TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

tokyo__driftwood Archive

View 1 post and 49 comments by tokyo__driftwood on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
43

Question For Womentokyo__driftwood/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/21 12:42 AM
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-3

Women have low standards for everything except looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/23 12:05 AM
8

Yeah but there's also a difference in "thicc" and fat women, and everyone who actually interacts with people irl knows the difference and meets people in both categories. Men are not filtering "statistically overweight" people out of their dating pool. They're filtering visibly fat women out. And many aren't even doing that
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/23 06:28 PM
5

To use the example given, men preferring younger women is a painfully obvious truth of life. If a woman in her 30s doesn't believe that, it's willful ignorance. Telling your 30 yo friend you prefer younger women won't suddenly enlighten her, it'll just change how she views YOU for the negative. She will label you a creep or pervert for wanting younger women, which allows her to maintain her worldview that "good guys don't care about age". Women are generally more likely to reframe information to…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/23 06:26 PM
3

It's not fear, it's social intelligence. It's usually the strategically smart move to maintain good social circles, and that's hard to do if you keep being a dick to people bc "I'm honest and not a pussy"
/r/PurplePillDebate27/09/23 06:16 PM
2

I'm not sure what you're point is. You cited yourself the part of the study describing how women messaged men outside of the top 20%. My point was that this indicates nothing whatsoever. Women match with, and message, men they find unattractive, with no intention at all to date them or "give them a chance" in any way. Women messaging outside of the top 20% doesn't change the fact that the 20% are who they're actually pursuing. Your second paragraph makes no sense at all in the context of this th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:57 PM
2

No, I'm correctly estimating the lack of any meaningful information on a tinder profile. To claim even half of men share disqualifying social views in their tinder bio is laughable
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:31 PM
3

1) Any subreddit is going to be a poor reflection of the overall population. It's very obvious from REAL LIFE social interaction that redditors are more politically minded than the average person. Women who frequent women's subs are going to be even moreso. 2) I'm not objecting to the idea that someone's worldview is a disqualifying factor in dating. I'm objecting to the fact that it's a disqualifying factor in the initial swipe of an OLD interaction. There's simply not enough information on the…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:28 PM
2

Anyone who's used a dating app as an average looking male could tell you this though. You WILL get matches, and some will message you. But how many of these women will actually give you their number, go on a date, or show any sign of meaningful interest? Few to none.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:20 PM
1

Highly delusional if you think that any of these things are responsible for women rejecting men on dating apps, at least on any meaningful scale. In my experience, the overwhelming majority of dating profiles don't even mention people's religion, political views etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:15 PM
1

"most compatible"? As the comment above said, women swipe the same way as men, looking at their pics a couple seconds and then moving on. There's no assessment of personality going on. Just like men, women are swiping on who they're initially, physically attracted to. They're just much, much pickier then men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/23 09:09 PM
14

Exactly. Women have no reason to invest the effort and approach Man #1 when 2, 3, 4, and 5 will approach her without her doing anything. It's like someone getting food delivered to them for free and then asking why they don't shop for groceries.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/23 03:07 PM
3

The problem is that women don't state this. They say, almost verbatim, "I hate being approached, I don't want to be approached at the gym, I just go to the bar to have fun not meet people, etc etc etc". When the reality is they would be ok with being approached almost anywhere if the guy was attractive/charismatic enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/23 02:03 PM
6

Gross oversimplification. Reddit and ppd specifically is heavily skewed towards antisocial men. The average man wants (and has) male friends, and cares deeply about them. These same men also want romantic companionship and feel lonely/sad when they don't have it.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/23 03:20 PM
0

The fact that someone mentions the value of basic, positive virtues and you default to calling them a fanatic is telling, and kind of reinforces his point
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/23 08:57 PM
1

I actually agree with pretty much all of that, I think you have a very insightful view of the situation. I think there does exist a problem where the "outsourcing" you're describing feels less gratifying than the authentic version. To use the easiest example, while porn scratches most people's sexual itch, it's immensely less rewarding than sex with a partner. So most people are getting their needs met pretty easily and then wind up feeling less happy overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/23 08:49 PM
10

Which serves only to reinforce what I'm assuming is OP's point. The common denominator is hot guys getting laid, while those that aren't, don't. This has always been the case. What's new is that where 60 years ago an average, agreeable man ended up with an average woman, now he ends up alone very often.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/23 08:36 PM
3

Statistically speaking, the men who DO run in the circles of "career women" also don't want them. There's been plenty of studies indicating that a woman making roughly the same as her partner (or more) dramatically reduces the odds of success in the relationship. And the personality traits that generally promote success in most industries - e.g. competitiveness, leadership, assertiveness - are traits we associate with masculinity on a deep psychological level. Masculine women are unattractive, p…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/23 10:34 PM
1

I disagree with the idea that you can't be a bad partner due to factors out of your control. "Choice" or "fault" are kind of irrelevant, if a man or woman does not provide for the sexual needs of their partner, they are being a bad partner. The choice to remain in the relationship, knowing that you're not attracted to your partner, is very much your fault. A scenario I've seen way too often: woman gets into a relationship. Strings the man along for a long time without sex, or reluctantly has sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/23 04:37 PM
0

Not to come across as an asshole, but if such a statement bothers you it's truly your problem, not theirs. If you are truly bothered by someone stating their beliefs, especially without any kind of threat or suggestion of violence, you are either too sensitive or have a compulsion to control the beliefs of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/23 04:19 PM
2

You make a lot of good points, but I think that the problem you present in the first paragraph is actually more concrete than that. It's not just movies and TV shows showing "red pill" men as being successful with women. The "bucket" of personality traits associated with being "red pill" (which are really just masculine traits) - such as aggressiveness, confidence, assertiveness, independence, etc. - all actually DO lead to more success with women. They're attractive traits. The problem is that …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/23 06:00 PM
1

That's not what's being suggested here at all. As society becomes more progressive and egalitarian, one thing that comes with that is a great voice and influence for women. Also, with single motherhood being far more common than in the past, many men are raised without masculine influence. As a result of this, much of young men's ideas on dating, love, sex, and relationships is formed by women. And much of these ideas are outright lies, that get perpetuated because they're comfortable, agreeable…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/23 05:30 PM
2

The difference is visibility. The "business men" involved in producing porn operate mostly in the background, and rarely advertise themselves. I bet if you met one of these individuals in public they'd say they work in "media" or "video production" or something ambiguous. Other men wouldn't improve of these people and what they do, but they avoid attention and in doing so avoid most criticism. Contrast this with OF "models", who are typically very open with their profession, advertise aggressive…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/23 08:57 PM
1

I wouldn't say anyone's necessarily "better" at any job. I'm hoping this isn't meant as a general statement about competency in occupation. With the significant majority of jobs it is very easy to quantifiably demonstrate how one employee is "better" at their job than another. It would be ridiculous to claim, for example, that men are not objectively "better" construction workers than women. teaching While this is true, if we broaden the scope to education in general, some interesting patterns a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 08:25 PM
1

Alright, then name 5 jobs women do better than men, excluding caretaking/childraising.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/23 07:56 PM
1

What are you even saying? Are you trying to honestly convince me that people with robust social/dating lives don't go outside??
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 01:50 PM
1

Did you even try to read? Leaving your house is the FIRST STEP towards having any success in dating. It's not a magic fix, it's literally the bare minimum prerequisite to start building a social life
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/23 01:13 PM
1

They weren't happy with the men they ended up with in the past and they aren't happy with the men they end up with now. This gets said a lot, but is really just blatant conjecture. The only statistics we have to verify this one way or another (mostly marriage length/divorce rate) point to the opposite, although there's many other social factors that would bias those stats. However, reason suggests that a lack of FOMO and a generally higher rate of high-value men (due to greater income equality, …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 06:23 PM
1

Yes and no. High value men have always had "options", but that has a different meaning now than it used to. No longer are the man's "options" a bunch of local women hoping he'll choose to court them. Post-sexual revolution, it's now a series of past sexual partners. These women all have good reason to believe they have a shot at being the one he settles down with, but most will be disappointed. Statistically many more women will sleep with high value men than will actually marry one, especially …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 04:40 PM
1

The stay-inside introvert thing might be the most egregious of OP's arguments. Any half-decent advice on dating starts with "go out and ...". The one and only way to get dates as an introvert is dating apps, and we all know how well that works for the average man.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 01:57 PM
1

I think one can very reasonably argue that it IS intrinsically bad for the population. The natural conclusion of women having higher smv is that they will (reasonably) seek their best attainable option. This will usually be a high value (maybe even top 10%) man, who will have many potential partners available to him. The "best case" outcome of this scenario is that the high smv man will pick one of his options for long term monogamy, and the other women will settle. This is a recipe for many uns…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/23 01:53 PM
0

Wanting your partner to think that you're the BEST option is completely delusional, and rooted in insecurity. The twofold problem is rampant insecurity in men, and behaviors by women that validate those insecurities
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 04:26 PM
1

This view is only held by highly traditional men/those from hypermasculine cultures (such as Latin America). Where I am from (United States), the typical man would be ecstatic if an attractive woman approached him, and flattered even if an unattractive woman did
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 04:23 PM
0

Tbf the person you are replying to literally never said they wanted casual sex or many partners. It's genuinely demoralizing for men with limited sexual experience who want a long term monogamous relationship when all attractive women their age have 10+ body counts
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/22 04:18 PM
8

1000%. Just knowing that an attractive woman has gotten plastic surgery makes her less attractive to me. I'd rather a natural 7 than a fake 10
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/21 04:54 PM
2

Women can walk into a bar, do absolutely nothing, and (if she is so inclined) walk out in an hour with a sexually willing man who's as least as attractive as her. An average or below average man will have to go out of his way to approach women if he wants the same result. Barring extremely good luck, he still runs the chance of going home alone, unless he's willing to settle for someone much less attractive than himself. That's a pretty clear example of the massive effort disparity between men a…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 05:33 PM
1

I think there was a miscommunication. My point was not that men SHOULD pursue sex. Just speculating on why the mouse utopia is actually a fairly good model for ONE of the causes of male sexlessness. Granted there are other causes (feminism and rise in female wealth come to mind), but the affluence of western society is definitely producing large numbers of men who don't have the drive to become sexually competitive, and therefore become neets.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 05:03 PM
1

Access to easy, cheap gratification without social standing. In poor countries/societies you need to move up in the world to meet your needs and wants. In wealthy societies, you can pretty easily trick your brain into thinking that you're "eating well" (fast food), "accomplishing goals" (video games) and "having sex" (porn). Once your brain checks all the boxes, your drive to better yourself effectively dies from a neurochemical standpoint
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 04:58 PM
1

It's an incomplete solution that doesn't solve a lot of the tech-based issues you listed, but a cultural pushback on women in the workplace would be a start. To be clear, I think women should still have the OPPORTUNITY to work. But at the moment, young women are being raised to think that they WILL and MUST work. This causes them to pursue higher education and careers. They become financially independent, so financial stability and being a provider are no longer "attractive" male qualities. In s…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 04:52 PM
0

They aren't rejecting girls to play games, but they certainly aren't making significant efforts to better themselves or socialize in pursuit of sex. Dopamine is very important in drive, motivation, and feelings of reward. It doesn't seem far fetched to say that the availability of first world luxuries (porn especially) is oversaturating young men with dopamine. This would inhibit their drive to succeed, become fit, socialize, or pursue real sex. Ergo wealth of society -> neets and sexlessness
/r/PurplePillDebate15/10/21 04:41 PM
2

Considering I was looking for a rough number gauge of how much working out helps appearance my opinion is still pretty useless. I would likely overestimate the effect, as I think even "skinny to fit" transformations make night and day differences for men
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/21 01:09 AM
2

If you were to isolate the changes in soley physical appearance, what would you quantify that improvement as? Or better put, how much does "photo appeal" increase?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/21 01:07 AM
6

As a heterosexual male, my opinion on the attractiveness of other males is pretty moot to the question
/r/PurplePillDebate29/09/21 01:02 AM
6

I'm insinuating that by that definition, yes. I am a university student. I've witnessed frat guys do very well with women, frat guys who I've personally met. They're usually rather uninteresting people who are very good at leveraging their position and playing word games to get in girl's pants. Being cool gets you girls, getting girls doesn't mean you're cool lmao If you believe that getting women makes you intrinsically cool, there's a good chance that you actually ARE that douche that everyone…
/r/seduction05/03/20 03:04 AM
56

Backwards equation. People who are cool, interesting, and successful usually attract women. Attracting women doesn't make you cool man
/r/seduction04/03/20 11:55 PM
1

In no particular order:money, status, physical attractiveness (including fitness). Social prowess (how well you speak to people) is a strong runner up that usually comes hand in hand with status. My point in responding to OP's article is that we can't just declare the death of hypergamy because the education gap is reversing. Women will still continue to date upwards and across in the perceived dominance hierarchy. In fact, this is problematic from the male side of the equation. As men and women…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/20 05:22 PM
2

Lol I love this point, and don't know why it isn't made more often. In my limited experience, first generation immigrants are humble and hardworking, and their children are (if born in the US) entitled as fuck. Immigration to solve labor issues is kicking the can a very short way down the road
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/20 03:27 AM
0

This paper deals with educational hypergamy, or the idea of women dating men better educated than men. I know this is anecdotal and not real evidence, but I think a pretty cursory observation of modern dating markets shows that education is not even in the top 3 of factors affecting female dating choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/20 02:58 AM
0

Feigning status is also easier for men than women. For better or worse, money, social status, and power can compensate for physical attractiveness in men. Therefore, if a man gives off the false pretense that he is wealthy or important, he can date up. It isn't sustainable, but it happens. The reverse scenario practically never happens. Women can't really fool men into being higher value (well, aside from makeup, some clothes trickery, etc.), and they don't really need to, since most men would t…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/20 02:54 AM
1

Not staunchly defending the idea of hypergamy, but the idea of orbiters supports rather than refutes hypergamy. Orbiters are, practically by definition, lower value men, so women have no compulsion to branch swing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/20 02:49 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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