25 AM
1

here's the problem with that: acting masculine or feminine is optional. being black or Hispanic is not. people who find that they're being judged according to others implicit biases are going to change because it's beneficial. you cannot change skin color.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/09/17 01:14 AM
1

but we'll still hold positive associations for masculine and feminine traits, just like we still hold implicit bias for structural race.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 07:52 PM
1

what is it determined by in this ideal social system of yours? and what are your politics?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 07:39 PM
1

yeah, you can be forgiven for believing that humans are inherently good and altruistic or whatever...but my point-of-view is basically that any social system inevitably ends in a tangible social hierarchy with insiders and outsiders, winners and losers. you can switch out patriarchy with 'egalitarianism' or you can replace it outright with 'matriarchy' or whatever you want. but these tend to follow the same exact patterns historically -- who wins, who loses -- it very rarely changes. given the h…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 07:30 PM
1

by those standards, there are very few places in the world where you could easily study the effects of progressive politics. even France and the Nordic countries have heavy neo-reactionary streaks. if anything, the state separatist approach we have in the U.S. enables an easier look into regional/political differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 07:16 PM
1

New York and California are probably the most competitive, socially hierarchical states in the U.S. Massachusetts has always been extremely entrenched in social hierarchy. while they might be 'socially liberal' they're filled with, uhh, yuppies? people who live in progressive states thrive on status, competition, exercise, etc. this is basically New Yorkers and Californians to me Oregon is the one state where 'deconstructing the patriarchy' might actually yield some tangible results, but you'd h…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 06:59 PM
1

that's not the point, you're just twisting the point into an entirely different subject matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 06:54 PM
1

But can only really be tested by actually 'deconstructing the patriarchy' personally I'm all for it. anecdotal results in progressive states are not positive
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 06:21 PM
1

but it's not irrelevant, because if female sexual strategy determines or plays into social hierarchy or plays a large role in determining social/hierarchical status or plays upon it, then deconstructing the surroundings wouldn't be enough. which is why i said if you want to redefine masculinity, you have to redefine mating selection. but women seem to have exactly zero interest in doing that, so the whole thing is some weird exercise in moral masturbation
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 06:14 PM
1

You're making the assumption that the sexual dynamics had been different (or more egalitarian) prior to any rules being set in place by 'the patriarchy.' And you seem to be making a jump in stating essentially that women didn't have any immediate role in the creation of 'the patriarchy.' edit: and while I get the point of that last post, my reply primarily concerns the origin of patriarchal mechanisms and patriarchy as an institution -- if they're both heavily associated with female sexual strat…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 05:45 PM
1

well I'm not OP, so
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 05:28 PM
1

Because there's the question of origin. For example Steven Taylor argues that the rise of patriarchal domination was associated with the appearance of socially stratified hierarchical polities Socially stratified hierarchy and sexual dynamics go hand in hand
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 05:27 PM
1

problem apparently is that i've been hearing more of the 'college feminist' interpretation of patriarchy, not the PPD interpretation.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 03:06 AM
1

semantics, see the chain of /u/whiskersNT talking about patriarchy
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 03:00 AM
1

you mean the United Kingdom in the 1600s? but yes, patriarchy exists primarily because women have tended to mate with more masculine, dominating/forceful, physically powerful men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 02:59 AM
2

what's really weird to me is how you constantly reinforce your points by referencing internet geek culture, without realizing that people on Reddit aren't exclusively 'nerdy nerd 4chan users' seems like you're taking kind of an ad hominem approach rather than actually addressing issues
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 02:10 AM
2

women create 'patriarchy' if you want to redefine masculinity, you have to redefine mating selection. but women seem to have exactly zero interest in doing that, so the whole thing is some weird exercise in moral masturbation
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 02:08 AM
2

wow big surprise
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:59 AM
3

nope, school social settings and talking to young feminist women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:56 AM
2

lol I've never been on 4chan and I don't go on any of those sites, all of my experience comes from real-life encounters with young feminist women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:55 AM
2

maybe on here, I have never (or very rarely) heard that perspective outside of PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:50 AM
1

once again, that is my point
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:40 AM
2

don't know if you meant to respond to me or not but that's literally the point i'm trying to make, seems as though it's been misinterpreted by a few users
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:38 AM
1

uhh nobody did. i'm arguing that exact point.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:36 AM
1

yeah, I remember her career really taking off around '06-'07. just constantly plays up the tits and her attractiveness, she's very abrasive and loud as well which takes a few points off for me. but yeah, just look up Chelsea Handler on Google Images and you'll see 90% of her career is based around her being topless and talking about sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:34 AM
0

*toxic humanity has given us wars, pillage, rape and bloodshed. ftfy
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:29 AM
1

don't women enforce 'real men do X or Y' as much as men do, if not moreso?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:27 AM
1

I think she's attractive but I'm enormously turned off by the fact that she's built her entire career off of being somewhat hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:23 AM
2

I'd like it to be, but given how involved Russia is becoming in the area and our previous involvement, I highly doubt we just back out of the influence/oil game. Breaking Saudi/Iraq/Israel backing would be a big move in itself and that's what we'd have to do to shift out responsibility
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 01:00 AM
1

Iran is more worrying, IMO. Tensions in Middle East are going to skyrocket
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/17 12:48 AM
11

Sounds like a made-up story.
/r/MGTOW22/09/17 11:50 PM
1

god your tag really is not a joke is it
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 10:26 PM
1

OK, see -- this is where it gets a little ridiculous and I guess subjective. Kit Harrington looks like Heath Ledger. Neither of them are very 'feminine' -- they just have long hair. Bob Dylan is a fairly feminine looking man.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/17 10:20 PM
1

yeah I would honestly have no clue, it's not something i'm very observant of.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 07:47 PM
2

yeah I guess I don't really think of eyebrow shape as a dimorphic physical feature
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 07:41 PM
1

It's really just beyond my scope of vision to spend a good amount of time like bugging and making fun of them. I just don't get it -- plain and simple. I rarely see any violent or serious 'woe-is-me' incels on here and I just don't check out the /r/incels sub because I have zero reason to. Why concern yourself so much with what they're doing? edit: oh and by the way, the last 'but he did it too' point had zero to do with the first couple sentences
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 07:39 PM
7

lol right? Cristiano Ronaldo is feminine because he wears earrings even though he's literally an all-time great athlete with a very masculine face? come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 06:52 PM
2

am I really the only one who WTF'd at Tsarnaev's inclusion on this list?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 06:43 PM
1

Ever seen the schlubs at /r/IncelTears? That's a sad, sad group -- almost as sad as the actual /r/incels sub. I can't imagine what it takes to get on a subreddit to actively insult people worse-looking, with worse upbringings, whatever, because they're gasp venting frustration on an online forum. And as far as the "But he did it, too!" deflection -- it seemed like the point was that 'hateful speech' can be very broadly defined and it's very difficult to not engage in some form of hateful speech,…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 06:41 PM
1

I mean, you have a few segments of Red Pill -- those who follow Rollo and Rational Male and read every post on the front page every day, reading the sidebar like the Old Testament or...the ones who just understand the tenets, have seen it all of their life and use it as a tool for self-improvement and understanding. Not really 'crushing individuality' by any means, but you have a great habit for spinning some random thing and taking it to completely different territory.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/17 04:59 AM
2

My guess is that the author was emphasizing the disconnect between what is found to be attractive in men versus what the modern job market is designed for. And also that psychological effects from decreased workforce representation and the 'non-male attitudes' of the modern workforce will inevitably result in a male backlash (like Red Pill).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 08:42 PM
2

very good description, props to you
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 08:19 PM
3

Again a lot of these people are forced either into 'following their own beliefs' or 'being homeless.' No one is asking for permission. There's a very real choice here that determines the outcome of someone's life. It is, once again, very, very easy to sit on the outside and state that they should just do what they want to do. The point is that there's a statistical gap between what men want to do and what they're forced to do to live. What they actually do is not the problem. A good proportion o…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 08:09 PM
1

I'm not sure what the point of this reply is. This is more of a sociological/economics post where s/he's outlining how men are inclined towards blue-collar work which is incompatible with the modern world. But women are still inclined sexually towards a larger, blue-collar man, silent, somewhat repressed man. Men are raised as one thing in adolescence and are now expected to be the opposite in adulthood because average white-collar jobs have tendencies towards female attributes. Management posit…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 07:36 PM
4

A lot of it holds true. Men are also expected to be very involved in physical, strenuous activities which can cut away from academic learning. But the biggest motivating factor is always female choice, which continuously leans (heavily) towards the male as described in the above post -- even as the model becomes somewhat outdated for the modern age. Essential 'male jobs' are also being increasingly shipped out of the country. People who worked in factories for a $90-120K salary are being shifted…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 07:18 PM
2

it's so frustrating debating the moving targets on here. every single user has their own definition. of everything. wow it's almost like real life
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 06:28 PM
1

No, but that's how you want to interpret it so I don't see how I'm going to change your mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 01:51 AM
1

identity politics, cultural relativism, and post-modernism. these are all terribly divisive for anybody seeking to maintain or build class consciousness and cohesion.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 11:37 PM
1

Yes it did. Women date people of their attractiveness level and above, sometimes below but not often. They can trade up more because they have more opportunity to do so. Switch the thirst around and it's the same scenario. Trading up isn't like a video game with levels. People have different attributes and what a woman wants one day can be totally separate from what she wants the next day. Same for men. More opportunity is the driving force.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 11:35 PM
1

Did you even read the first paragraph
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 11:20 PM
2

The idea is that people aren't reliable. Women have more options. They can move up at almost any time. Football player at the store throw her a glance? Meets a musician at a concert? We meet so many people on any given day, especially if you live in a large city. It's a given that there are days when she'll come home and you'll be a downgrade. If a supermodel or an actress randomly threw me a look at the grocery store while I'm getting food for home, you think it doesn't cross my mind? Come on. …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 10:59 PM
2

He said he wasn't messaging them because he used Tinder Plus to gauge his options in other places. His frame is kinda small and he made a ten-minute video talking about getting Tinder matches. I'd assume that the reason he doesn't get laid is lack of social awareness (doesn't read signals), probably a bit below-average height-wise, his living situation and being both deferential and a bit rambling. He's got kind of a 'momma's boy' look which could potentially be off-putting. I'd think he does be…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 10:46 PM
1

Haha yup. Want to control people? Religion has no comparison. Despite being atheist/agnostic, I've begun to slowly advocate for religion because unrestrained humanity is pretty bleak in comparison. We've hardly changed our nature at all. Most people aren't shitty, just human. And the human animal is selfish for good reason too. I think we've changed a good deal. Put Justin Bieber, Zayn Malik out into the West in the 1900s and watch them flounder. Things have actually changed quite a bit since th…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 09:17 PM
1

What's your solution? We need more war to kill off the stupid and weak masses. I don't have a solution, I think we need a major event to reshape the way modern people think and act. There's a good Buk quote that goes: "The problem with these people is that their cities have never been b*mbed and their mothers have never been told to shut up." If humans weren't human, then, lol Yeah, well, we've changed a lot in the past hundred-fifty years or so -- I don't really put it outside the boundaries of…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 09:00 PM
2

My dad looked like a young Marlon Brando in his prime, I look like a cross between Harry Dean Stanton and Dennis Hopper.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 08:38 PM
1

Eh. The oceans are dying and there's a mass extinction taking place. I have faith in humanity's resilience, or else it deserves extinction too. I generally get your viewpoint. Been there. Done that. Don't really care anymore. Do you? Because you seem to be ignoring the basic point of it. Humans have selected for the best individual genetics for tens of thousands of years because collective-growth wasn't en-masse -- we didn't reproduce at the rates we do now. Exponential growth in birth rates mea…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 08:18 PM
2

Well, the American-Indian wars and the entire Jacksonian era were genocidal in nature. Most wars are genocidal by strict definition, but I'll limit to specific targeting of an ethnic population for political purposes and to advancing the welfare of a separate ethnic population at expense of many lives from the targeted population. The United States provided military support and covert ops. to the 1965 Indonesian mass-killings (somewhere between 500,000 and a million dead), supported the Trujillo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 08:08 PM
1

Interjecting to state that the U.S absolutely, unequivocally has carried out genocide in the past and continues to do so under veiled means and through political proxies. And acting like eugenics is a thing of the past is pretty unhealthy, too. The eugenics mindset in the States is still very, very strong.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 07:12 PM
7

can confirm, my entire family is very attractive and i'm like...a 6 on a good day.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 07:00 PM
2

How can we be overpopulated and underfed if population is driven by food? Because the food is concentrated in first-world countries and third-world population rates are exploding, meaning we're shipping in food to sustain an unsustainable population boom or the food isn't there in the first place, meaning drought and famine, which is very common in Africa and other poor areas of the world. Underpaid? Always. Except for the few non slaves, the Masters. Yep. What makes you think or feel this way? …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 06:54 PM
2

humans are more unique in that our rationalization processes can let us actively defy our instincts, unlike most other animals. Outside of this select quote, I'm not sure where you're headed. We may be the most intelligent animals on Earth but we're still locked in contentious nuclear fright, the world looks like it's on the verge of collapse, the environment is literally broken, we're overpopulated, underfed and underpaid. Whatever 'genetic imperative' is at work here is the wrong one. We're ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/09/17 06:29 PM
3

The rare PPD post I can one-hundred percent agree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/17 11:19 PM
5

sex drives most human productiveness, even art. if we're talking everyone grows up in a world without sex, we would probably just find different things to value as much as we value sex. if we're talking people are suddenly en-masse deprived of sex -- yeah, suicide rates go up, productiveness goes down. it'd probably be better for humanity to be essentially asexual as per first scenario. we'd likely be more peaceful and offspring would be higher-quality regarding traits necessary for continuing h…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/09/17 06:01 AM
1

Yeah, I know way too many feminists who love Red Pillers for me to take anything they say on the matter seriously -- they just don't know they love Red Pillers. That article posted a few days ago about the feminist who 'needs help, she keeps sleeping with Trump supporters!' really hit home.
/r/MGTOW10/09/17 10:03 PM
7

It's honestly not surprising. I know dozens of feminists who almost exclusively hook-up with alt-righters. Goes to show you who's winning that war.
/r/TheRedPill10/09/17 02:20 AM
1

At least mildly desirable =/= mildly desirable. Really, we seem to just have different perceptions of how attractive these people are. I don't think we're getting any pictures from OP, so guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 09:19 PM
1

I'm pretty sure that was just a way to let people know that they're at least mildly desirable people. Yes, I know. That's what we're talking about right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 09:16 PM
1

They're "Chad" at least according to OP, meaning they've already demonstrated high SMV.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 09:13 PM
1

What I see from my circle of friends (which neckbeards on /r/incels would call "Chads")
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 09:02 PM
1

Why? Women who are dating up subconsciously apply 'comfort tests' to the higher-quality men. It makes sense -- they don't want to have a bastard kid. Being a 'nice guy' doesn't work unless you've already demonstrated high SMV.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 06:46 PM
1

That's kind of a jump. I believe women feign empathy, and that might inform their voting habits a bit. But when it comes down to it, women are just as selfish and self-serving as men are. I don't buy the 'more empathetic' observation.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 06:36 PM
5

Women have far, far more to gain from voting left than voting right. Abortion, free contraception/birth control, health care, etc. Women even benefit from higher tax-rates on high-earners because 'wage inequality' is still prevalent -- there are far more men making top salaries than women making top salaries.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 06:31 PM
1

It's less about the categorical 'dishonor/honor is virtue' and more about the shades in between. What is honor? Do you have to apply honor in every single situation? What about group honor versus individual honor? Is self-sacrifice honor or vanity? Shit like that. Anybody can be contrarian, but that's not the point. It's just that there's far more than simply virtue/anti-virtue. You need to create a system to standardize the belief system. Hence, religion.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 02:33 AM
1

Subjective virtue is relative.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 02:06 AM
1

That's definitely true. But what I found is that virtue without power is essentially meaningless and inconsequential. In the modern age, you need to have power in order to gauge any effectiveness of virtue, and virtue and power are basically anathema to one another. St. Francis doesn't exist in this century because the Catholic Church is almost irrelevant in modern discourse. I do not believe that the world or people are evil, just that they are at best indifferent or neutral to their lack of "v…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/17 02:05 AM
2

this is a very high-quality chain of comments
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 09:13 PM
2

Suffering is objectively morally wrong to humans. Now this is tricky territory. I think that's a very, very outdated blanket statement. Suffering in the name of long-term 'bliss' has been a catalyst for hundreds of human-driven disasters. The Holocaust is an immediate example that jumps to mind -- they really thought they were doing good work. The Crusades was 'God's work.' And where does the limit to ending somebody else's suffering end? Do you end their life if they're in pain? Do you personal…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 09:04 PM
2

I've found that 1.) hateful and unpleasant people are generally considered somewhat more positively in Gen Y than positive, uplifting, churchgoers 2.) I don't know any excellent and virtuous people and never have. The sweet, beautiful hyper-religious cheerleader from my old high school sucked my friend's dick a few weeks ago and tried to get gang-banged. She's addicted to Xanax now and snorts coke from time to time. She's on missions every year or so and is legitimately one of the most 'religiou…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 04:41 AM
2

It's easy to disagree with any measure of morality because it's all subjective, that's the point of my OP. We don't have any universal measure of morality. That's why 'virtue is dead' -- even though that was kind of a blanket statement that I'm more-or-less regretting right now.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 04:16 AM
4

No...virtue is dead because religion and standardized morality is no longer a viable concept. We haven't learned to adequately replace systemized morality with something more relative yet functional, so we're in kind of a dead space where religion is generally disregarded but we still tend to strive for some measure of morality.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 04:10 AM
11

Virtue isn't attractive. We don't live in a moralized society, even if it is Christianized. Look down the street. Down mine there are about four strip clubs, three bars and a university filled with kids 'raw-dogging' and getting fucked up on a nightly basis. I saw a family of four sleeping on the street with a disposed couch by a garbage bin the other day. Where exactly are the virtue ethics of society there? I don't think most Red Pillers are genuinely thrilled at the concept of 'vice over virt…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 02:07 AM
2

5-10 matches/week, varies quite a bit though based on location, season, etc. plus I only have one really awful blurry pic and a one-line bio. could probably do better if I added more but meh. it's a pretty one-sided app, almost any girl can get 2000+ matches in a day, so the whole Tinder inequality thing is not blown out of the water -- it's very, very accurate. i'm just on it in case some random LTR-material girl randomly thinks it might be a good option for some reason. it's mostly meant for e…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/09/17 12:46 AM
2

You are feeding them, though. Not feeding them would just be to allow the responses to gather at the bottom rather than replying directly and trying to win something you're not going to win. And I don't think they're trolls, they're just telling you things outside of your narrow perspective and you're panicking and calling them rude.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 08:05 PM
1

then don't respond to them?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 07:48 PM
5

every time they've done this you've called them a troll or told them to stop being 'rude'
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 06:27 PM
0

well, if it were a fact rather than an opinion then... there's hundreds of better places to get Red Pills, everywhere from /r/TheRedPill to /r/MGTOW to /r/sluttyconfessions to shitty accidental RP Elite Daily articles. the whole 'kek' movement on here is pretty rough tbh
/r/MGTOW03/09/17 07:05 AM
-1

4chan posts have been at the top for like a week straight...not a good association by any means
/r/MGTOW03/09/17 05:22 AM
6

This is too easy. Chad Alpha
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/17 03:19 AM
4

that's more of my interpretation of it, more like All People Are Like That and women just have more opportunities to be unfaithful or 'AWALT' for various reasons
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/17 12:46 AM
6

My favorite thing about the mainstream media coverage on this whole Red Pill thing is that they openly advocate for and accept usage of the term "Alpha women/females" and shut-down any usage of "alpha male" or lessons deriving from the Red Pill community. Like, what?
/r/MGTOW29/08/17 11:08 PM
2

Fuck: Selfish/Selfless and Frigid Etsy Artist Marry: Selfless Daddy's Girl Doctor Kill: Slutty Selfish Lawyer
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 09:48 PM
1

Like that hasn't already happened?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 09:40 PM
1

Extreme shortness isn't the problem, I think we could all agree that such an aberration in height signals some kind of genetic problems. It's the people who are average height -- again, the United States average height is 5'9.5" and 85% of men are below 6'0" in the United States, one of the most Westernized, pro-superficiality societies in the world. But you'll get anywhere on the Internet, feminist forums and Pill forums, and see people call those around 5'7"-5'10" "manlets." So, it's not abnor…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 09:38 PM
1

Social media savant "Trendy" personality Heavy drug-usage, although a bit hypocritical because I used to be a heavy user myself Big into 'sexual expression' Impatient Very obsessed with appearance Fratboy/athlete past relationships Actually a nice person but puts on front as a "bitch" Fake personality Inauthenticity in general
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/17 07:37 PM
1

listening to what? you just said some stupid shit, asked if I'd been to Portland and I answered both. goddamn bro, take the stick out of your ass
/r/MGTOW27/08/17 07:54 PM
1

...yes, I have. It's a hub for anti-folk, which is what this person is playing. If you really think she's offering to suck your dick for a cup of coffee...maybe, just maybe -- you're totally misinterpreting things. or maybe you're LOW IQ. Sad!
/r/MGTOW27/08/17 06:03 PM
10

It's only hilarious because what they could actually do to stop the Red Pill from spreading is stop being self-serving, hypocritical, hypergamous assholes
/r/MGTOW26/08/17 07:33 AM
6

...no.
/r/MGTOW25/08/17 08:15 PM
10

She's joking, this is basically anti-folk this sub is autistic as fuck sometimes
/r/MGTOW25/08/17 08:12 PM
3

I'm downright shocked to be called skinny all the time by fellow Americans. I'm almost 24 BMI and have nearly the same height/weight as Mayweather/McGregor (a bit above). Our standards are really fucked, the average BMI here is almost 30.
/r/MGTOW25/08/17 08:09 PM
4

meh, it's not great but dating sites are always 90% male. at least it cuts the ratio down a little bit, not that i'll be joining.
/r/MGTOW25/08/17 07:51 PM
1

You're correct and also had a cool-ass English teacher.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 07:48 PM
2

...it was hyperbole.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 07:32 PM
1

You're suggesting that men are in positions of power because they've been rewarded with sex, but things are so much more complicated than that. Meh, I'm suggesting that power and sex go hand-in-hand. That's a little bit different. It's supported by the statistics correlating male wealth with height, power with height and both with attractiveness. Women choose taller guys, larger guys, even, again, because it makes them feel 'safe.' Why does it make them feel 'safe'? That's the immediate question…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 04:53 AM
2

You still haven't addressed the point regarding women who continuously choose 'dominant males' and how that feeds into the very system they fight against. Considering it is female choices that perpetuates the hierarchical male power system -- how is a sexual structure predicated on the dominance-submission dynamic anything but contradictory? The immediate connotation that comes with a dynamic so obviously rooted in power struggle is that power in the male sense is associated with dominance. Domi…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 04:09 AM
3

Yes, they are. The quote above is from Who Killed Davey Moore? a song about the shifting blame following the death of boxer Davey Moore in the 1960s. I don't see anything contradictory about being an otherwise pacifist, hippie type person who likes MMA. The fighting in consensual. It's agreed upon, it's fair, there are rules. This is actually the perfect analogy for feminists who like rough sex. People can be multi-faceted. I'm implying that the feminists who like rough sex and the hippies who s…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 03:54 AM
1

No. I'm using it as an example that it is well-known that women control society, and that it is women who choose domineering 'patriarchal' men. If women didn't choose these men, they wouldn't be living under the system they are living in. Women create and perpetuate the circumstances which they so gladly complain about. There are numerous studies citing women's large decline in happiness since the 1950s. They're cited on here often. As a moderator, I'm sure you've seen them.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 03:36 AM
1

Poetry? One was a quote and one was from a song dealing particularly with the exact subject matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 03:28 AM
2

“Not us,” says the angry crowd Whose screams filled the arena loud “It’s too bad he died that night But we just like to see a fight We didn’t mean for him t’ meet his death We just meant to see some sweat There ain’t nothing wrong in that It wasn’t us that made him fall No, you can’t blame us at all”
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 01:47 AM
2

The concept of domination and submission. Women are more miserable than ever, and it's because they inherently do not enjoy being dominant, in the bedroom, in society, in career fields. You believe that dominance and submission within the bedroom does not extend outside the bedroom. I find that categorically false. If women were really, truly feminist -- they would change their sexuality, they would change their general attraction because their attraction, their sexuality is what creates the pat…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 01:42 AM
2

you can point it out to her dozens of times and it just doesn't get through.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 12:26 AM
0

But most people don't have the genetic package that involves 'being a Chad.' It's really not as simple as 'Become Chad or lose out.' I'd say, probably 80% of men if not more, whether they hit the gym for 5 hours a day and practice game/frame the rest, have basically no chance of being 'Chad' and are more-or-less wasting their time.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 12:26 AM
1

People seldom do what they believe in. They do what is convenient, then repent.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/17 12:17 AM
2

Eh, the government has just expanded responsibilities. I don't think it's so much that they're taking active effort to control men -- they're just expanding government reach and regulating all industry.
/r/MGTOW24/08/17 11:26 PM
1

Plus women's tendency to more hypergamous behaviour the wealthier they are, equals no one happy. Surprise. Well, yes. This is the most damaging part of feminism on society. As they become the 'bread-winners' -- and they are, slowly, becoming bread-winners -- their nature will cause a collapse of the marital system and dating system that we had known for a hundred or so years. It's already happening, but marriage will soon be obsolete save for the religious and tax-evasive and women's hypergamiza…
/r/MGTOW24/08/17 10:42 PM
5

It was "worth it" because those jobs were available to all men -- allowing for some degree of social mobility. But white-collar jobs are generally limited to university-educated males, who tend to come from high-earning families anyways. And the ones who get the high-paying jobs out of those university-educated masses? The tall, good-looking and well-connected. So the illusion of any social mobility has largely crashed on a generation of males. They're realizing that it is 100% rigged as female …
/r/MGTOW24/08/17 04:29 AM
3

I hate it when people do this. Some people are actually relatively private and don't like divulging personal information. Get over it. "It's a personal question," doesn't mean "Yes."
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 04:06 AM
1

idk her response seems like a joke and the bio sounds like one too. sounds like an autistic response to a bio joking about women's standards tbh. not too far out there that maybe it's real, but the chances lower than the whole 'it's a joke' thing.
/r/MGTOW24/08/17 02:57 AM
1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKUvKE3bQlY
/r/MGTOW24/08/17 01:03 AM
4

yeah, MGTOW is the logical extension of TRP. too bad the reputation is shit, it's a much healthier concept. if you're kowtowing to pussy, you're not much different than all the 'beta simps' out there.
/r/MGTOW23/08/17 04:15 PM
9

yeah, I somewhat doubt this. the "professor" has the writing skills of an eighth-grader, at best.
/r/MGTOW22/08/17 07:57 AM
1

Are you kidding me? Tinder is like a group activity for tons of people. Women do this even more than men do.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/08/17 02:55 AM
1

yeah, the problem is that the two of those tend to go hand-in-hand. BP mindset is naive and generally seems to come from the women who aren't doing the casual hookups.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 07:34 PM
1

meh, this is more common than I see a lot of BPers acknowledging. like, way more common.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 07:28 PM
1

right, but this is a girl with glaring depression who would legitimately benefit from a stable, long-term relationship -- however, she's been spoon-fed 'independent woman' crap since she was 14 and is more dependent and miserable than she ever was. she also now has an egotistical, shallow attitude towards dating in which she literally tells guys on Tinder "I'm pretty enough to make anyone I want wait." once again, she's at best a 4. btw, that had nothing to do with "rhetoric that it's always men…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 07:06 PM
1

because she sits there crying to all of them sending hundreds of text messages at a time bc she's a lonely depressed person outside of that, they literally use her as a human sex toy I love when people try to 'gotcha' this kinda thing
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 06:28 PM
2

never seen anything like that and I've been on MGTOW for a while. mostly see stupid posts from like Imgur or something. pretty much filled with dumb posts but there's occasionally decent content.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 08:00 AM
6

yup, I know a few very, very below-average women who get like 2,000 matches in a day and their ego explodes. one of them is now comfortable enough to be "plated" by around ten different guys while thinking that she's the one doing the "playing" tbh, she's at best a 4. she's on Twitter all-day rambling about how pretty she is and how many matches she gets.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/17 04:16 AM
1

I agree it's just that it would have to be a very large percentage of those churches to make up for the decrease in overall religion and it would have to be statistically proven that it is evangelicals becoming more religious which is the cause of 20-24 year old decrease in sex not denying that certain strands of Christianity have become more fervent in the past thirty or so years, only that your claims are experiential and not able to be proven as directly correlated with the linked study
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/17 12:10 AM
1

Possible but unverifiable
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/17 12:06 AM
1

What? There is an increase in women abstaining from sex. the millennial group's younger half is twice as likely to be sexually inactive in their first years of adulthood as Gen X-ers were. Researchers also noted a particular trend toward sexual inactivity among millennial and nascent Gen-Z women, and that 15 percent of the 20- to 24-year-old set has not had sex since coming of age, which is a 6 percent bump from early '90s rates.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:55 PM
1

http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:54 PM
1

There was still a large increase in the shares of women going without sex from Gen X to Gen Y, but rates of adherence to all forms of religion have markedly decreased. source
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:38 PM
1

Traditional religion and culture has markedly declined since Gen Y/Z women have come into the fold, don't see how that checks out.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:32 PM
0

I'm not sure how that would explain the increase for Gen Y/Z women, though
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:23 PM
0

Like I said, you might be asexual but to ascribe that same motivation to the entire 15% abstaining is projection. Those who are more picky are just holding out for a very high-quality man, which they may not be getting even through a casual online dating app. We have no idea how attractive these women are and we have no idea what their career interests are.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 10:09 PM
1

If it's pickiness -- which is the most likely scenario, because it's hard to believe 15% of women have suddenly become asexual -- then this is basically just one of the RP tenets laid out in a study.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 09:52 PM
2

can you send the study that says most men don't get any swipes? I think I've seen it before, but I was just in a thread where the person was arguing that the average male gets 10-20 matches their first day.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 09:10 PM
1

Researcher Jean Twenge, a millennials-expert and lead author of the two studies, told the Washington Post that the prominence of online dating as young people's primary means of getting together is a likely factor in their drooping rates of sexual activity. "It ends up putting a lot of importance on physical appearance, and that, I think, is leaving out a large section of the population,” said Twenge. “For a lot of folks who are of average appearance, marriage and stable relationships was where …
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 09:08 PM
1

well, at the very least your OP is misleading
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 08:57 PM
0

so after the one hour, where he would have swiped right on every single profile in existence in the city, his matches would basically fall to zero? edit: no idea why someone is going through and downvoting all of this, 500 matches an hour is an absurd claim
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 08:41 PM
10

tru
/r/MGTOW19/08/17 08:36 PM
0

I totally agree about the city thing but you literally can't match 500/hour. He runs Tinder bots? So like, he is one of those dudes putting up pictures of male models and seeing how many matches they get?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 08:35 PM
0

OK, so yes, I got 10-20 matches my first day. I've matched with models, college cheerleaders, etc. and I have one picture and one-line bio. 500/hour is still an unreasonable claim though unless your friend looks like Brad Pitt. I have zero idea what the tendency is because I've had varying amounts of success in different cities -- in Portland I did really well, in my university city I did well but not quite as good, but did better on the first day than anywhere else and in my hometown which is a…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 08:24 PM
2

Yeah, that claim sounds like utter bullshit to me. A news outlet did a profile on Tinder's most successful users a while ago after asking Tinder for their most successful profiles. Statistically, the top 1% of Tinder males only gets 10-20 matches a day. So not only do I call bullshit on the above guys claim, I call bullshit on the OP. Here's the link and reminder that both are likely right-swiping a low percentage of users.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/17 08:11 PM
1

First ISTP to post? Strange.
/r/MGTOW19/08/17 03:30 AM
6

60% of men are below 5'10 -- it's hardly ''manlet territory" Un-pussy brainwash yourself, 'bruh'
/r/MGTOW19/08/17 03:07 AM
1

Nobody ever said that co-operation doesn't involve great benefits, simply that groups are co-operating against something else, an Other, in some sense. I have zero prejudice against co-operation -- I'm simply stating that co-operation is a form of group competition. It is not some innately altruistic act wherein everybody is proceeding according to some higher moral principle without inherent rewards that would arise from doing so. Co-operation follows the basic pattern of conflict, it is simply…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 10:44 PM
1

It doesn't oversimplify the situation whatsoever. Conflict is competition, either by virtue of co-operative group mechanisms or an individual vs. individual model. Co-operative groups are in conflict with nature or another group, individuals are in conflict with other individuals. Within the group, there are individuals in conflict with each other. Outside the individual, there are forces or groups in conflict with each other. A co-operative group forms because the individual is unable to provid…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 10:28 PM
1

Games and war are different forms of conflict. The point isn't 'war on women' -- the point is that relationship dynamics have an aspect of gamesmanship to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:49 PM
1

This is so ironic, you say 'only loser men' essentially divide the world into a dichotomy of winners-losers. Reminds me of a quote. "There are two kinds of people in the world: Those who divide everybody into two kinds of people, and those who don’t."
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:47 PM
1

We're not in disagreement here.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:44 PM
1

I agree, the point wasn't to argue that this was Red Pill, necessarily, though. The point was to go through and extract some idea of what Blue Pillers value. This was the perfect quote to do so. Through the replies, I found that Blue Pillers tend to value safety, subjective happiness and self-perception. They also tend to be altruistic to a fault. To add to both points, here's a decidedly BP quote: “I bear my burden proudly for all to see, to conquer prejudice and ignorance and hate with knowled…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:15 PM
1

FYI, if we're going to be here just quoting out the ass, he said this as well: “Thinking is not enough. Nothing is. There is no final enough of wisdom, experience--any fucking thing. No Holy Grail, No Final Satori, no final solution. Just conflict.”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:04 PM
1

You'll find that the perception of AWALT differs throughout RP, just like anything else... I've always viewed AWALT as all women tend to have certain qualities but in varying degrees, which isn't so much of a conviction of women but of people in general. I've seen this point several times on RP and it seems to be a common misconception. It's about human nature and the idea that only sexual marketplace distortion allows AWALT, not because women are inherently evil...
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 05:51 PM
1

Wow, so people can have intricacies and not be completely polarized and one-sided? You're kidding
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 05:30 PM
1

Yeah, I've written around that concept before. Idk if you're saying I'm the talking asshole then you're ignoring the point of the post, which isn't to prove it as a RP/BP issue but to get at specific definitions of what Blue Pill believes As I've said in another post, I learned from these replies that BPers tend to be innately altruistic (almost to a fault) and value subjective happiness, safety and self-perception.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 05:16 PM
3

And I think you're doing the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 09:22 AM
1

I'll reply to this later, I've been in like six different threads going back-and-forth and this is actually going relatively deep into theory. Also it's like 3 AM here.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 09:02 AM
2

You're creating a simulation of a scenario which you would typically have to play out while living in a non-artificial, non-society-driven world. This is only proving my point. Just because it doesn't have direct implications doesn't mean that the meaning we have been discussing doesn't exist. Your objective is still survival and co-operation against external forces -- that's the crux of the disagreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:59 AM
2

So, you're role-playing the scenarios listed above. EDIT: More context: a group of humans engaging in co-operative action in order to increase their odds of survival or the ease of survivability.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:49 AM
2

But what is the objective?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:43 AM
1

I haven't. I've heard about it though I'll have to check it out. Any good?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:33 AM
2

I loved Yage Letters, a short set of correspondences between him and Ginsberg as he searched for the psychedelic drug ayahuasca in Mexico after his release from prison. Any interview collection with him is great. The Adding Machine was a collection of essays that I liked a lot. He did a great series of lectures at the Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics at Naropa under Allen Ginsberg that deal with philosophy of literature and life. His recordings, like Spare-Ass Annie, Dead City Radio, C…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:20 AM
1

Well, as I stated in the OP -- my agenda isn't necessarily to argue this as a Red Pill idea, it's to see how perceptions of winner-loser factor into the Blue Pill-Red Pill divide. I've gotten some pretty good responses as far as that goes, which essentially bring me to the conclusion that Blue Pillers are simply inherently altruistic and place high value on subjective happiness and safety. I one-hundred percent agree though, I love that example. I think (DIY punk group) Half Japanese is a great …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:09 AM
1

I've never played, but here's what I've just quickly found from a quick Wikipedia search. Players are faction leaders who must work together to ensure the colony's survival through incoming zombies and lack of supplies. In addition, players have individual, secret win conditions that they must meet to be victorious. You're the expert on the game -- I'm sincerely just looking for the example, so I'm only arguing on the point as far as my knowledge goes.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:03 AM
1

I think that perception can become your subjective reality but that doesn't dictate how other subjective realities perceive you.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 08:01 AM
2

No, I'm not. Just show me an example of a co-operative game that doesn't involve co-operation against nature or another team. I'll gladly concede the point if you do. I sincerely can't think of any right now, but that doesn't mean there aren't any.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:57 AM
1

But the idea isn't that you're a bad person unworthy of the position nor that you have taken what is rightfully mine -- it's that the competition exists in the first place and one person temporarily takes a higher place in hierarchy due to this. Of course, society mitigates this to a large extent and this example becomes a bit negligible. We are in agreement that how someone chooses to react to losing the competition becomes their reality, however, that does not take away from the fact that the …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:56 AM
2

Well, it's weird because that's not what I'm saying at all. Creating a bridge to cross a river is an expression of dominance over the natural world by a group of humans engaging in co-operative action in order to increase their odds of survival or the ease of survivability. Playing a board game is a different form of game-playing which involves different human players playing against one another.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:50 AM
1

But that's not the implication, because the quote isn't "This is a war universe. War all the time. That is its nature. There may be other universes based on all sorts of other principles, but ours seems to be based on war and games. All games are basically hostile. Winners and losers. We see them all around us: the winners and the losers. The losers can often times become winners, and the winners can very easily become losers.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:45 AM
2

I certainly believe that we have a form of power dynamics with the natural world, and that in the last two centuries or so we've essentially attempted to dominate the natural world or force it into submission to humanity, from destruction of forests to creation of electricity and other artificial substances. The refuge comes from the competition, it doesn't innately exist. There is no such thing as safety, we create it and it is temporary when it exists. It exists temporarily in a vacuum where p…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:39 AM
1

I'm using the definition implied in the quotation, which essentially states that war and games are a form of antagonism involving hierarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:31 AM
4

But they're always working against something, aren't they? Whether it be nature or another team.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:29 AM
1

You didn't -- that was just implied from my end and apparently wrong from my part.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:26 AM
1

I understand where you're coming from. It's a good point. But I'm going to workshop and rephrase a response to someone else that I just typed out -- and I'm sure that they're going to have a good response coming as well. Outright hostility is different from competition, but hostility is inherent in competition because it involves an antagonistic mindset. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts. Conflating hostility with outright anger or a temperament change seems to be part of the problem of t…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:25 AM
2

But that's the thing -- the title of "winner" is hierarchical and inherently antagonistic. And you immediately just conceded the point that even the games with nothing on the line are divided into winner-loser dichotomy. Outright hostility is different from competition, but hostility is inherent in competition because it involves an antagonistic mindset. Those aren't mutually exclusive concepts. You're conflating hostility with anger, when hostility in gamesmanship is antagonism derived from an …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 07:10 AM
2

If it wasn't hostile or competitive, we would just play and agree to split the pot no matter what the outcome is. But that doesn't happen, because games involve divisiveness by definition. I have never played a card game for nothing or agreed to split the pot no matter what the outcome was. If you have done so and enjoyed it, then sure, we have different definitions. The point of games seems to be to win or to lose, not equilibrium.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:51 AM
2

You think I don't like Burroughs? He's one of my favorite authors. Simply discussing this has no weight on how much empathy I have for losers. But it's undeniable that Burroughs was a "winner" although he might have lived his life like a "loser." I admire the shit out of him for everything he's done, I admire him as a person, not just as a writer. But he was also an avid libertarian from a relatively rich family (he called the "Burroughs millions" a myth perpetuated by Allen Ginsberg, but he did…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:47 AM
2

I'm not sure what you mean, what applies to the society applies to the individual because the society informs the thought of the individual. You can change the society and change the individual thought, but to change the concept of society as an extension of the 'war universe' you would have to rid society of a number of concepts that perpetuate larger structures. And even when you get to the basest animal nature without social instincts, you're essentially coming up with unbridled competition. …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:32 AM
2

I'm only going to respond to the last one because the rest would just be reiterating what we've already outlined as to how RP and BP differ exactly. I think it comes down to definition of hostility. The definition of hostility, for me, is pretty close to somebody taking my money, even if it were a game entered by mutual arrangement. Say you and I are entering a poker table -- when we get there, the immediate goal for both parties is to win money. In fact, it's not just to win money, it's to win …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 06:24 AM
2

I didn't involve Burroughs level of empathy with losers because it is irrelevant. And from another perspective, it's very easy to empathize with the losers when you're a Harvard graduate from a wealthy family with an inheritance that allows you to travel the world without consequences and pursue your passions. I would argue that if you were in his position and didn't empathize with losers, he would have to be a far larger parasite than the rest of us, right? But morality has nothing to do with t…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 05:58 AM
2

Well, my father is a libertarian who has never really imposed dominant structures onto me of any kind. Truthfully, I was allowed free rein from a very early age and chose practically everything in my life. Far cry from the typical helicopter parenting which should, according to your theory, produce a generation of males who seek submission from their spouses. And yet, this is the most submissive generation of males arguably on record. Superstructure, yes, but some hierarchical structures exist o…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 05:37 AM
7

From a lot of psychological theories, yes. Parents are at war with their children in some way. This goes all the way from the Oedipus/Electra complex through the dominance of the male in the clan -- when a male son gets older, there is a natural tension between his individualism and the values of the family, the values that the father instilled. I think it's fair to say that Red Pill is very clear: yes, you are at war with your lovers. Generally. It doesn't mean that you cannot co-operate or be …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 04:26 AM
2

What would you say to the idea that it is people who cannot tolerate peace, and if people could tolerate a peaceful and safe world, we would have it? Say, in a hypothetical world of general peace, somebody, as someone eventually would, comes along and says -- we, 'X' need to subdue 'Y' because he/she/country/group is a threat/anti-peace/anti-'X'/will subdue 'X.' Isn't the only way for an absolutely peaceful and sane, non war-driven society an absolute suppression of dissent, which is both anti-i…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 03:39 AM
1

While governments are bureaucratic enough at this point to almost be their own entity, modern democratic governments are still ruled by a collective of citizens. So, you do not see the international political system as an extension of human nature, then?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 03:32 AM
1

For example, if it wasn't clear enough, somehow -- this is a good response: My point was that the underlying theme was flawed. You're working with crude heuristics - your model begins by awkwardly shifting everyone's sexual behavior into extremes of Yin and Yang, while limiting itself to no strings hook-ups among society's most blessed. It's a very narrow perspective, and one that'll naturally favor the ideals of the alt-right. My reason for phrasing my response the way I did, was to show you ex…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 05:51 AM
1

Oh my god, reformat your argument in a way so that you're not selecting three sentences from a three and a half paragraph response or stop. I'm happy to debate with you if you simply do what I did -- respond to each and every point in multiple paragraphs without resorting to simply quoting anecdotes to fit around what you want your response to be. You did it once, let's see if you can do it again!
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 05:40 AM
1

The whole quoting anecdotes without addressing the general basis behind the reply is something that I don't really enjoy on this sub. Like your reply, it generally ends in rebuttals of pre-selected quotations that somebody already has a formed opinion on. So I'm just going to step out of this one, even though I gladly engage in most debates here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 03:47 AM
1

bro, I'm calm. I'm literally about to walk away to go to Target.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 03:37 AM
4

Ignoring the first part of any sentence can always lead you to a totally different conclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 03:29 AM
1

The whole quoting anecdotes without addressing the general basis behind the reply is something that I don't really enjoy on this sub. Like your reply, it generally ends in rebuttals of pre-selected quotations that somebody already has a formed opinion on. So I'm just going to step out of this one, even though I gladly engage in most debates here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 03:25 AM
1

it's not really careful, you're just continuously doing the same thing I told you in the very beginning that I would not debate using. I've done too many of these on Reddit. Have a good day
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 03:03 AM
1

Nope. You just went back to the exact same model I told you I would not participate in a debate using, which is cherry-picking three sentences from a three-and-a-half paragraph response in order to reinforce your beliefs with your own prejudices. You aren't debating to entertain other belief systems, you're debating in order to casually enforce your own upon others and you do this through generalized claims of Disney-inspired love stories, beliefs that all Red Pillers were 'hurt' by reality and …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 02:34 AM
1

Well, the truth is that I don't believe that Red Pill is a universal model. There are always exceptions to the rule. However, Red Pill holds true for the vast majority of the American population. And that extends to the 'hook-up model' -- these are both my personal experiences and sourced through studies of what the general population of women prefer in short-term relationships. These have been sourced endlessly on here and TRP and I'm sure you've seen them. Hook-ups do generally tend to come am…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 01:21 AM
1

This is more like it. I enjoy this kind of debate. I'll respond in a while, gotta run some errands.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 12:44 AM
4

And Dean's character looks absolutely disgusted with the dad in that scene, looking at him with the apron on. Outside of that, the natural hierarchical dynamics with Natalie Wood being attracted to the leader of the 'bad-boy/alpha group' - after the first one dies in the racing accident, it becomes James Dean. Please. Anybody who watches these things and comes away with a Blue Pill reading is not watching, they're projecting. Culture is a byproduct of belief systems. I know women who go for the …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 12:27 AM
8

I was a liberal arts major for a year. But I still believe that most literature and film is inherently Red Pill. Maybe modern culture is more blue, but it's hard to walk away from a viewing of A Streetcar Named Desire, Rebel Without a Cause or a reading of almost any 20th century novel without coming away with a distinctly Red point-of-view. Almost all of the Classics -- by virtue of being in the Western Canon -- are inherently Red Pill. That's essentially the definition of Red Pill-ism. Western…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/17 12:03 AM
1

The whole quoting anecdotes without addressing the general basis behind the reply is something that I don't really enjoy on this sub. Like your reply, it generally ends in rebuttals of pre-selected quotations that somebody already has a formed opinion on. So I'm just going to step out of this one, even though I gladly engage in most debates here.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 11:49 PM
1

It really is just two sides of the same coin. Feminism --> female sexual liberation --> feminist women still want masculine traits --> TRP and alt-conservatism tout masculine traits --> feminism allows for the concept of women having casual relationships --> TRPers almost exclusively want casual relationships --> women go for masculine traits in casual relationships --> women go for TRPers. Both are about maximizing sexual strategy. Both feed into one another's sexual strategy. Feminists see no …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 10:27 PM
1

dude would become an internet meme very fast...don't think he'd have a cult following, if he did it would be almost purely ironic
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 08:03 PM
1

Well, I'll put Steve McQueen out for an example. I know celebrities aren't typically the greatest example in this respect, but considering it's a common-ground with mutual experience, it's easiest to show the rationality here. Steve McQueen was a wife-beating misogynist who forced his wife (Ali McGraw) to quit her very prolific acting career to serve his needs 24 hours a day. He was literally quoted as saying, "They call me a chauvinist pig. I am and I don't give a damn." (I'm not one to shame a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 04:09 AM
1

It's definitely a rare stance in my experience -- good on you for sticking to it but I don't see it often whatsoever. From what I've seen/experienced, it's sexual attraction >>> moral/political stances. If the moral/political stances conflict with the sexual attraction, well, that's something that they typically figure out later rather than sooner. Again, I find it very hard to state how little I see pre-screening of moral/political/social beliefs in dating/SMP.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 03:57 AM
4

Anyway you can learn to do the same shit, but it will take you about 6-12 months of serious trial and error type embarrassment before you figure it out. Not many people really want to do that, it's brutal By the way, DO THIS -- go outside your boundaries, wear some new clothes, try some new hairstyles, be eccentric. A minute or two of shaming on the bus or a mild smirk or shout from someone on the street is basically nothing in the long-term. Learn what's in your boundaries and what's not. Peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 03:39 AM
11

I see a lot of "You're over-interpreting things" in this thread, but this is 100% true. Very few people besides Brad Pitt can pull this off and the ones who try but don't are literally shamed on Snapchat/Twitter/other social media nowadays.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/17 03:19 AM
1

I find no easy way to distinguish high-morality liberals from low-morality liberals, and I have my doubts that you have the sole ability to determine someone's morality from their sexual selection or the rigidity of their ideology. You're misinterpreting what I'm saying -- the morals and integrity of 99.9% of the human population are twisted and a large portion of liberal and conservative people fall into that. Ideology and morality are not linked. That's a quick way to say, 'My side is right an…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:43 PM
1

Well, then let's lump them in with 99.9% of the human population.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:37 PM
1

The behaviors are not within the control, there are exceptions to the rule like your 6'4" bearded Viking -- but the vast majority of large-bodied, traditionally masculine guys are essentially biologically conservative. And outside of that, what I've found is that very attractive, high-testosterone men have little to lose by essentially faking liberalism -- and tons to gain. Being conservative as a man like that, as you have construed yourself, is essentially a no-win game. And many benefit great…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:36 PM
1

The point is that they don't pre-screen political orientation, that's the whole argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:26 PM
1

What I'm claiming is that the behaviors and physicality are linked. No, you cannot, without being at the very least mildly hypocritical, oppose the behaviors of masculinity and not the physicality, because the behaviors are directly linked to the physicality.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:24 PM
1

If these people are third-wave feminist Marxist Bernie supporters who work at art galleries, in the fashion and music industry in high-density urban areas -- are they less liberal because I've had a different experience than you have had? Or can you admit that your isolated experience may not be the end-all-be-all of how liberals select partners?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:19 PM
1

That's a faulty argument, not just because my friend group is also largely urban, highly-educated artist-types and I've had an entirely different experience than you have had, but because you are considering any argument outside of your own subjective viewpoint outside the realm of the experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:16 PM
1

You cannot oppose the behaviors and not the physicality, because the two are biologically linked. When I work out for long periods of time, I come away with a far more distinctly masculine view of the world, which includes the behaviors listed. Selecting for physicality and selecting for behaviors are largely the same thing. If we were to apply RP principles -- you'd have to likely say it's a Paretto distribution of 80-20 to men who are unable to control those behaviors when increasing their phy…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:15 PM
1

It's not, because I'm not even liberal. I'm merely saying that there are very few people out there who pre-screen for liberal orientation, even in liberal groups. Your isolated experience in an extremely liberal city with extremely liberal friends are the exception, not the rule.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:07 PM
1

Disagree. I don't think feminists look at physical stature and oppose it. We look at behaviors and oppose them. Did you just ignore the second half of that and cherry-pick an anecdote? a man who presents as very masculine in appearance but who holds very liberal beliefs and expresses emotion is incredibly attractive. The emotions are a feature not a bug. See previous reply. Testosterone levels are linked to inability to identify emotions, inability to empathize, emotional repression and dominanc…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 10:02 PM
1

OK...but not everyone who is liberal will uproot and head to a high-density urban area because the politics are different. You're not more liberal because you chose to leave a less liberal district. There are plenty of very liberal people who do not have access to that prestigious sort of friend group who also either choose to stay in their area or do not have the money to just uproot and join a high-density social club.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:53 PM
1

More like depends on your location and friend group -- not how liberal you are. There are plenty of people who live outside liberal archipelagos with liberal beliefs and liberal friends who do not pre-screen political orientation or do so minimally.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:37 PM
1

Feminism/feminists are opposed to expectations of masculinity that hurt men or those around them. What do you think the dangers are of being a "lumberjack hipster." I don't think there are inherent dangers in being a 'lumberjack hipster' as a generalized archetype -- the problem is that the muscular, bearded, intimidating stature is exactly what feeds into the traits of masculinity that feminism is apparently against. Testosterone levels are linked to inability to identify emotions, inability to…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:34 PM
1

Right, well that's a pretty select group. There are very few groups like that in the larger population.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:16 PM
1

http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/09/macho-culture-hurts-men/ There are dozens, if not hundreds of articles like this -- specifically pointing to hypermasculinity as a feature of "repressive patriarchy." You can find it attractive or you can ask for it to go away. You cannot do both. Every guy is a soft-hearted guy wrapped in the trappings of masculinity. I know very few "nu-males" in real life -- and they are only tagged that because they chose emotional expression at the wrong time, not because…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:16 PM
1

don't know how you can say that so certainly, it's not like pre-screening political orientation before a ONS is a typical thing...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 09:03 PM
1

it's still an extremely masculine profession with extremely masculine values. for all the feminist talk about how "hypermasculinity" is unattractive, I see lumberjacks as a prime example of women finding hypermasculinity attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 08:59 PM
1

Do you realize that the 'lumberjack hipster' motif is just an extension of conservative values with a front of placid liberalism?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 08:44 PM
2

Most people don't actively tout their politics to the public, I know a ton of "progressive/feminist" women who ONS/FWB/date alt-righters a lot
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 08:33 PM
1

I know this is a joke, but I know plenty of diehard feminists either openly Marxist or bordering on Marxist beliefs who almost exclusively fuck alt-righters
/r/PurplePillDebate15/08/17 06:57 PM
3

I used to be the kid picked last -- and then I would get on the field or court and typically be the best player. I was a white kid in a predominately POC school. Was better than all of the kids who ended up playing high school/college football and basketball. After a few games, I always ended up being picked first or second for the rest of the year. Sorry, this doesn't check out. If you really just want everyone judged on appearances, you're missing out on a large amount of people who don't fit …
/r/MGTOW14/08/17 09:40 PM
1

The most believable cut-off date for Gen Y that I've heard is who remembers some aspect of 9/11. If all you remember is a post-9/11 world, you're Gen Z.
/r/MGTOW14/08/17 08:25 PM
1

Soviets lived in a decidedly 'fake' system for twenty-five years or so before it collapsed. And it left hell to clean up, they're still recovering.
/r/MGTOW14/08/17 07:44 AM
1

Yeah, coming from a very small segment of the university students. University is a model for high-end academic research, but it primarily comes from dedicated, hard-working STEM or Psych/Sociology students and professors. That's a really small portion of the university crowd, though. You're taking a small portion of the post and responding to that alone. I thought it was pretty clear what I meant.
/r/MGTOW14/08/17 07:37 AM
1

I'm primarily talking about the Beatniks and the counterculture which emerged before the hippies. And whether you like it or not, at least in the 1960s San Francisco was a hub for great music. It's just a dull, boring Yuppie playground now. I'm quite proud to be a Male Chauvinist pig, having been one for over 35 years now. Truthfully, that word doesn't get used much anymore. Now it's misogynist. Jesus, you're twisting things. I never said anything about actually it having any meaning, nor did I …
/r/MGTOW14/08/17 12:43 AM
3

Snapchat has a Snap count -- people artificially inflate it all the time. You're just a number to these women, don't fool yourself.
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 11:48 PM
1

No, it's really not too far off from something he could have said. But there is no evidence in any of his novels, poetry or video interviews that he ever said that. This reminds me of those quotes that circulate the internet attributed to Charles Darwin or Abraham Lincoln. He just didn't say it. There's loads of other material for you to source which he actually did say. Read through the book 'Women' -- it's a gold-mine for this sort of thing. But he never said this. Just because it's something …
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 11:22 PM
4

San Francisco used to be a hub for legitimate counter-culture. It's a shame what the techy-left has turned it into. Bohemianism and individualism go hand-in-hand. Most real bohemians are the ones denigrated as "chauvinist pigs" by avowed feminists. It's just a dozen rows of virtue-signalling, neoliberal Yuppie assholes now. Too bad. There used to be some culture there.
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 10:57 PM
1

your edit still suggests that he said it. there is literally zero evidence that he ever said this or anything like it.
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 10:53 PM
18

AWALT. Just look in the average woman's phone for the ultimate Red Pill. Almost all of them have a rotating phonebook of around fifteen guys. btw congrats on taking the MGTOW RP, welcome to the club
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 09:04 PM
8

Concentration of wealth (any kind, economic, power, sexual) has a tendency to distort the emotions and decision-making process of the group affected. Populations with large amounts of wealth have a tendency towards utilitarian thinking rather than altruistic rationality. Concentration of SMP decisions in the hands of women has created a sociopathic form of personal relationships. But I don't think most women are generally sociopaths outside of male-female relationships. Sometimes, it extends to …
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 08:31 PM
5

It's a difficult question. Raising her as a chaste, celibate-type good girl has a tendency to backfire. Seems like the best option would be to use a non-religious moral-driven background and hope for the best. Morals are hard to replace or remove once they're in place -- control and over-parenting is easy to swat away. Women have different biological motives than we do. Raising her under a roof of MGTOW-isms would be a recipe for disaster. I tend to think that stressing the importance of family …
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 08:23 PM
9

Most people want wealth because it's free-and-easy access to women and more wealth. But like you said, 'you'll never make a woman happy no matter what, so stop.' If it's not your money, it's your attitude, if it's not your attitude, it's your time spent away, if it's not your time spent away, it's how you don't seem to care about her anymore. Women view us as accessories in the feminist era -- the answer is pretty simple. Don't be an accessory. If she wants arm-candy, she can buy a Prada. You ne…
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 08:13 PM
2

High school used to be a privilege, not a right. Diplomas were useful and most people who obtained high school diplomas went on to successful, well-earning careers. As the job market became increasingly white-collar oriented in the 1980s, demand for white-collar workers -- typically sourced through universities -- became higher and higher. The increased demand for white-collar workers led a new generation of future employees to view university education as a necessity for obtaining work in the 2…
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 07:56 PM
1

Bukowski never said that and never would say that. There is no source for that quote and it tends to be translated from German.
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 07:17 PM
9

Yeah, this is where I started to diverge from the average 'college kid' culture a few years back. Social media really did a number on our generation. Scroll down through her replies and she'll talk about how she would 'go crazy' if she had to spend one weekend without Internet and how she can't go 'ten minutes without checking social media.' We're really just creating a culture of dumb, dull, homogeneous assholes who think they're cool because they post shit on Instagram and get a few likes. The…
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 08:19 AM
2

Arizona's getting pretty expensive, Californians are being driven out due to high prices and it's bringing tech culture and high housing prices here. Tucson is one of the only places in the state left with affordable housing. I'd stick with Texas, New Mexico or Wyoming, tbh
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 06:10 AM
6

Colleges aren't anything but degree-mills in the 21st century. Basic economics applies to everything -- we'll soon be looking at universities like we used to look at high school, if we're not already at that point. Those paying tuition at the all-time high rates today and over the next seven-to-ten years are going to get the shaft economically. I think we're looking at another Lost Generation, particularly among men. Only these men won't be lost to war -- they'll become anomalies, statistical ze…
/r/MGTOW13/08/17 12:22 AM
1

Who's the other Pynchon/Dylan overlap MGTOWer here?
/r/MGTOW12/08/17 11:45 PM
17

"She said the pressure of Ned having to prove himself was grueling. Nora was surprised that many women had no interest in a soft, vulnerable man. 'My prejudice was that the ideal man was a woman in a man's body. And I learned that no, that's really not [the case] -- there are a lot of women out there who really want a manly man.'" Just another case to add to the binder -- women don't know what women want.
/r/MGTOW12/08/17 11:40 PM
7

The problem wasn't the hippies -- it was that the hippie movement was destined to fail in the first place. Largely because it was another 'trend' and as soon as something else cropped up, it would be replaced. And it was. The leaders of the student movement almost exclusively went on to help create the 'Yuppie' movement of the 1980s -- Jerry Rubin is a prominent example of the 'Yippie-to-Yuppie' trend. The truth is that the hippie movement began with legitimate grounding -- the American folk rev…
/r/MGTOW12/08/17 11:22 PM
2

definitely not a fantasy theory, your experiences being an exception to the rule (supposedly) doesn't make it true of the SMP in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/17 08:07 PM
5

Of course subtlety is in hibernation in modern America. The third player in the drama is Google’s diversity officer, Danielle Brown. She didn’t wrestle with any of the evidence behind Damore’s memo. She just wrote his views “advanced incorrect assumptions about gender.” This is ideology obliterating reason.
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 09:08 PM
4

But if you're having sex and creating a situation wherein you're opening yourself to the possibility of creating a fetus, and therefore opening yourself to the possibility of aborting the fetus -- aren't you creating the very situation where you would have to decide whether they are or are not valuable? While you're not personally creating the value or assigning value to a fetus because you've already decided that the fetus is going to be aborted, you're still putting yourself into the position …
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 06:14 AM
3

She's stating that the moral value of that clump of cells only exists post-hoc -- not that the value is false. She's not stating that somebody else is ascribing value to the clump of cells and that it's inherently invaluable, she's stating that she ascribes value when the cells become valuable. But considering that she alone is making the decision as to whether it becomes valuable, it absolves any responsibility for the decision as to whether the fetus has value. If your nails had livelihoods an…
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 05:38 AM
7

Outside of that, this is essentially a line-of-logic which allows someone to absolve themselves of responsibility for any actions whatsoever. I was going to steal the object anyways, so the object had no inherent value because it was already going to be stolen -- you can apply this rationality to anything and come away with zero logic whatsoever. It's basically a zeroed-in look at how people (particularly women) justify stances which conflict with their basic sense of personal responsibility. If…
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 05:13 AM
7

Women seem to essentially believe that the hyper-concentration of sexuality in the modern dating world and inequities in dating and marriage are only consequential when they have impact for women in the future and not in the present or past. That's what I've gathered anyways -- women rationalizing a lack of morality behind shreds of evidence based on emotion and compounded into illogical arguments like the ones listed above.
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 05:03 AM
12

Just another woman rationalizing heinous morality and arguing that morality only matters in terms of consequences for subjective analysis. It's a good look at how they rationalize these things. "Morally permissible moral mistakes" are basically the cause behind MGTOW
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 04:58 AM
7

y'all realize that it's not about any of this, it's about disqualifying average men for various reasons. if all men are equally shitty, well, then why shouldn't she just fuck the 9/10 alt-right frat boy? read through it, she now has cause to dump or not date somebody for being: too feminine too masculine not making enough money making too much money being male being female not being assertive enough being too assertive
/r/MGTOW11/08/17 01:22 AM
10

https://rampages.us/springerd2/wp-content/uploads/sites/1049/2014/09/cyber-bullying-tyler-the-creator.jpg
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 10:01 PM
1

A man can literally do whatever he wants and men are instantly well-liked. Gonna jump in here, this is 100% not true. I think both genders have it equally bad in the judgment department. People are generally pretty shitty, and it's really easy to get judged as a guy for being a.) too short b.) too introverted c.) too extroverted d.) no hobbies e.) minimal social life f.) walking behind a girl g.) be yourself but also be someone else who's better h.) not earning high amount/being in a less mascul…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 09:57 PM
1

Seems to me like leftists are misinterpreting Gramsci given that leftists today tend to be the bourgeois. They're not really tearing down any superstructure gradually, they're reinforcing the systemic beliefs by creating 'acceptance' for their ideas. Feminism led to a huge increase in hypermasculinity. Right after third-wave became a widespread phenomenon in the 2000s, the 'lumberjack' trend began and bodybuilding became a nationwide hobby. Allowing for femininity in males hasn't created greater…
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 09:50 PM
21

Substituting one kind of inequity for another we mean we have travelled far and gotten nowhere, they warn. “If we flip the power to women, we’ll just end up with the same role responsibility burdens and imbalanced lives,” Amy told me, only with the genders reversed. That’s not progress, that’s Backwards Day. And we should opt for better than that. God knows how many times I've said this to women in debates about gender equality and they've pushed back heavily on the idea that their unrestrained …
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 09:46 AM
7

should be more upvotes on this
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 07:16 AM
2

he posted a video showing the profile as it matched every right swipe
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 02:44 AM
6

yeah man I'm not saying you're not manning up I'm just sayin that she's making excuses
/r/MGTOW10/08/17 01:41 AM
13

I'm gonna guess she's cheating on him or will be soon.
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 09:13 PM
22

read further, she's pissed because he's not manning up and taking care of her. Hot Pockets were just an excuse to have a different conversation altogether
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 07:35 PM
3

RP truths incoming
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 07:34 PM
1

Yes. Yes. No. We can try to suppress emotions in conversation, but they always surface. You can pretend to be an uber-rational, emotionless turd but it always shows. "Reason is a slave to the passions" -- probably less than 1% of the human population could actually suppress emotions in everyday arguments -- even sociopaths have emotions at times. Yes. How they put themselves forward, though, is a pretty good way to judge how to treat them. If they self-identify as a group member and not an indiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 07:16 PM
2

yes, it's only fair -- most people are shitbags.
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 06:56 PM
1

Sometimes "Men Going Their Own Way" sounds a lot like "Men Going Their Own GAY" nice one
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 03:34 AM
3

This was one of the worst realizations of my life. What life actually is. Controlled eugenics. Near-uninhibited natural selection. The American eugenics movement never died -- they just learned to hide it in the system after Nazism turned public opinion against it. Capitalism, in itself, is a large, systemic form of eugenics. This quote summed it up quite well for me. “Paranoia is just another mask for ignorance. The truth, when you finally chase it down is almost always far worse than your dark…
/r/MGTOW09/08/17 03:01 AM
7

“He’s super busy and works all the time. Amber is filming [Aquaman] in Australia until October. She’s in no position to settle with him. She feels her career is just starting,” This bitch thinks she would be settling with Elon Musk.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 09:21 PM
1

Yes, I agree. lol
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 05:46 PM
1

Well, it's conjecture but legitimately possible. However, it's impossible to know because it isn't society that pushes rigid gender-roles, it's women themselves.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 05:57 AM
3

This basically stretches across party lines, too. Noam Chomsky (an icon of the far-left) has stated that the educational system was created to indoctrinate, control and coerce independent farmers into becoming tools of commerce.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 05:54 AM
3

Yes. Everyone likes motorcycles. I understand they're exhilarating and fun. That's not really the point I'm making.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 04:57 AM
3

I'm in the U.S. but despite them being cheap, the only people I know with motorcycles are rich kids and rich older guys. Not because of the cost, just because of...I don't know. They're compensating. They know it's something women want.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 04:16 AM
1

yeah, sounds like he thought he would get off without paying for their services because he bought them a tire.
/r/MGTOW07/08/17 01:27 AM
38

This is extremely true. Women generally don't go after 'real' bad boys -- they're too poor, unattractive, etc. Often what turned them bad was bad upbringing, attractiveness, social opportunities, etc. Women want the rich men who ride motorcycles with their $100K salary, or the sons of those guys. These men co-opt actual degenerate culture because they're aware of what makes them attractive to women. It's why motorcycles, which used to be a counter cultural symbol, are increasingly just rich boy …
/r/MGTOW06/08/17 11:52 PM
1

Because advocating for general equal-outcome between genders allows for women to continuously hypergamize up to the best-of-the-best. Decreasing the wages of the average man allows the higher-earners (wealth is correlated highly positively with height and looks) to concentrate wealth and women. There's no contradiction -- not when you understand the goals of feminism.
/r/MGTOW06/08/17 11:28 PM
56

I really think one of the few societal positives to come out of the Digital Age is that it's really increasingly easy to see through these hoes. Think about it -- without Twitter, Tinder and Instagram many guys who are now RP/MGTOW would still be stuck on the plantation, slaving away for a 50+ N-count woman who will never be satisfied with him.
/r/MGTOW06/08/17 11:22 PM
6

lol, this happened the day before https://www.google.com/amp/www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-4761828/amp/Amber-heard-dons-leather-lingerie-provocative-shoot.html she sent out a snap in leather lingerie with a male model who had her lipstick marks on his arm Remember guys, AWALT
/r/MGTOW06/08/17 07:34 AM
1

no, as far as I can tell, what it's saying is that teacher-student interactions lead to gender-oriented problem-solving approaches. totally disputable, but that's not the point.
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 10:05 PM
3

don't think there's anything in there about them being desirable traits, just feminine traits.
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 09:45 PM
4

please post this on /r/purplepilldebate, I'd really love to see the responses. don't wanna just copy and paste it
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 03:38 AM
13

yes, it should be common knowledge to anyone in RP/MGTOW-sphere that women use 'toxic masculinity' to weed out people who don't fit their criterion. shit-test heaven. too bad you can't take anything women say seriously.
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 02:57 AM
1

I know, that's why I'm pointing it out. they're not any different, they're just being described as different. idk why.
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 02:40 AM
1

14M/RP
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/17 02:39 AM
1

Gen Zers are supposedly fiscally conservative, socially liberal -- so they're just like most Millennials, except Millennials are way too plugged into the heroin of social media feeds to differ in any way from herd thinking. I know like maybe one person irl who is actually socially and fiscally liberal, everyone else just says they're liberal. Politics is a status game for people now.
/r/MGTOW05/08/17 02:19 AM
5

that girl is like a 6, I can't imagine what kind of numbers some of the 8s and 9s I know are racking up
/r/MGTOW04/08/17 08:14 PM
2

they're 'body positive' for women, 'fuck you loser' for men
/r/MGTOW04/08/17 05:46 PM
7

romantic approval has been substituted by Instagram/Facebook/Twitter likes. it doesn't matter anymore if the woman can actually get the hypermasculine, 6'4" football player anymore -- what matters is that she thinks she deserves it because she got 300+ likes on IG
/r/MGTOW04/08/17 05:13 PM
3

check the eyebrows she has a YouTube video of her doing like a standup comedy thing, check for yourself https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lKVGadm24D4 if you know how good women are at making themselves look better in photos, you shouldn't be surprised
/r/MGTOW04/08/17 04:10 AM
3

Irrational Man directed by Woody Allen and starring Joaquin Phoenix. Tons of RP truths in there
/r/MGTOW04/08/17 03:31 AM
17

welcome to the 2010s
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 08:53 PM
1

meh, corporate men also like having something to stare at.
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 08:03 PM
36

she's also a Guardian writer who really isn't that attractive. she literally does this for a living. and of course, her perception of her SMV is 10x higher than it actually is. irl non 'her angle' photo
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 07:31 PM
10

yes, and it makes sense. outside of administrative jobs, which are generally handed to women because of perceived empathy, people's skills -- ways of saying people like being around women -- typical desk jobs tend to go to women because, surprise, men like having women around the office. I'll see five high SMV women with zero clue what they're doing in their job get hired before a low SMV male with high qualifications gets the same job
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 07:29 PM
30

Bitter evil male who cant get laid and is angry about women and his life, signing off. Reporting live from my parent's basement which at a closer inspection appears to be a beach. Expect to hear a lot of this whether you're Red Pill or a RP MGTOWer. It's in their best interest to shame you into submission, it keeps the system going. By the way, notice how both of those (demonstrably false) statements are meant to lower the subjective perception and external perception of your SMV.
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 06:46 PM
6

‘It’s just a fact that there is a lack of available decent men,’ she says. lower your standards or shut the fuck up and stop complaining. same thing women tell men.
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 06:38 PM
3

This should just be common knowledge at this point, 'rape culture' is just about manipulating power. Women literally recreate and perpetuate everything they complain about.
/r/MGTOW03/08/17 06:36 PM
2

I don't think it has much to do with following the cultural norms. But certainly, there's an aspect of religion which has always emphasized "submitting" to religious orthodoxy and God. When you look at that from power dynamics POV, it's no wonder that certain men turned out naturally 'beta' and others who refused, in some way, to submit to God would be considered 'alpha.' You can tie this into several aspects of religion, to Lucifer having his own kingdom, whatever...people who created religion …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:08 PM
2

I think the argument here is that most of these modern-day attitudes in developed countries can be traced in some way to the divide between Catholic and Protestant orthodoxies, which is very true in some sense. I would argue that it probably has less to do with immediate religious philosophy and more to do with the power aspect of religion, which is very prominent.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/17 06:01 PM
116

They use it to increase SMV...if a middle of the road or below woman rejects a middle of the road or below guy harshly, she's telling him and the people who witness it/hear about it that they're not actually equal. She gets to play up her SMV, "oh this dude was hitting on me, but gross hahaha" High-quality women don't have to deal with this, they're comfortable in their SMV and in some cases it might increase SMV to be generally empathetic towards people below her SMV
/r/TheRedPill03/08/17 06:01 AM
24

They had no father no rules in their home society growing up to teach the proper morals and to respect men themselves. Women are all have always been sadistic now it seems.
/r/MGTOW02/08/17 07:17 AM
2

Whatever you enter into, culturally, socially, politically after surrendering certain rights under the social contract in exchange for general protection from natural infringement of safety and certain social liberties. It differs from country to country, and there's more-or-less an international society which you also enter into.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 04:56 AM
1

Always makes me think of Brave New World, which was intended as a warning to what technology could bring to human relationships/breeding.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 01:34 AM
1

yeah, well I can only speak for the people I'm around and what I see in the US. it's become kind of a running joke on Twitter and there are some people who take it seriously, some who don't, much like around here. there's the occasional person, like I have someone who's not really an acquaintance but I know of and he literally just calls himself baby beta male. and talks about how beta and low-t he is all the time. but people like this honestly don't think for themselves so it's hard to tell wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 01:09 AM
1

basically, I'd say that the dominance-submission aspect of sexuality has always been very real and TRP initially attempted to make men aware of this in an increasingly feminist world, one which was making them less attractive to wifes/girlfriends etc. -- it advocated sexual strategy which often worked and detailed a lot of the things women subconsciously desire or more consciously desire but kinda didn't think was all that realistic and told men to start doing it, becoming it, etc. and now we ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 12:41 AM
0

if you're used to eating at some fucking 5 star Ramsay-sponsored shit, no, obviously not. if you're in the middle of bumfuck nowhere Ohio and Red Robin is some high-class shit, then yes. that's the point. we're literally saying the same thing you just are lacking the perspective because from what I can tell you're female.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 12:24 AM
1

no one said average men were broadly attractive, that's the fucking point!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 12:16 AM
1

if you isolated 100 of the worst-looking men with a blank-slate experience and 100 good-looking women with a blank slate and zero conception of what a man should/would/could look like, they would still go for 20% of the males and fawn after the 1%. yes, I agree, the women create the reality of what is attractive. their perspective creates the reality, but average guys are just average, they're not fucking disgusting. just because an isolated perspective creates a warped distribution doesn't mean…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 12:12 AM
1

yeah, I can tell. I'm not gonna sit here and explain this shit to you. group solipsism ≠ objective reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/17 12:06 AM
1

because we're saying the same fucking thing, I'm just saying that the Paretto principle is in play and even though women find 80% of men unattractive, objectively, it's not like that. but it doesn't fucking matter what it is objectively because that's not the reality
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:56 PM
2

I'm not complaining, I'm just saying the standards are unrealistic. That's a huge fucking plank of TRP. Doesn't mean I think it's going to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:51 PM
0

Doesn't mean the standards aren't unrealistic, it just means that they're willing to compromise other areas to fulfill their unrealistic standards. Not surprising in such a twisted supply-demand situation.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:48 PM
3

You have any thought process to support that which you might want to share?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:42 PM
1

just don't be a condescending dick
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:39 PM
2

By the way, a fantastic simplification of my thought process! Really accurate. Let me stand back and applaud you for all the time it must've taken to come up with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:26 PM
1

That's fine. It's just wrong to make it seem like a personal thing -- it wasn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:16 PM
1

Just an extension of consumerist values, not really surprising for an openly consumerist (and globalist) platform. What happens when you pursue capitalism all the way to human relationships? People always want the best, won't settle for less, always looking for something better. Got a great boyfriend? Swipe right and you'll find a better one. The destruction of humanistic values is what brought me to Red Pill, nothing else. There are a lot of Red Pillers who genuinely despise women -- sure. Ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:15 PM
2

No, I think you're generally on-point. I didn't take offense to Red Pill necessarily being over-generalized, I took offense to someone saying I couldn't appreciate or understand Russian literature because we had a different interpretation of a five-sentence book summary. It was pretentious, preening and condescending. And it wasn't even you.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 11:06 PM
1

Well, I guess that's all subjective and what's face-value to one person might be the meaning of the work to another. As far as the liberal arts degree part, I was initially an English and Filmmaking major -- pretty rare for a RPer, I guess -- but that cements my point that maybe both sides should just refrain from making hasty judgments based on user-tags. Just saw the edit. Yes, I agree. That's not all RPers, though. But yes, we can agree that some are borderline awful socially and seem to "nee…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:58 PM
1

I did read the OP, but because I was coming over from the comment section where a guy basically said I probably couldn't understand or appreciate Russian literature because I had a different interpretation of a book summary (one that I haven't read, by the way) that wound up in my response.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:52 PM
1

You realize that interpretation of literature is totally subjective and while an author might intend one meaning or another, five readers can take five totally different meanings from a book? Furthermore, there are a great number of authors who don't particularly place importance on 'meaning' or an intended motif or theme -- they're post-hoc interpreted by over-confident and overzealous academics who think they have monopoly on meaning.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:50 PM
1

Finding this from your comment, yes. I don't pretend to be the smartest, most intelligent person in any room, but I have reading habits. East of Eden was my first real "novel" -- I say that anyone who reads it is really reading a "novel" for the first time. Like Steinbeck said, it is "the first book." I've been sidetracked recently, but I was reading Paul Klee's notebooks, Kandinsky's theory on artistic practices (Concerning the Spiritual in Art) and Funeral Rites by Jean Genet before I started …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:40 PM
1

that's kind of the point, Internet has really warped expectations of males. partially because of the ease of online dating, partially because of all these memes that spread around. Twitter had 'Big Man Wednesday' like two months ago -- just like 6'4" 230 lb guys posting pics and having women fawn in the trending section. Just stupid hive-mind crap, I try to stay as focused on the real world and non-digital situations as possible
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:32 PM
1

you guys are sincerely very pretentious
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:29 PM
1

Yeah, obviously -- but being outside an equal ratio or even close to equal ratio, isn't that just unrealistic standards?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:26 PM
1

sure, yes, I hate Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Pushkin and Chekhov because I find the theme of one particular book outside of the general stated goals of feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:23 PM
9

Don't think it's really limited to 'creepiness' -- it's a general rule that we think far more positively of attractive people regardless of their actions, intentions or beliefs. But yes, it's true.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:18 PM
1

Well, I appreciate the response and just remember that it's a really small proportion of short men that feel that way. I have a feeling they'd struggle with women no matter what height. There's always tons of stories about the short guy with tons of women, and I have a handful of my own along those lines. The problem is still in the general refusing to acknowledge that women are creating and maintaining the rigid gender roles for men that are supposedly meant to come down in the future. Women st…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:09 PM
5

Isn't the general argument that women underestimate the man's attractiveness? Basically, they rate men along higher guidelines than men rate women? So it wouldn't really be fair to say they "overrate attractiveness" based on very high standards. I realize OkCupid isn't pinnacle high-grade science, but just want to get someone's thoughts on that.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 10:06 PM
1

Yet, it's sexual selection that makes them feel miserable. And it's not even all short men or a good percentage. Wouldn't the easy solution just be to not take that into account and understand that doing that on a macro scale allows for the problem to be reduced? Btw let's resolve this one and then I'll turn back over to the pair-bonding discussion
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:52 PM
1

So you are telling me that you prefer to have offspring with someone society deems attractive than someone you personally find attractive? I really just want to get this straight, correct me if I'm wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:47 PM
1

it's about the children. That's why I said it's different for me than for you, but you got mad. because it's not different, I'm not going to care any less about my child than you would. It's not my responsibility to breed desirable traits into existence -- it's my responsibility to ensure that offspring has a good life regardless of what I'm attracted to -- if you think that your responsibility as a woman is to breed people society deems attractive, then that's where we differ.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:40 PM
1

Are you ignoring everything else I cited?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:34 PM
1

You just cherry-picked the definition. I literally bolded the part that says "the cause of personality disorders are unknown, although genes and childhood experiences may play a role. May -- play a role I'm not denying that relationships are intrinsic to personality disorders, I'm arguing the cause of personality disorders. Once again, I'm not ruling out your idea -- I'm saying it's a theory, not a final, tell-all certainty. There are dozens of theories on what causes personality disorders. Just…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:33 PM
1

And lots of people like short men, that doesn't mean there's any less of a stigma around red-hair or being a short male. It also doesn't mean I'm going to refuse to find somebody attractive because other people say 'gingers are virgin incels' because it's not always true. Someone can complain about the treatment of red-haired people and not expect that to worsen their burden, unless everyone literally operates on the most shallow, hive-minded principles possible
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:16 PM
1

Here are the four definitions of a personality disorder from the ICD-10 Diagnostic Manual of psychology: A diverse category of psychiatric disorders characterized by behavior that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individual's culture; this pattern of deviation is pervasive and inflexible and is stable over time. The behavioral pattern negatively interferes with relationships and work. A major deviation from normal patterns of behavior. Personality disorders are long-term patterns o…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:13 PM
1

Well then your example was dumb. Suppose you're not a brunette yourself, and everyone is saying "brunette women can NEVER find a partner and they will be MISERABLE and they will be inciting themselves to suicide (like incels)", would you not be concerned? No, I wouldn't because that's a fucking stupid criterion to judge somebody on and I realize fully that all brunette women have varying degrees of attraction. I literally hear the same thing about red-haired women and men all the time, but I've …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:04 PM
1

I'm not sure if there are leagues -- if a woman is on a date with me, she found something appealing or attractive about me and she's willing to forgo other possible dates to do something with me. If someone is on a date with me, we're "in the same league." They can change their mind eventually, and breakup with me -- but that's only because their standards are higher in one area or another and getting to know me revealed that I'm deficient in that particular area. I do see women, however, spinni…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 09:00 PM
1

You are once again regurgitating the same exact thing which I have previously said there are multiple theories for. I'm aware of the theory that mental illness and attachment theory are linked -- it is not the only theory on attachment or mental illness.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:53 PM
1

You really think that men just don't care about their kids and that something that would give them a hard life wouldn't bother a man? It's just, another thing coming from me out of a human womb? edit: if you honestly think that, I think you're beyond any rational discourse and you can just continue spouting misandrist thought-bubble non-sense somewhere else. I have zero interest in discussion with somebody who thinks women are the only ones with any investment in child-rearing and I hope you rea…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:39 PM
1

No, it's not. There are dozens of theories that explain what personality disorders are, and they range from attachment deficiencies to problems in the later developmental stages to societal standards to location of birth. It's one-hundred percent unfair to compare sanity and pair-bonding, because there are a number of things that can make a person who was totally sane go insane. It's not like someone is 'born insane and they're just waiting to crack.'
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:38 PM
1

If someone tells me that 'Wow, brunette women are totally unattractive and all men find them unattractive!' I wouldn't go 'Wow, I guess you're right -- I just shouldn't have kids with a brunette woman! Men don't like brunette women!' If you're using that line-of-logic, you're just explaining away your inability to deviate from community standards in favor of an individual opinion on the subject.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:35 PM
1

According to one strand of theory on human relationships. We both know that there are dozens of psychological theories out there that attempt to explain psychological dependency, mental illnesses, chemical imbalances and other aspects of human psychology.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:34 PM
1

Well, if you didn't base all of your perceptions on communal thought than it'd be a general positive for humans, not just men. Think for yourself?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:22 PM
1

Sanity and pair-bonding are very different things and it's unfair to compare the two.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:18 PM
1

I agree, but people can also stray from secure relationship forms, just because you have a tendency one-way based on early-life experiences doesn't mean that you are indebted and locked into it for the rest -- and there are more developmental stages than simply infancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:16 PM
1

So, you just want people to stop complaining or asking for the issue to be addressed because there are outliers to a general rule? I'd say about a quarter of women are very fine with dating someone shorter than 6'0" and the others will count it as a negative mark. There are other women who will just say -- if you're below 5'10" I won't date you, flat out, even if you have great personality/looks/career whatever. I think the issue isn't with 'how hard it is for short people' but more that it's ev…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:12 PM
1

But neither of us has any studies backing up either assertion, right? We just know that people lose the ability to pair-bond or didn't have it in the first place. How that occurs is anyone's guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 08:04 PM
1

I suppose you have to distinguish between the people who are born with the ability to pair-bond, those who lose it during their adolescence and those who willingly give it away to satiate insecure personalities or because the pleasure principle overrides positive relationship dynamics.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 07:56 PM
1

Maybe this is what I don't get. The woman ends up in a far worse situation because she demands monogamy from a man above her level, essentially breaks up her marriage and then kills herself because she didn't get what she wanted. How is that empowering?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 07:19 PM
1

Men might be biologically polygamous, but when we enter into the social contract males tend to seek monogamous and sustainable long-term relationships. Any polygamy in modern society is greatly reduced from the potentiality of that polygamy because men buy into traditional systems for altruistic purposes -- and because other men benefit, they're more productive and increase wealth shares for higher social-status men. It's easier to convince women that unrestrained polygamy and hypergamy is to th…
/r/TheRedPill01/08/17 06:50 PM
2

By the way, I've got to add that lower-class men are historically at a disadvantage for retaining lower-class women -- they tend to marry and date upward in financial status. Young men also typically have a shallower dating pool to select from than those around 25-29. Sugar daddy is just a logical extension of this -- it's further disenfranchising what is already the most sexually disadvantaged population. The women who tend to go for 'sugar daddy' relationships are either monetarily not well-of…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 05:58 PM
3

Because sex and gender are complicated issues with multiple viewpoints and we're coming to a really difficult time in our history where everyone has a personal, subjective belief system that may or may not hold true in reality. If everything was perfect and dandy, we wouldn't be here. There are problems from almost every viewpoint, whether you're Red Pill, Blue Pill or Purple. Male-female relationships have always been troubled because of inequalities -- whether that's sexual, financial or other…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 05:35 PM
51

Yup, this is exactly it. Women didn't have these movies before -- you guessed it -- they started earning enough money to sustain industry. If women didn't open up their pockets for Wonder Woman and POC for Black Panther, the film industry would remain the same pocketed industry it's always been. They only make these films because they care about exploiting personal beliefs for profit, the fact that this goes over people's heads is astonishing.
/r/MGTOW01/08/17 05:32 PM
1

Meh, it's fine. It's a little strange, to be honest -- but male-female dynamics in those relationships are different anyways. I personally would find it strange to seriously date an older woman. I think the sourness (if there is any) comes from the dating pool shrinking for younger men, who already statistically get the short end of the stick. And then you add sugar-daddies into the equation, and there's a good number of young men left without a partner because the established, older man stereot…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 05:22 PM
1

Really? 'cause I one-hundred percent think that inflated male attention leads to inflated female egos. Compliments, as you said, are often a way of just trying to get into her pants -- and even if they're not, the woman perceives them that way -- as you just said. So, you already have a woman perceiving her value as likely higher than it is just by the virtue of consistent compliments. And if you extend a 'compliment' to a like on Facebook/Twitter/Instagram -- and for all intents and purposes, t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 04:53 PM
1

Women get more than enough compliments and they know that. I don't look at it from the prism of "real human/with thoughts and feelings/sexism" -- more of stop feeding her already out-of-proportion ego.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 04:27 PM
1

More seriously, it's not that we actually like to share a high sexual worth male, but it's usually a slightly less crappy situation for a lot of women than having an unattractive male to themselves. Didn't say it was, that still reinforces the point. The truth is that what women deem attractive and what is generally considered baseline attractive are too far apart to have any legitimately positive value for humans when sexual freedom and polyamory becomes the norm. I find it really hard to belie…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 04:17 PM
1

It's not all about you, as crazy as that sounds. I made a thread about a point you brought up. But you're insane and I've come to realize that rather quickly.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 04:12 PM
2

Here's my list (the above obviously leaves you zero women): Instagram addict or high follower/like count Constantly uses smartphone, texting/Snapchat "Trendy" The Beta stable is full and she enjoys having them 'as friends' She talks about other men to you and uses them to showcase her SMV ('this ugly guy totally flirts with me') She doesn't seem to have much of a mind of her own, if not explicitly "trendy" and say so then shows it in music tastes, what she does, etc. Doesn't listen to others Put…
/r/MGTOW01/08/17 05:17 AM
2

Well, first of all, I never called it evil -- morality is relative -- I said that it has similar roots to the eugenics of Nazism and the American eugenics movement and I said that it was a form of positive eugenics. Which it is, because you're controlling the breeding habits of the population to weed out undesirable traits. How you want to spin that is up to you and depends on your personal experience and gender. I did, however, call you selfish and rooted entirely in self-interest. I stand by t…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 04:51 AM
2

Just an old friend group. We hung out relatively consistently and smoked and the girls just liked me. What can I say? We were young and everyone was just starting to get comfortable with their sexuality. Sometimes things like that just happen. EDIT: By the way, it's not like these women were All-Stars on the Traditional Marriage team, you feel me? I got a heavy dose of Red Pill at an early age.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 12:57 AM
1

In traditional relationships? The same, just cheating and divorce were less common. People would just tough out their differences. Loyalty and compatibility were more important (in inter-class marriages) and sexual attractiveness somewhat less. More financial hypergamy, but less sexual hypergamy -- outside of the occasional cheating episode, which I'm sure happened. It's important to note that late-20th century civilization is entirely different from 19th and 18th century civilization. Most peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/17 12:50 AM
1

I tend to hear and see the 'sure, he's a player, but I want to be the one he steps out of the game for' mentality a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:59 PM
3

Exactly my point, thank you for taking the time to type this out. We're just creating a consumer item out of sex and relationships, and it's resulting in the kind of hyper-concentration seen throughout other areas of society.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:57 PM
1

Well, this has yielded a pretty good discussion and at the time I did not know. What does it matter if it ended up creating a necessary discussion? The people in the comments are making the same points you are. It's so rare to see someone who's a 'progressive leftist' and not a feminist -- that must be like a 1-5% thing -- you've got to admit that.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:30 PM
1

High n-count just goes with the general notion of being desirable. If women see a few girls fawning after one guy, it makes them have more positive associations with him in their head. Not even particular to females, just human psychology. It's just more effective in those cases because women have that kind of thing on-tap.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:26 PM
3

http://research.similarminds.com/romantic-height-preferences-in-men-and-women/227 https://scholarship.rice.edu/bitstream/handle/1911/75471/Yancey_Does%20Height%20Matter.pdf I've seen studies ranging from 55-75%, although I fully acknowledge that what women say they want/will settle for in a survey and what actually occurs is often different. I also fully acknowledge that the studies could be cherry-picked and the possibility remains that it's a lower number. However, there are obvious preference…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:22 PM
2

Not really, studies show it's at least 70%
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:11 PM
1

Absolutely, I know many men unable to commit to long-term relationships and have admitted it's because their n-count is too high. They lose the ability to view sex and relationships as anything but physical pleasure. The problem is women seem to value high n-counts in male partners and men seem to value low n-counts in female partners...that's obviously going to conflict at some point.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 11:10 PM
0

What I find really strange is BPers saying that this idea is naive or won't happen and then later admitting that women will essentially form harems with men via casual sex, and that these men likely have their own harems, etc. Polyamory generally leads to this behavior, all I see is people saying it's one way, acknowledging it's actually another and having it both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:59 PM
0

Progressive leftism tends to be tied to feminism, it's a pretty easy mistake to make and you know that
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:49 PM
-1

What turned me RP was being in a crowd of artists/musicians/liberals/"progressive feminists" who consistently use Tinder/hookup with obviously 20% guys, IG whore, can't stand "clinginess" -- all traits immediately conducive to RP truths. I think most of those people consider themselves pretty liberal and Blue Pill, but in reality, they're pretty damn far from it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:45 PM
1

I definitely agree, but I think where Blue Pill goes wrong is underestimating the portion of the world's women who are superficial gold-diggers. I don't hate women, I'm not unsuccessful with them -- I've just had experience and I've seen the number of women who go particularly for status/height/wealth. It's really not a concept that's far from reality or outside the realm of most people's life experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:36 PM
2

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2344324/Men-dont-stand-chance-women-6ft-Bad-luck-Tom-Cruise-Daniel-Radcliffe-Jack-Black-Seth-Green.html
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:31 PM
1

Well, she calls herself a progressive leftist/communist, so it's pretty easy to get it mixed up, especially when she uses terms like "patriarchy" "oppression" "sexual freedom" etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:30 PM
0

It doesn't matter if women know he exists irl, it matters what type of guy they go for. That's the point of using it in RP. I know a few men who successfully mimic his lifestyle to the extent possible under their financial status. I think a lot of women think they're chasing monogamous relationships with people they have casual sex with, when they're just another toy. I think a lot of women also choose to have casual sex particularly with these men rather than what Pillers would call betas. That…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:27 PM
2

So isn't that a tacit admission of the 80/20 principle and the concept of betas?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:17 PM
0

Yeah, it was a group of girls who were all really into me. I was pretty much MGTOW before MGTOW was a thing...and idk it just kinda happened. Quickly, too. Multiple women in the group threw themselves at me for years afterwards...but knowing how desperate they were and watching them send texts in for days and days without shame -- kind of a turn off. Plus I knew some of their histories and didn't like it, or knew they were about to be influenced into proto-feminist/polyamorous behavior by the gr…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 10:08 PM
3

Got offered an eightsome once, didn't take it. Not appealing to me. Prefer long-term monogamous relationships where both partners remain faithful...always had the ability to sleep around. Not very appealing, necessarily. That's changed a bit because of RP, but if a legitimately good and faithful relationship was possible -- I'd take it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:57 PM
2

But her harem is deliberately more exclusive and has a large number of men who have formed their own harems. If 75% of women won't date below 6'0" and 85% of men are below 6'0" -- you're going deep into men having multiple harems by virtue of women creating harems of men who already have their own harems.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:51 PM
5

I'd say that I'm most concerned about the effects that numerous partners has on the ability to adequately pair-bond, to the extent necessary for survival of marriage and/or long-term monogamous relationships. And it tells me a lot about the person when they're openly sleeping with tons of people just because they can. Woman like this, in my experience, tend to reek of extreme personal insecurities and (often) obscured mental illness.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:49 PM
2

Didn't ruffle feathers, just a common miscommunication.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:16 PM
6

here's the primary example used among Red Pill males, make what you will of it: https://www.instagram.com/danbilzerian/?hl=en this is more common among very wealthy/attractive males than you think
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:11 PM
3

The thing is, I used to think this way -- but I've read enough from women to believe otherwise at this point. I'm just here to read what people have to say on the matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:56 PM
6

Yes, because women's harems would be far more unequal in sexual value than a man's harem. I could cite the 80/20 study on attractiveness and the study that 75% of women would refuse to date someone below 6'0" despite 85% of men being below 6'0" -- but I'm sure you all have seen it already.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:53 PM
2

It doesn't explicitly mention non-monogamy, but it's implicit in the comment. 'Traditional relationships' = monogamy. Women won't go back to traditional relationships after having been on the market = women will be polyamorous because the market is genuinely giving towards them, they can fulfill their needs from multiple partners whereas the marketplace is less forgiving to men, who have to make up for deficient qualities with other things like financial status, personality, height, whatever.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:48 PM
4

Well, I never said either of those things -- so, you're basically just putting words in my mouth.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:27 PM
4

I don't understand what you're not getting. Women having equal rights and sexual freedom doesn't mean hypergamy will cease to exist. The patriarchy was a way to even things out by controlling female sexuality. I propose sexual freedom for women so that they can choose to mate with alpha males whenever they want. The patriarchy restricts that. I never said my system would eliminate hypergamy. I believe that there should be sexual freedom so that hypergamy and polygyny would not be restricted. Sur…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:25 PM
2

Then here's a link to Rational Male blogs, where you can get exactly the kind of solipsistic advice you want.
/r/TheRedPill31/07/17 06:31 PM
2

Well, while I appreciate and agree with the underlying principle behind your comment -- it just doesn't apply. If you're looking just for strategy and zero discussion about how women act, visit the Rational Male or a site where there are no comment chains.
/r/TheRedPill31/07/17 06:07 PM
1

No thanks, high-N counts make it difficult to pair-bond. It's either/or, like everything in life. I'm just doing my own thing and if women want to come along, they can. But they get no emotional attachment, no guarantees of monogamy, no resource sharing and we pay equally for everything. Basically FWB. I would've preferred a relationship five years ago, three years ago. Now I have zero illusions about how one-sided these 'relationships' are.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 05:32 PM
1

Overstatement, to say the least. It takes thirty seconds to comment/reply. You're here, aren't you?
/r/TheRedPill31/07/17 05:28 PM
1

No, everything is a social construct, so I'm not sure where people go with that whole idea. People are inherently selfish and cruel, they'll do anything that benefits them. It's not about monogamy or non-monogamy, it's about people being shitty. My strategy is to do my best with what I've got, do not get attached, do not allow women to hold any power over me, become self-sufficient and live life the way I deem fit. Women aren't very much but holes for me now. I'd prefer it some other way, but it…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 04:21 PM
1

How are you RP? Do you believe sexuality is a social contruct of something? Because I understand human nature and even though I want it to improve from primal instincts and base physical desires, I don't see it being very likely - so I've modified my own personal behaviors, habits and some political stances. Sexuality is mostly a power ritual. Like RP suggests, it's a dominance-submission game. What RP and MGTOW attempt to do is turn the tables on sexuality and create a society where men don't s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 09:02 AM
1

I really think we have different ideas of what it would look like, but sure. I just believe that sexual freedom is a divisive topic among the working class, that you need to dismantle the state system before implementing socially revolutionary ideas otherwise the system crumbles and divisions intensify. Outside of that, I think that the largest motivator of women (and men's) sexual desires are not only primitive but determined by cultural and societal norms, so ridding ourselves of primitive gen…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:50 AM
1

Yeah, well it depends on which theory you follow, doesn't it? I certainly don't think so, but others do. As you know, that's one of the main arguments and the not-so-hilarious thing is that it's divided into so many strands that it's basically an impossible ideology for the layman to follow (including myself) or implement.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:43 AM
1

You clarified that you were an anarcho-communist afterwards, but that was not clear before and communism itself is not necessarily a strand of libertarian socialism because we reject state ownership of the economy.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:39 AM
1

It's broadly libertarian socialist but we're talking about different individual meanings. Libertarian socialism is an umbrella term -- there are different forms of it, such as what you've listed in sourced material.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:34 AM
1

Go back to capitalism versus socialism and try to figure your shit out
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:14 AM
1

God I'm gonna stop arguing with you because you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:14 AM
1

Your understanding of leftism is poor.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 08:11 AM
1

I don't know why you have a problem with sexual freedom though. "Maybe the one thing that the white working man can hang onto is that he runs his home? Now that that’s being taken away and nothing is being offered, he’s not part of the program of advancing women’s rights. That’s fine for college professors, but it has a different effect in working-class areas. It doesn’t have to be that way. It depends on how it’s done, and it was done in a way that simply undermined natural solidarity. There ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 07:57 AM
1

You just called yourself a communist, say, maybe an hour ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 07:46 AM
1

You are literally so dense it's impossible to have a general discussion with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 07:45 AM
1

Just by the way, I'm a libertarian socialist. I believe in freeing the means of production and operating through co-operative union structures with a rotating leadership structure. I think that genetic differences are primarily caused by wealth and opportunity, not necessarily by genetic structure. What really scares me and makes me double back on my philosophy is people like you who are so explicit in their genuine self-interest and nothing else that it almost makes me churn. At least you're op…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 07:14 AM
1

Reductionism -- I said the far-right includes Nazism, and I've said previously that eugenics was highly propagated in Nazi society. I didn't say you were a Nazi, I said you're further to the right than you think. You spout some really reactionary stuff sometimes. edit: didn't see the last part. you're right. it just means you're a non-genuine leftist. you're a leftist because it benefits you, not because it benefits others.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 06:55 AM
130

I feel bad for women sometimes. I couldn't imagine being such an innately selfish, non-empathetic, callous creature.
/r/TheRedPill31/07/17 06:54 AM
1

You have a really weird way of reducing everything that's being discussed to the lowest possible denominator. I'm sure you'll say the same about me, but I can tell there's zero chance I'm changing your mind about anything and you're going to continue to call yourself a 'progressive leftist' despite being completely and totally selfish in your intent. Do what you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 06:46 AM
1

/r/istp
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 06:03 AM
1

Hell, I couldn't stand living with people at 17. But rent is insanely high in some places, all depends on where OP lives. It's often the best choice for Millennials and Gen Z to live with their parents and roommates for a while. My rent has been $800-950 in one of the cheaper states, although it's a university town.
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 06:03 AM
1

Yes, I'm aware. At his age, it's important to be able to take a shower somewhere outside of a public gym and generally be social/have a place to take women. For 28K, you can live in South America for a year and a half. Or you can buy a sprinter and bum it out in the boondocks, your call.
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 04:40 AM
1

You know, I wrote another reply a while ago...but I have to say, while I used to believe what you say, I don't anymore. I've had too many experiences and see other men with too many experiences to believe anything else. They might 'look past' them temporarily, but it always comes back when someone better comes along. I'm mildly successful with women, but I've also been turned around and cheated on for random tall, attractive dudes just because they felt like getting f*cked. I don't trust them an…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 04:30 AM
2

I highly advise against vandwelling, not only because of the negative connotations but because the legal implications in many areas are pretty severe. Many sections of the United States have (and historically, it's no different) outlawed homelessness, which includes living in a car. I don't have any information particularly on wood-working or carpentry, although it's a good field and can be useful. Community colleges will almost certainly have classes in that subject, and your local library will…
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 04:16 AM
6

I agree, love is real, lust is more real. Love exists primarily as a concept and secondarily as an actual physical sensation. Lust exists primarily as a physical sensation and secondarily as a concept. The problem is that the sheer number of options for women allows lust to take over when love should be the overriding mechanism. But because lust is primarily physical and love is primarily metaphysical, lust always wins. It's too bad, really.
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 03:15 AM
5

Lamenting over reality is pointless. I don't think the world was ever much different, it just seemed that way in mayonnaise commercials. This is my favorite thing I've ever read on this sub.
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 03:11 AM
1

You need to start simplifying your life. The truth is that it's extraordinarily easy to live on a very modest income, within and outside of the United States. You do, however, have to plan extensively. Simplify your meals, plan a budget with proteins, calories, etc. counted. Decide on university education this year or next. It's a big financial burden, consider going to community college if you're not going into a lucrative field or are planning on entering a trade. Learn basic survival skills a…
/r/MGTOW31/07/17 03:07 AM
1

Well, that's what I mean. In my opinion, the expectation burden has shifted from women to men. Barbie/Hollywood has full-figured models now, He-Man/Superheroes/general Hollywood stars still comes in the same size. It's a stupid comparison, but men will always be expected to be 6'0"+ with wide shoulders and good abs. Most of that is really rare genetics, and the rest is extremely hard work. I, and other men, can do our best to live up to that. But a certain number of us just literally cannot do i…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 01:55 AM
1

I totally agree with that, I just think the most important thing is lowering our personal expectations to a sustainable level. That means we, meaning both genders, stop with the fetishization of Hollywood-level attractiveness. We're poisoning our world, we're poisoning our society, we're changing the general basis of how things have worked for thousands of years. And that means that people realize that having a women with curves in all the right places and having a man who's 6'0" or above are un…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 01:43 AM
1

But that is the exact system we currently have.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 01:26 AM
1

I did not once categorize those as 'must-haves' in men. I stated that there are always some people who will choose those things, men or women. And furthermore, it's just as much on women as it is on men for choosing those things and using those things to attract partners. Which makes the entire argument moot, because all it takes is a few rotten apples to spoil your whole system.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 01:19 AM
1

But how can you realistically get money, fame and real-estate not to matter? Fame offers more opportunities for attracting women or men, that's not simply because of the positive attributes that come with catapulting to success, it's because you're seen more often and you have more opportunities because of the connotations people associate with a familiar face. If I have an equal chance at Jessica Alba and a girl from down the street, I'm going to go for Jessica Alba. And money allows people a l…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:58 AM
1

No, I dont see it that way, sorry. I have zero idea how you can just say that when you say all that matters is attraction. That is so obviously about socialization, cultural expectations and biology that it does not need any further explanation -- that's something Red Pill men and feminist women tend to agree upon. What you're saying is that you want to purely be ruled by attraction and your basest desires, and if that includes billions of men losing out, then that's their problem, not yours. Al…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:45 AM
1

It is a form of oppression, telling other how to live their lives beacuse some bio-bs. Its all socialization. But that is exactly what you're doing.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:36 AM
1

You're just reversing the roles of what we previously had, you're not creating a more equal or positive society. You're just making women what men were, but with a far less equal distribution of sex and reproduction. That's the problem. I understand that a lot of women find that appealing, and some men are fine with it, but I don't understand how people can say it's an equal society or an oppression-free society.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:33 AM
1

The problem is just human desires. Men don't want women who have high numbers of sexual partners or went to them as a last-resort, which is entirely understandable as far as I can see. Women want men who are above them in attractiveness or social status, which is again, understandable, at least from our cultural and societal viewpoint. I don't see how to reconcile the two in a feminist society, but I'm open to any ideas. Exchanging female oppression for male oppression is just as bad a gambit as…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:26 AM
1

No, the alt-right is against sexual freedom. The far-right is libertarianism in it's purest form, which means unrestrained sexuality, baseline laws to guide a society and free market economics in most spheres of life, including sex. The far-right also includes Nazism, which is national socialism and almost exactly what you describe in your posts. You have told me that you're only communist because you believe it will free women's ability to hypergamize. That's not a systematic belief, that's a b…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:13 AM
1

So, you realize fully that you're exchanging one form of oppression for another?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:11 AM
1

I'd say you're probably far-right, on the anarcho-capitalist spectrum. But you should probably figure that out. There are several political compass tests on the Internet. I'd be curious to see your results and what politicians you generally admire or believe in. But it's important to note that I know people who are Sanders acolytes who are just as far from progressivism as you are. Politicians can fit a general criterion for individual cohesion while still straying from general individual politi…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:09 AM
1

Arguing for those particular planks doesn't make you a progressive leftist any more than me arguing for Red Pill ideas makes me an alt-righter. You can share certain basic ideas of a platform and have nothing to do with the orientation of the ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/17 12:05 AM
1

You should really stop calling yourself a progressive leftist RP. You argue some of the most reactionary, instinctually-biased positions I've ever seen. Whether you realize it or not, you are alt-right.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 11:59 PM
1

The problem isn't that there will be losers, you're right, that's life. The problem is that there are so many losers in the ideal feminist scenario that it creates serious societal problems from top-to-bottom. And from what I can gather, it's because women just want to have sex with the most attractive guy possible. Regardless of what that means for themselves, possible families, or the men who count themselves out of the narrow, 1% range of 6'2"+, high-earning, powerful, dominant, very attracti…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 11:52 PM
1

Settling doesn't hurt both parties. People just have unrealistic expectations and that's the root cause of this all. Settling is actually the most realistic and adult thing you can do, rather than continuously waste your life away thinking some 9 is going to sweep you off of your feet. It's not even realistically settling, it's going for someone in your own weight-class. What exactly is settling about that? The trade-off between short-term and long-term satisfaction is the problem here, and so l…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 11:42 PM
1

Both genders lower their standards to reality and stop using consumerist notions of what a person should be or look like. The inability to deal with not getting 'exactly what you want' is what leads to this glaring SMP inequality. Mostly coming from women. Both genders adjust their long-term relationship concepts and end-goals so that it's actually compatible with modern society and values fit for raising children.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 11:35 PM
4

Look, you can't just take it back or change how it effected him. Part of the consequence is knowing that he could choose to do the same to you at any moment, or just get fed up one day and leave. You made the choice, now you stick by the ramifications of your decision. edit: It also sounds like the only reason you value this person is because P left you, and if he hadn't stopped gaming you, you would still be doing it.
/r/TheRedPill30/07/17 10:16 PM
3

No, there are some women who are intelligent and well-read. I've met a good number of them. The problem isn't general intelligence or disposition for learning, it's how they utilize what they learn. Someone just posted an image link on the utility of morality for women and how it's different between genders. They fail to recognize higher moral principles than self-interest and generalized group interest.
/r/MGTOW30/07/17 04:48 AM
3

I one-hundred percent agree, but that's also the primary focus of liberalism in the 21st century. Peddling liberal ideas to upper-class university pussy is a good way of obscuring the actual logic behind the philosophy. This is what most women who claim themselves to be liberal or communist actually want, unfortunately.
/r/MGTOW30/07/17 04:29 AM
5

I tried explaining it, but she still labels herself a communist. Because, women. She maintains that eliminating wealth structure eliminates the utility of beta men and therefore women could form harems and mate only with alpha males.
/r/MGTOW30/07/17 04:24 AM
2

Further reading on the links between feminism, eugenics and the Nazism movement: https://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminism-and-eugenics-engineering-reproductive-totalitarianism/
/r/MGTOW30/07/17 03:47 AM
1

Damnit, first time I've posted an NP link. Thanks, I'll repost in ten minutes.
/r/MGTOW30/07/17 03:37 AM
1

because communism attempts to eliminate hypergamy essentially through class warfare
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 02:41 AM
1

uhhh I get laid, I just don't agree with the basic tenets of what you're saying.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 02:40 AM
1

why are you calling yourself a communist then?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 02:37 AM
2

so you're basically not communist, you're just an RP woman trying to maximize your own sexual production
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 02:33 AM
2

So how are you disagreeing with anything that the Red Pill says, then?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 02:04 AM
2

Do you have any clue of the basic tenets of Nazism? The 'ubermensch', the dominance of the white, tall, blue-eyed male? You seem totally clueless as to the origins and historical basis of positive eugenics.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:58 AM
2

Yes, because uncontrolled, illimitable sexual freedom is basically Nazism.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:57 AM
1

That's all I needed to hear to permanently rule out communism as a positive governmental form. Congratulations. You're now associated with the Nazi-era eugenics movement and the United States own form of forced sterilization. You are, strangely enough, further right than the Red Pill.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:56 AM
2

you are delusional https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/patriarchy https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/patriarchy http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/patriarchy Now admit it, admit that you're a eugenicist.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:53 AM
3

It's not equal opportunity. Women disqualify 80% of men as too unattractive to date and 75% of women say they will only date a man over 6'0". These attributes are structurally correlated with wealth and power. You realize that you advocate for positive eugenics, right? I just want you to admit it, at the very least.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:46 AM
4

I have studied the historical context in which patriarchy was created. As a matter of fact, as you wouldn't know, I was a strong feminist and communist for years. I'm aware that there are theories that life was egalitarian and peaceful. I'm unsure of how truthful these are, although I will give it the benefit of the doubt for argument's sake. You're equating patriarchy with forced monogamy, which is a false equivalency. Patriarchy is the dominance of males in social structure, which occurs prima…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:41 AM
2

You realize that the entire reason for life is to procreate? How do you suppose that what you're doing is equal rights when you're basically subordinating men to a structure of empirical eugenics?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:37 AM
1

Sexual freedom is not what I'm advocating for. Sexual freedom is linked with hypergamy and hypergamy is directly connected with patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:35 AM
2

I believe that there should be sexual freedom so that hypergamy and polygyny would not be restricted. Sure some men would be left out, but that is how freedom works. Oh, Jesus. That's really easy to say as a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:34 AM
1

It's desirable because it lays out structures for men and women to strive after that fulfill their biological needs. Men are tricked into believing that being sensitive, emotional and interesting will get them laid in the 21st century. But we all know that's not the truth. Feminism and matriarchal thought lies to both genders and paints the world in the brightest colors possible. If you cannot rid the world of hypergamy -- and I would find it hard to believe you could convince women to give that…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:28 AM
1

I'll address some of the points here, the ones I ignore are only ones where I disagree with Red Pill dogma. In general it is a view that is not based on hard evidence at all, therefore I don't think it should be taken seriously. One other reason why I think this view is flawed is that actually western civilization, despite being "feminized" is the most dominant in the world and heavily influences other cultures. The Western world is without a doubt the most dominant civilization in the world bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/17 01:20 AM
2

bro, you'd have to be able to afford the reverse-aging treatments in the first place. and even then, if cancer rates went down, chemotherapy pricing would rise astronomically. outside of that, you're discounting all of the medical disease which have nothing to do with old age. price-gouging is an extremely real thing. you can ignore it, but it doesn't make it any less a part of our daily life.
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 02:15 PM
2

That's just totally untrue, you're distorting reality to fit your chosen worldview.
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 01:55 PM
1

bro, you're literally taking the one Red Pill truth that we all agree on here -- AWALT -- discarding it and telling everyone that they're essentially faking and are wrong about women. I totally understand wanting to do MGTOW with wife/kids...but it's literally only possible if you find a homely, traditional wife who wants to live out in the country, isolated from people and raise a family while subscribing to traditional gender roles. that's unicorn squared. even if you found it, she'd turn hell…
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 01:55 AM
3

You address mass technology, like the airplane and the computer, but fail to address rising medical costs, the extraordinary costs of many prescription drugs and treatments like chemotherapy, HIV/AIDS treatment, etc. The thing is, modernizing and cheapening mass technology allows a wider degree of profit to be squeezed out of the product. This, however, does not typically apply to medical products.
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 01:12 AM
23

As a millennial feminist, allow me to run with this victim thing. she literally said this
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 12:58 AM
9

There's always the (probable) risk that these ideas carry astronomical costs, and that only the rich would be able to afford treatments. Which means that Chad gets 250 years of destroying prime pussy because he was born into wealth.
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 12:56 AM
4

The females also mate primarily with alpha males, from what I can tell, in regards to conception. The beta males get sex, but it's unenthusiastic and sparse. The females satisfied a large amount of their sexual desires through clitoral stimulation with other females. Of course, in chimpanzee society, it's the alpha males who dominate all sexual encounters. So I'm not sure how much bearing either primate form has on where we're headed. Maybe a mixture leaning towards more bonobo structure?
/r/MGTOW28/07/17 12:53 AM
1

you're obviously not.
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 10:45 PM
40

we knew she was a gold digger anyways, Steve almost definitely knew that too
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 05:05 PM
1

nah go read my reply to your other comment, I tried to answer to the best of my ability
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:29 PM
6

i'd say the general attitude I see towards wife/kids here is that men want them but understand it's impossible in the modern society for a variety of reasons. marriage has very little to do with traditional values and whatever blue pill nonsense we've been fed, it's mostly a contract denoting tax relief and future asset splits. in that sense, continuing to feed into the continuum of marriage/wife/kids/white picket fence thinking only aids the women in throwing our society for a loop. women aren'…
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:27 PM
6

holy shit this conversation is so fucking dumb
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:22 PM
12

I've become convinced that the gender-spectrum nonsense has been pushed by women because it allows them to justify not dating/fucking someone for being too feminine or not masculine enough.
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:07 PM
50

$10 she's holding out for the arrogant rugby dude
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:04 PM
2

feminists just want men to be miserable and confused. well, they've done a very, very good job of this
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:02 PM
1

I actually saw Jason Whitlock arguing a really MGTOW point about women/marriages on some shitty FOX Sports show last night. we goin' mainstream boys
/r/MGTOW27/07/17 04:01 PM
6

bro, you're taking it way too literally. 'who cares' is just a euphemism for 'do your own thing.' yes, it effects everybody and it's always in play. we live in a system that caters to the entire concept of competition. i'n literally just responding to your whacked out reply.
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 11:53 PM
2

lol what? i'm telling you to not let power games effect you.
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 11:44 PM
6

yeah, if women were how they say they are, we would have no problems in society. things would work out fine and gender roles could actually be interchangeable. but they're not wired like that, and so the whole thing is just fucking ridiculous.
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:30 PM
7

Everything becomes a power/status game, it doesn't matter what you identify as or what the philosophy behind it is. The idea is to go your own way, so who cares?
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:29 PM
6

Yeah, this isn't as far-fetched as it sounds. The idea was that information agents penetrated both countries at the height of the Cold War and attempted to alter the national discourse. The American side succeeded and forced national change and abandonment of the communist way of life. You actually see Russia mirroring a lot of the older American ways of life today, they're very paleo/neo-conservative now. And the Russian side may have succeeded as well, given that they were communist agents at …
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:26 PM
3

Basically, because women control and manipulate the 'social currency' and control the social mobility of men in society, they're able to control the code-of-conduct. And what we know about women is that they're constantly looking for ways to affect an air of superiority. One way to control the narrative for a woman is to show a larger degree of empathy and caring than other women do. So, they'll stand up and tell someone lower on the totem pole that what they said is wrong, immoral, whatever, be…
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:23 PM
3

Not entirely true. While I avoided university for years and worked the lower-end jobs to try to get experience, I found that higher-end employment agencies would overlook me and most entry-level jobs require college degrees these days. It's a scam, but one that is so built into the fabric of the system that it's basically a joke. Debt, work, debt, work, debt, work, death. There's no purpose to a college degree and the classes are generally vapid and useless. But you need the goddamn piece of pap…
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:08 PM
5

There was a thread a few days ago discussing the institutional bias towards women in early schooling and secondary school. I know at my high school, girls would sometimes get a 'do-over' on their test if they failed, the teachers would artificially improve their grades, etc. I know some dumb as rocks girls, who can't tell the French flag from the Russian, who got 4.0s in high school and above a 3.75 in university.
/r/MGTOW26/07/17 10:05 PM
2

Anna, a 23-year-old who’s gone on dates with more than 30 Wall Street-types since moving to the city three years ago, is also over Mr. Big. She’s not looking to settle down with a wealthy banker. Nothing we don't know here, move on folks.
/r/MGTOW21/07/17 05:03 PM
2

leaves 24M after taking marriage into account account for LGBT population and there are...22 million eligible women for 62 million eligible men (edit: under 6') and it's not like the other 30% of women aren't seeking a man over 6', just that they won't rule somebody out for it. so you are also at an immediate disadvantage for these women.
/r/MGTOW20/07/17 05:44 PM
7

Anyone who's been in an American high school know that what it takes to get a 4.0 is basically clean attendance, mild work ethic and some Google searching. Everybody cheated on the AP exams. The Honors students are exactly the people we tend to dislike in this sub: middle-to-upper class "liberals" who haven't earned a cent of anything in their lives, they were placed in those classes because their lives have been oriented towards "honors." The American educational system is a joke. It's just mor…
/r/MGTOW19/07/17 03:42 PM
1

So they complain. I can't complain, I have work to do during the day. bro, what the hell are you doing here then?
/r/MGTOW19/07/17 03:32 PM
2

the world is unfair man, think you would have learned that being on this sub and all.
/r/MGTOW19/07/17 03:30 PM
11

Who cares, man? Let it go. You're not going to change it by being angry about it. Shit happens. Be happy for the fucks. Literally tens of millions of people are shit-deep in student debt. A few people got off. You have zero idea who in this bunch was a LA major and who had a STEM major or whatever. You just want to be pissed.
/r/MGTOW19/07/17 12:02 AM
5

Seriously fucking painful. That 20% study was about over the entire course of human history, including slavery, wars, tribal times, nomadic wandering, pre-religion times, pre-agriculture, and includes times when human beings didn't even have fire. No one cited a study. The statistic pointed to towards the end of the post is drawn from an OKCupid statistical graph that women find 80% of men unattractive. Human being males in civilizations reproduced in MUCH higher numbers, high enough that the ov…
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 09:29 PM
18

oh, well that's completely fucked. no wonder we're all miserable. that's seriously what most American women want. they end up fucking pissed that they have to settle and make us miserable by association. and how many of those guys are even above-average looks-wise? crazy shit.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 07:39 PM
14

yeah, what I posted is what the average girl generally looks for tbh. she's probably in the 0.040% club. and like the top 0.040% guys are gonna commit to her lmao
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 07:23 PM
30

being a model is doing nothing but posing for your entire life and getting paid shit-tons of money and high-quality men for it. the social connections made from modelling range everywhere from Hollywood to the Fortune 500 to top-tier artists and writers. it's like the self-starting billionaire CEO for women but with no work except for being attractive.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 07:21 PM
40

6'3"+, high-earner, equally attractive or more attractive than her = about 0.2% of the entire global male population good luck
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 07:17 PM
59

that's what a lifetime of pump-and-dumps gets you.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 06:59 PM
16

Yeah, the sad thing is I don't know a woman who would refuse to go to one of his parties. I think it'd be a stretch to say all of them would fuck him, but the vast majority would just be another toy for the rich dude. And be very happy with it. That's when you realize that the whole 'social-justice' shit women spout is bullshit. They believe in absolutely zero of it. They use it for social purposes because their value is tied into group valuation.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 06:45 PM
4

Through pure chance, yeah. But I know some college sluts who are legitimately this bad and have admitted it in conversation. I don't think it's fake at all. Some women are this bad. But all women want to be used like that. They like the idea of being disposable.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 06:42 PM
12

Look at the Bilzerian IG feed, immediate confirmation of almost every RP truth. Unfortunately, we can't all be born into Bilzerian wealth. But plenty are, and those are the men who are sought after above all.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 06:34 PM
31

women don't want monogamy, they want subsidization. monogamy is the trade-off.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 05:25 PM
28

what women are actually like They kept talking for a while, about cum, and me, and where they wanted to cum on me, which was sorta arousing the way they were just talking about me like I was a toy or something
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 04:46 PM
5

The thing is, I wouldn't be here if feminists weren't extraordinarily hypocritical and self-endangering. I'd probably still be blue-pilled, paying out my ass for some broad to get a manicure. They played their hand too far and men are picking up on it.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 01:44 PM
13

But fuck the poor people right? You think marxism would be all about exploiting the poor. What they did do is fuck over a bunch of women that couldn't afford or dropped out of college and didn't become doctors and lawyers. Those women are the ones really getting fucked that relied on a partnership with a man. I know a good number of girls who are "Marxists" that openly talk about hypergamy and "elite dick" etc. They're all highly-educated, trust-fund white women in misandrist thought-bubbles who…
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 01:17 PM
1

But every time I see a pretty woman, even though I do not make prolonged eye contact (therefore further elevating her ego), I might think about her, or if she's on Instagram I'll follow her. Bro, you've literally got it all wrong. Eye-contact and actually talking to her might elevate yours, whacking it to her Instagram pics, following her and thinking about a girl you've never spoken to only elevates hers.
/r/MGTOW18/07/17 01:09 PM
4

no, I don't want anyone I know doxxed -- it's way too easy to type the exact text into Twitter search and come up with the username/bio etc. if you're on Twitter, though, you know how stank Millennial women's feeds are.
/r/MGTOW17/07/17 04:09 PM
12

I know girls who post tweets like, "If you haven't sucked dick for spaghetti, you're not a [whatever, Millennial woman or some shit]"
/r/MGTOW17/07/17 02:47 PM
7

no, I know you're joking but vigilantes are literally the worst thing ever. it always ends up really fucked up and they always get it wrong.
/r/MGTOW17/07/17 11:08 AM
7

Society protects her now. The government protects her. Cities protect her. Police protect her. Being around other women with regularity allows them to form cliques, where they influence each other and become synchronized to group thought patterns. I've yet to meet a woman who doesn't act exactly like her closest five friends. It's the same for us, but men are naturally programmed to be relatively self-sufficient. It's why we can take a little prodding from our friends, (e.g. "faggot" "douchebag"…
/r/MGTOW17/07/17 10:46 AM
1

I'm not saying that this doesn't happen, I'm just saying it would have been a hell of a lot easier to take some other route if this were the case. I could be wrong, honestly. I'm just presenting another side to this.
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 05:45 PM
2

well, they charged him with recklessness leading to death, so that's basically what they came up with. but apparently making an immediate judgment that the wife must have hired a random parasailing company to murder her husband for a will that we are unsure exists or gives anything to her, while assuming that this parasailing company is willing to go along with some random woman's plea for murder against her husband and spend time in jail for assumed crimes...sure. you've really got a good case …
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 05:42 PM
3

the man operating the boat and the safety guy seen on video were both charged with recklessness leading to death
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 05:20 PM
13

well, the Economist is a hack magazine for bland centrist Macron lovers, let's start there
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 04:44 PM
24

joke but every joke holds a hint of truth
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 03:58 PM
-1

right. which makes it more unlikely that this was a paid murder thing. Thai guy risked his own life moving quickly on the gear and grabbing his hands, holding him from falling after he unclipped from safety gear for a good chunk of in-air time. negligence? irresponsible? maybe, yes. as I said in my post, the straps seemed to have slipped beneath his arms causing severe pain, which might have caused him to unclip. but murder? no. I really don't think so.
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 03:07 PM
1

lol look at any other parasailing video. they always jump on, it's part of the safety gig.
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 02:49 PM
1

It looks like the straps caught under his arms, the tension between the straps and the parasail caused severe pain to his underarm/shoulder region and he unclipped himself. We do stupid things when there's high adrenaline and pain involved. I think jumping to the conclusion that this was a murder is a little bit rash. Parasailing accidents do happen.
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 02:45 PM
49

delusional edit: like seriously, just read this: equality can’t be achieved by treating everyone equally.
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 12:26 PM
3

one month in prison for $300,000 in extortion seems pretty light
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 08:06 AM
8

sad that I literally don't ever want to have a daughter because of this shit
/r/MGTOW16/07/17 08:00 AM
3

Finland and Spain seem to be doing fine. India has a history with the British but like 10% speak English. France should be on here.
/r/MGTOW15/07/17 07:36 PM
7

weird that France isn't on here
/r/MGTOW15/07/17 05:35 PM
8

lol sure
/r/MGTOW15/07/17 03:42 PM
2

I mean, who buys all the clothing, and the makeup, and the accessories for the dog, and the excessive toys for the kids? Who convinces you to buy the larger television set, who asks for all of that jewelry, who wants to go out on Friday night because their friends all do it and they don't want to be the one sitting at home? And you get the bigger house because she wants it, and you get the nicer car because she wants it. Women know intrinsically that they are the most shameless consumers of West…
/r/MGTOW15/07/17 07:19 AM
1

I mean, just look at TRP for instance. Men there will run circles around each other to call other people on the forum beta cucks. Like, life is one big platform to display status to most people -- and most of the time, it's not even a correct appraisal of their objective worth. Look at it on the freeways and streets. People will speed up literally so you cannot pass them, then slow back down. People are fucked man, just look out for yourself.
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 06:26 PM
10

AWALT. Women have always been like this but cities, social media and dating apps have made them constantly aware of their options. In the 1800s, you would get a visitor to your home once every few months, if even. In 2010s, you walk outside your door and there are thousands of single and available men/women. not to mention Tinder and the like inflating their egos and whatnot.
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 01:31 PM
7

Not quite so much the fault of the generation itself but the failures of the generations before it. MGTOW tend to be Xers and Yers who realized that they were being fed a spoonful of bullshit. We come here to de-pussify, but let's be clear: 'pussy' is the default setting for these generations.
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 01:15 PM
1

never expect anyone to support you. the most common misconception on this sub is that men are better than women. people, generally, are status-obsessed and will do whatever it takes to get ahead. if you're a step behind, they'll make sure to point it out to everyone because it makes them look better. women just have a leg up on men in this because their existence centers around it.
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 12:58 PM
1

too bad most men are little dipshits who will orbit a woman proudly for years
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 06:39 AM
1

karma's a bitch.
/r/MGTOW14/07/17 06:15 AM
4

lmfao
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 07:06 PM
13

posted this in another thread but here: It's because 'bad boys' are naturally sociopathic. Women innately understand that the rules of society as we are taught are bullshit. Being a 'good person' is a shit-test. They don't select towards empathy and understanding and altruism, they select towards selfishness, hoarding and greed. This ensures that if they're the primary mate for a sociopath, they'll get fruits of labor when they fuck. Capitalism is literally an extension of this whole phenomenon.…
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 02:46 PM
10

wait, so she refused to have a threesome with her boyfriend and his friend, because it was degrading...and then fucked his family member and a family friend in a threesome? fucking sad how women are. I don't feel sad for them, I'm sad for the fucking world. that's some twisted shit. Millennial women are worthless
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 02:23 PM
1

there's no other way to say it. only saying 'states' is just too vague by journalistic standards. gotta be in the AP stylebook somewhere. I get where you're coming from though
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 02:14 PM
4

Women lose their sexual appetites after locking down a husband. This has evolutionary reasoning behind it: after they've had a child with one, they contort their psychology to justify divorce so as to go have a child with another.
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 06:04 AM
2

that's the correct way to type it out. eight states isn't specific and tends to refer to international states. American states doesn't work because American is a denotation of citizenship. 'Eight U.S. states' is grammatically correct, 'Eight United States states' isn't, because, well, obviously.
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 06:00 AM
2

Who knows, man? Maybe she watched some Netflix show and decided that all of a sudden your relationship wasn't fitting the bill? Maybe she saw some 6'3" dude at work in a suit and it gave her a few tingles, and then she came home and you were emotionally unavailable. That's all it takes. But it doesn't matter now, because you have to know she's at bars and wherever getting free drinks and hit on endlessly. You are now part of her past and she owes you zero. Contact a lawyer immediately.
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 05:36 AM
1

what a fucking cunt. that's a word I rarely use, but when the glove fits...
/r/MGTOW13/07/17 05:22 AM
3

poetry.
/r/MGTOW12/07/17 06:28 PM
25

It's because 'bad boys' are naturally sociopathic. Women innately understand that the rules of society as we are taught are bullshit. Being a 'good person' is a shit-test. They don't select towards empathy and understanding and altruism, they select towards selfishness, hoarding and greed. This ensures that if they're the primary mate for a sociopath, they'll get fruits of labor when they fuck. Capitalism is literally an extension of this whole phenomenon. Which is the most ironic thing of all o…
/r/MGTOW12/07/17 05:38 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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