TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

wattwatty Archive

View 2 posts and 1,246 comments by wattwatty 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)
12

CMVwattwatty/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:13 AM
8

Discussionwattwatty/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 03:32 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,246 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
3

after an interaction with a stranger that they didn't ask for They were at a salsa club, FFS. Christ, the entitlement...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/19 08:14 PM
6

I'm a attractive thin 50+ woman If this is true, then this: they don't look at me as "a women they want to fuck" is simply incorrect. It is 100% wrong. They all want to fuck you. The old ones, the young ones, the married ones, the single ones. All. Of. Them. This doesn't mean they will act on it. But, if you are an attractive, thin woman, every man you meet has a fleeting thought of rawdogging the hell out of you. This is what women don't understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/19 09:07 PM
1

This is the response to OP. Well said.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/19 06:34 PM
8

It's totally a thing. All men want to know. You are completely correct that few men ever ask. I'm not saying that a high n-count is good, bad, or indifferent. I'm not saying that you've only ever had a bunch of bloops for partners or making any judgment about any of them. If they were male, they have wondered about. There have wondered about it a completely quantitative manner (ie what was the actual number). Whether they cared (ie would have made a decision to do something it not do something) …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/19 09:32 PM
5

He doesn't need further details: he knows with a reasonable precision what your count is. Also--since you were friends--I assume he knows, at least, several of the individual men. He has a ton of information. Is this why you said it would never occur to him to ask? I was confused by the statement (how would you know it never occurred to him? All you know is that he hasn't asked!), but now it makes more sense: he has no need to ask.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/19 09:13 PM
1

50% have been with a pro... You are completely insane. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/paying-for-sex-is-not-as-common-as-once-thought-2013-3
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/19 06:58 PM
4

"Fun" is code for "causes tingles." If I could cause tingles, I would never commit (ie be "secure"), because why would I? They are not exclusive in the sense that they couldn't co-exist. They are exclusive in the fact that, practically, they never do because of this selection effect.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/19 03:17 AM
3

Of course we understand the woman's reasoning But, to know it and to allow it to happen means living an unexamined life. Such a life is not worth living. Period. Edit: I realized I didn't answer your secondary questions. No: almost no men meet both preferences. If a woman is completely honest--"I'm not attracted to you, but we work well together."--then I'm ok with whatever she wants to do. If dude figures the deal is good enough after getting symmetric information, so be it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/19 02:51 AM
4

That women settle, but are never truly happy. That when a woman settles, it is begrudgingly, knowing he just isnt going to turn her on or give her the excitement she wants. She settles for secure guy, and deep down there is a pain inside her which screams “what are you doing!? You need to make babies with a better genetic specimen than this!” This is a pretty good exposition.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/19 02:50 AM
1

My recently ex-wife is far, far better looking than me. So much so that it was often embarrassing for both of us. I've only had one relationship where I was objectively the more attractive partner. This was with my late-college/early grad school gf (~4.5 yrs). She was essentially a ginger Hobbit. Nevertheless, she was very fond of telling me that I was no where near the best looking man she had ever been with.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/19 04:52 PM
1

This totally sounds like stress to me. I've been there (not to the point of reducing my libido this strongly, but bad). Try to alleviate the stress when you can (easier said than done, I know).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/19 07:07 PM
4

You're delusional. Twice a week is ridiculous. I am 16 months shy of 50 years old. I don't need to fuck 3 times every day, but I would like >8 times per week.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/19 04:23 AM
3

From the WP story: "For most of the past three decades, 20-something men and women reported similar rates of sexlessness. But that has changed in recent years. Since 2008, the share of men younger than 30 reporting no sex has nearly tripled, to 28 percent. That’s a much steeper increase than the 8 percentage point increase reported among their female peers."
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/19 03:10 AM
11

Women really want themost high value man in all respects--looks, power, etc--in their sphere of awareness. Nothing more, nothing less.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/19 09:12 PM
3

It’s less quantifiable and more related to avoiding the feeling where it’s clear they have no consistent attraction to me and the chief appeal of the relationship is comfort and convenience. This is a near perfect answer. This is what matters at the heart of any relationship for a man.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/19 02:43 AM
19

Several women have answered that nobody gave a shit in the 80's. As a man who was in college in the 80's:. Men cared. A lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/19 06:16 AM
4

Their lived experiences are just too different from one another. They might as well be from totally different cultures. Sounds like he gets that.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/19 04:18 AM
33

Been there, done that. Her filing for divorce was way better. Simple reason: Her filing for divorce was not a lie. Everything else was.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/18 03:42 PM
1

You're not wrong. It is risky behavior. I probably trust my instincts too much because the payoff is so immediate and substantial.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/18 05:44 AM
1

Make no mistake: When I do this, I am a full-on piece of shit. I'm 6'2" and have 19" biceps. I pick on smaller men. I kinda wish someone would fight me: It is a horrible thing to do to anyone, and I do not think it should be tolerated. But, it's like catnip. I've done it 7 times and gotten laid 5 times (so I guess I technically lied in my initial comment, but even the the other two times resulted in me being bought a drink by a woman).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/18 04:23 AM
2

I've told this story before, but... It's distressing how effective the following is: I'm at a bar. I walk up to a group of people, and I simply take some small item from one of the men. Lighter, fresh drink, never a phone or keys. Then, I just refuse to give it back. That simple. Works every single time. Showing dominance in a society where that is utterly superfluous to survival. That is what being a jerk means.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/18 08:31 PM
5

I meant what I said. The average woman has sex with Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/18 07:56 PM
7

How does the measured fact that young women are having less sex have anything to do with who they are having that (less frequent) sex with?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/18 07:56 PM
13

I don't have much to say about most of OP, but... Your average woman isn't bedding Chads... Yes, she is. But, not enough to satisfy her.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/18 06:34 PM
-1

A 5/10 man cannot get a 3/10 woman with any consistency. A 7/10 man can't get a 3/10 woman with any consistency! You have to be 8+9/10 as a man to have consistent, open options. That's why this doesn't apply to all men. NB construe 8/10 here as "really high value."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/18 03:56 AM
1

I would put myself in social situations where I could meet professional athletes.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/09/18 02:44 PM
1

Forget her, and when she comes crawling back, throw her out. Being smart isn't enough: you're gonna have to try if you want what you say you want. S. has the right idea: hit on every girl you see: you only have to be successful once a day. You're not good-looking under that fat, but you can still look ok if you lose it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/18 02:09 PM
0

you're a drama queen. sensitive as you to get this spun out over an imaginary statement. Can we put this somewhere as the answer for the next time somebody asks, "What exactly is 'gaslighting'?"?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/08/18 03:17 AM
7

Let me be more specific: the median single woman has more sex than the median single man. You can choose not to believe this, but every shred of evidence I have gathered in my nearly half century on the planet is consistent with this statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/18 06:25 PM
6

Is number of times a month a useful or informative metric? I agree that the guesses for both sexes are silly, but isn't it obvious that people in relationships skew the distribution a lot? When I was 22 and in a relationship, I was fucking more than 10 times a week (on average). When I was 23 and single, I had sex once every 6 months (maybe). Single women fuck a lot more than single men. However, paired people fuck a lot more than either of those populations.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/18 05:28 PM
1

No. Breitling analog.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:49 AM
4

That may be, but that litany of what you think the "good guy" is is nothing more than a solipsistic female view of men from the outside. It is exactly the kind of fucked-up categories that women slot men into based on what they think they observe. No man thinks any of those things when he says, "Joe is a good guy."
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:47 AM
2

You are, of course, essentially correct with much of this. But, my comment is more to say that even good social skills with same-sex people (here, men) is not adequate to have success with women. Being a well-socialized man without having some understanding of how fundamentally different women want and expect you to be towards them is the ideal way to produce a high beta. High betas (as you allude to above; maybe it was me) end up divorced at 45.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:42 AM
2

I get this. I also understand that most people are vacuous and tedious. Not all, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:34 AM
3

The “good guy” is the mascot of the male friend group. And female friend group. His jokes always miss. He doesn’t razz the best. He’s not the wittiest. The slickest. He’s just a sweet guy who is part of the group because they feel bad of letting him go. And he’s just so sweet — a good guy. You don't have a very good grasp on how men interact with each other. Secondly, are you looksmaxxed ? As good as I can be: I have a >$60 haircut, I own no clothes bought at Target, Kohls, JC Penny, etc. and th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:33 AM
1

You equating “sociable” with stupid macho brutes is your own problem. I did not make that equivalence. I did note that many of these types of social circles for me came from sports, but I did not say (nor did I mean to infer) that all did. I also ended the OP with “not core group.” OK. I'm not sure why that matters. I'm talking about being the kind of guy that other men will not immediately evaluate as an asshole. This is the primary evaluation that takes place when a new man starts to socialize…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:29 AM
3

Cool. Do what makes you happiest and most comfortable. But, you will limit your professional opportunities operating this way, and it doesn't matter what "line of work" you pursue: The result will be the same. If that's OK with you, I get it, really. But it is reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:20 AM
5

I get it. What I'm saying is... And you’re still struggling, it’s likely now because you’re not sociable, charming, playful etc. No. Being sociable with men and being a friend (a real friend, not an acquaintance or colleague) is important for men, but has no direct bearing on your success with women. It is true that being a "good guy" and having success with women are often correlated, but it's because the guys who have figured out how to be good with women generally understand people. BUT, the …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:11 AM
3

Nope. If you want to better your station in life, you better be "Rel" to all your colleagues: beer buddy, shooter of the shit. They will hate "Mr. Red."
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:06 AM
7

The constant stream of "TRPs are weirdo autists with no social skills, and that's why they are the way they are," smacks of concern trolling. I've always had a large circle of male friends, forged through various channels. The most prominent of these channels has been team sports. Men fucking love me! I'm the guy who's always up to just talk shit and have a beer, the guy who will help you out with something, the guy who gets tweet mentions like, "To heck with being like xxxx. Be like wattwatty! …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/18 01:03 AM
0

Just pulls his face together and makes him sexy AF. I still feel revulsion whenever I see his red carpet looks if he's got short hair though This is the same person with a different haircut! This is not a question of grooming making a difference. "Sexy AF" versus "revulsion" is mental illness.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/18 09:41 PM
1

It's just as "reprehensible" for men to pump and dump, but this is encouraged by RP That's not what you just said. You said it's OK for women to lie! I have, of course, known lots of men who have lied to women. I have also known lots of men who did not and will not lie to women. And, I've known just about everything in between (e.g. used to lie, told one bad lie and regretted it, you pick it). I have never known a woman who does not lie. About what she finds attractive. About the complicated cal…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 07:17 PM
3

Telling those lies is part of the female sexual strategy in our society. This I agree with. I also agree that it is understandable, considering that women have had to do this for a long time. However, it is still reprehensible on the face of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 07:01 PM
7

I was banned from RP for pointing out that you don't have to be mysoginistic to have sex with lots of women. It is certainly true that having sex with lots of women does not depend on misogyny. However, if you hate lying and liars and do have sex with lots of women, you will become a misogynist. To gain their respect a woman would have to treat beta the same as alfa. Certainly not. Indeed, I would consider such an attitude and outcome inherently bad. Women, by and large, operate well according t…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 06:45 PM
2

So if the second woman a man has sex with is hotter than the first, he’ll commit? What he’s been able to get in the past... over what time period? Sometimes, yes. Most of the time, it doesn't take more than 2-3. Statistics on number of partners over a man's lifetime basically tells us the mean: somewhere around 4-7. Relying on a partner’s inability to have sex with hotter women as the reason he doesn’t cheat or leave just doesn’t sound all that great to me. Indeed. I understand your reticence. B…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 01:57 PM
4

Women's soccer? Who cares?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/18 02:23 AM
6

It's what rich middle school girls play in the US. The US will never be a soccer power until poor people start playing it (like poor people everywhere else do!).
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/18 11:09 PM
3

Basically, how does he know he will never find anyone hotter? I didn't say that. I said that men commit to the hottest woman they have sex with. As soon as most men have sex with a woman substantially more attractive than what they've been able to get in the past, they commit. He might find somebody hotter, but the odds of him having sex with that woman are very small indeed. If he can, that might well lead to problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/18 10:35 PM
6

Have you ever been initially uninterested in woman, only to change your mind later (again, with no significant change in her appearance)? No. Never. Let me be a bit more specific: I have never known a woman I would consider dating whom at any point in time I was not interested in. If I am attracted to a woman, I am attracted from the get-go. That attraction can wane, e.g., if she proves to be abysmally stupid or particularly evil. But, it never grows. My attachment to a particular woman can incr…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/18 06:57 PM
3

This is pithy and 100% true.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/18 06:52 PM
3

In your experience are UMC women better than LMC/LC class women? I've had better (i.e. more honest and straightforward) interactions with lower-class women than with UMC and above women. ALL the UMC and UC women I have had sex with have been the very apotheosis of AWALT. Every. One. Are smart women better than average/dumb women? Smart women lie more effortlessly and better.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/18 04:12 PM
2

Have an upvote.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 07:14 PM
16

Man. There's only one answer: pump and dump them immediately. This is like the origin myth of RP. It's almost impossible for a man to pull this off to his real advantage: He was a non-sexual creature to her. Being put in that category is like slipping beyond the event horizon of a black hole -- you can't get out, no matter how hot you get, barring some miracle. More common is your "crush" deciding it's time for her to settle for beta bux and come sniffing around.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 07:13 PM
2

Do you mean "balk"?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 06:57 PM
0

Ehh, shacked up as good as married! NBD. Nevertheless, I should not have been carelessly presumptuous. Why? What you would expect him/her to say? It wouldn't be useful for me to say what I would expect. Your response would be, "No, I didn't say anything like that," or, "No, I do not think that." And I would say something like, "Your response betrays a stereotypical RP motivation." And, you would close with a, "You're nuts!" I often think we oughta have a psychologist parse responses around here …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 06:28 PM
0

If he were mean or sadistic. I understand. But, this directly implies that a person who makes "inappropriate" comments of the ilk you describe your BIL making are to be generally construed as dangerous. One might callthese dangerous guys...creepy. But, your BIL is not creepy. Picture two little boys who pull a girl's pigtails; one makes her blush and giggle while the other inadvertently goes too far and makes her cry. That's like the difference between them. My man would joke around about doing …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 05:48 PM
1

It's been a few years and now I realize that "inappropriate" is just his default setting but he's otherwise harmless so NBD. Doesn't this just mean he's charming (i.e. attractive)? I mean, what would make him not harmless? Surely you don't think serial killers or rapists go around dropping double entendres, right? He elicited an emotional response from you. 'Twas a win for him.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/18 03:02 PM
2

Absolutely. I find this particular notion the strangest of all here on PPD. If women "in the wild" actually believe that essentially every single man they ever meet has seen a prostitute (which is the mode opinion among women on here), I guess I would understand their... reticence. But, it is such a ridiculous idea that I refuse to believe any actual woman outside of this sub believes it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/18 08:22 PM
5

Shiiiiiit ...then all TERPS should understand completely how I feel because the evidence of men being scum in general is so plentiful you can’t help but trip over it everywhere you go. All the men you consider "men," i.e. all the men that you could remotely be attracted to? Then: Yeah, you're right: Those are generally not what could be referred to as "good people."
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/18 11:17 PM
3

Where's the raft of bloopers saying that no woman ever marries a man she isn't so attracted to that she can barely contain her lust?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/18 12:37 PM
1

This scenario obtains for men all the time! Over and over and over again. I am collecting every no from a woman on this thread for the next time somebody trots out the lie about women's "wants" changing with time.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/18 06:48 PM
6

Boring story: Girl dumped me during freshman year in college. She came sniffing back ~5 years later. I thought she must have "come to her senses." Married her. Turns out she had decided that she had hit the wall already (for various reasons) and was gonna get married. She hit the easiest target. We're now divorced after her admission that she never really found me attractive at all and a lot of RP truths being exposed.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/18 03:00 AM
4

I did this, and it turned out to be the biggest mistake of my life.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/06/18 02:33 AM
2

Fight Club is a mystery cult. Simple as that. Not old as time, but old as the latter part of the Roman Empire.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/18 04:32 PM
2

All these women saying they love Adam Driver's character on Girls?? Adam Sackler is a complete shitstain of a worthless human being. Any man would get as far away as possible from this person, and would never imagine anyone else would want to have anything to do with him. Until they swallow the pill, and then I'm just like,"Of course women love him..."
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/18 05:27 AM
1

I am 100% in agreement with Margaret Mead, who posited in her 1978 Redbook article that we need a societal taboo against any and all workplace sexual relationships between men and women. Women do not want this.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/18 03:06 AM
1

We fundamentally disagree, then. Or, maybe we're thinking of two different classes of comments/questions. I can imagine the kind of thing you are talking about is when an OP says something like, "Why do all women only date Neanderthals?" and have to pull back from that claim because it's ridiculous as written. They arrive at something like, "Why do women sometimes have an obvious preference for men who have obvious protective qualities?" I'm talking about like when a poster tries to frame a geda…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/18 04:48 PM
1

Yeah or it could also mean said red piller is spouting nonsense that isn’t representative as well. Of course it could. And, it that does happen. But -- and I fully admit my obvious bias -- I really do honestly think that a mythical impartial observer would find a lot (most?) of the counter-claims made by bloops to things like this to be overly-specific, twee, based on ridiculously closely parsing what was written, and/or other linguistic and logical (fallacious) gymnastics.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/18 04:35 PM
1

"deny the truth of..." can admit the notion that their experience doesn't match (i.e. their denial is not a lie). But, it also can mean that the blue denizens of PPD are far from a representative population. It's a self-selected bunch of weirdos.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/18 04:23 PM
1

I know this is probably some weird thing to go like "look the women of PurplePillDebate are proving AF/BB and thus The Red Pill" or at least someone is going to inevitably comment that. Somebody might well comment that, but it doesn't take too much experience on this sub to realize that leading, "Gotcha!"-type questions from RP never "work." The bloopers here aren't stupid and the experienced ones are pretty skilled at spotting these types of questions. They simply deny the truth of any embedded…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/18 02:49 PM
2

Most men see "HELL YES" a few times, depending on the stars' alignment. Yep. I find it very important to my personal enjoyment of sex, and I am, therefore, habitually disappointed. But, I get just enough positive reinforcement to make it worth trying.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/18 09:41 PM
2

Tig ole bitties FTW! All other things being equal, I prefer larger breasts on a woman. But, I've had girlfriends from A to DDD. The woman I was married to was a larger B.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/18 09:35 PM
1

But bullet to my head some things are more important than others, if I’m thinking about the stability of my family and such. Maybe that's the crux right there. To me, not living a lie (i.e. not living in a marriage without attraction) is more important to me than "the stability of my family." Even if I try to be selfless about it, I still know I would be of little use to my family if I knowingly lived a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/18 11:52 PM
1

In a marriage I personally find “commitment” and “loyalty” more important than “fidelity” and “attraction.” I think this might be the pithiest explanation of what marriage is to a woman I have ever read. I suggest that the inverse of this is what is most important to a man, i.e. fidelity and attraction are more important than commitment and loyalty. I know you were careful to say this was your personal ranking, but there's a consistent trend there.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/18 11:16 PM
2

while women rate based on medians, perhaps. Well, yeah. Specifically, however, they rate a given male human put in front of them relative to the median "man" they have established for themselves over time. The scare quotes here mean a man is a being of the opposite sex they notice who registers as a sexual being. This strong selection effect means that median is far above the (as you suggest) mode (and mean) of the distribution of all men. Men have mental models of attractiveness where the mean …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/18 07:05 PM
2

People who think that the Pareto distribution obtains the way OP describes don't understand it. 80% of the sex outside LTR's is had by 20% of the men out there in no-LTR land. Women are the gatekeepers for this sex, so the obverse does not obtain: 20% of the sex women have outside of LTR's is had by about 20% of the women. 40% of that sex is had by about 40% of those women. 60% of the sex... you see where I'm going.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/18 12:33 AM
4

no men cannot be taught to be masculine in a book It's your position that men cannot be taught to be masculine? Or, are you claiming it cannot be "taught...in a book." (In an effort not to play gotcha: If the latter, it's silly. Written language can be used to help anyone learn anything.)?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/18 11:02 PM
2

Indeed. Tucker Max is quite thoroughly Gen-X, being only incrementally younger than me. You can't get more glorifying-hookup-culture than his opus.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/18 01:34 AM
2

So, you were in an 11-year relationship and had ~3 affairs, right (sounds reasonable: lots of stuff happens in 11 years)? I think RP would say you're a really picky HB9, and a pretty honest one at that. You have not resorted to BB because you support yourself and don't seem (?) to want kids. Good on you for being honest with yourself and the men you encounter.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/18 06:02 PM
2

May I ask how many sexual partners you have had? Specifically, in the last 14 years?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/18 05:55 PM
6

This is remarkably easy, it turns out. Anri Okita, NSFW Also, her face is not great (looks better than usual in this pic). But the body is the closest thing to perfect I have ever seen.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/18 02:10 AM
1

Sure, to an extent. But, that's not what happens. Instead, people nitpick some detail about the way the question/situation is framed. "Well, I would choose neither steak nor caviar if I was stranded on a desert island, because I had a traumatic experience with a cow once and I took a solemn vow never to eat black food." Just figure out what is being asked if you want to respond.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/18 03:47 AM
6

Goddammit. I feel like I've just been rickrolled. I Googled and found Mssr. Pump's Twitter feed. Minutes I'll never get back...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/18 03:21 AM
1

It's good that these kinds of posts are never interpreted too literally here. And PPD denizens never use pathological, overly specific details from their own lives to render a gedanken experiment meaningless. Yeah, it's good that never happens...
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/18 03:15 AM
2

Yup. I have made precisely this argument before. If I could earn enough to feed myself and obtain ample passive entertainment for myself, I would only do enough to maintain that. Anything I do beyond keeping that base level of existence possible is to attract and/or keep women. All of it. Why would anybody "strive" otherwise? Striving leads to more stress. The recompense is acclaim and/or money. The only reason to have either acclaim or money is to attract women.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/18 02:37 AM
5

Yep. Every one. I will give my sister full credit: she refuses to settle for BB, so has never been married in her mid-40s. She's dated drug dealers and pro athletes. She'd rather be alone than settle. She'd be happy to tell you that herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/18 11:35 PM
1

These both seem like reasonable studies. What if we think about the possible practical import of the findings? Masculine men rate higher in attractiveness to women, whether there are menstruating or not. Menstruating raises the apparent attractiveness of all men, but doesn't increase the manly-nonmanly delta. Cool. Also, this effect seems to be observed only in paired-off women. So, consider how a woman in a relationship might decide whether or not to cheat. (Inb4, "I'd never cheat!"-- okay, you…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 08:47 PM
1

I wondered why you only noticed my commentary Based on my inspection (which could be wrong, i.e. incomplete), you're the only insulter who tried to rationalize the insult later. Your opinion is fine, and you are entitled to proclaim it, especially here. But, what you typed wasn't really an opinion. It was just name-calling designed to make somebody feel bad. Nothing more.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 01:29 AM
1

If you are upset report my comments. As I said (and you concurred), I wasn't personally offended. "Others did it too!" is not a becoming retort, however. Especially if you really think you did nothing wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 01:20 AM
1

You may be right about Jagger. As I said, I don't know. Here's a couple of news stories I found with 2 Google searches. I cherry-picked them, so YMMV. But the differences in the descriptions given are the kind of differences I'm talking about: Ali Jagger
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 01:17 AM
1

I don't know what Lothario means. Google is a wonderful invention... That basically fulfills your definition yes? No. He was a wildly successful rock star. There are myriad reasons for women to want to sleep with him. To be sure, his charisma was (is, for that matter) his doing, but he is not the kind of man I am talking about. That's the point: Chad is not Chad because of the outcome. Chad is fundamentally Chad, and the outcome (i.e. he gets laid) happens because it has to.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 12:13 AM
2

You are right: I did not care that you called me gay. Nevertheless, you meant it only as an insult. That was its only intent. You did not offer any analysis beyond calling me gay. You didn't even say my screed was crazy, or stupid, or silly, or deranged. You just said I was gay. Just to insult me and thereby discredit my argument, regardless of what you thought of it. After the fact, you tried to frame your statement to say that the text was homoerotic, though I'm not gay (or of undetermined sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/18 12:10 AM
1

You might characterize this as a dodge (hell, maybe it is), but: I don't know. I've never been around a lot of famous people in real life, beyond the occasional public elbow rub. The kind of energy I'm talking about can only be felt live and in person. Nevertheless... Wilt Chamberlain was Chad yes? I think so. He was so physically dominant in his time: He was, in fact, playing a different game than his opponents (or even teammates). Also, if he wasn't Chad, he would have had to dedicate so much …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 11:55 PM
2

I would be happy to debate whether RP is useful in this sense with you (I think it is, unsurprisingly), but you have an overgeneralization to wrangle with. And, seriously, you are doing a fine job at it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 05:07 AM
6

Let me say that I'm not trying to argue the OP with you. You guys can hash that out: I don't have a particular dog in that particular fight. But, your good exposition here suffers from one glaring... thing. It's this middle-school definition of "the scientific method": This is what the scientific method is: You make an observation, identify a problem or ask a question: "What would happen if I throw a rock through a window at such and such speed etc." Make a hypothesis and research: Research what…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:57 AM
1

OK, that's a fine definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:43 AM
4

When there are 7billion people on the earth, "some" can be hundreds of millions of people. Sure. Also, importantly, (1-some) = still billions.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:37 AM
1

Here's the full context: These men are flat-out different than other men. They have an almost electric presence that changes everything around them. He is disproportionately successful because of this: he scares, excites, intimidates, and naturally leads by turn. The last list are the things that Chad does that make him successful. He does them (rather, he inspires these reactions in others) because he's different from those other people. They are the accidents of his fundamental being, not the …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:29 AM
1

Some fraction of the male population fucks a lot of women. Some smaller fraction of that group is Chad. because of this... This. He excites, intimidates, etc. because he's made of testosterone. He's not Chad because he does these things.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:18 AM
1

PPD it's in reference to him fucking a lot of women. Yeah, but that's a silly definition is my point. that would be irrelevant to your definition. You are right. It is irrelevant to the definition. All I was noting is that almost every sexually active woman has fucked Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:12 AM
1

One of the places I've lived was quite a large city, indeed. I don't ask the women. It's incredible for me to believe if you are having sex with a woman for any appreciable length of time and you share an acquaintance that you don't know if they had sex or not. Things come up. These are the top 1% of men. I suspect Rasputin was Chad, but the YouTube dude ain't. Chad is not defined by the sheer volume of women he fucks (regardless of how prodigious the number is). Lots of just plain stubborn and …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 04:01 AM
2

I'm with you: I don't have anythign to say about the scientific basis or not of RP. But, I am interested in your comment. So, what's "not the right thing to do"? Is it: Men shouldn't want to have sex with women? Men shouldn't generalize about women? Men shouldn't engage dread game or plate spinning? So, what am asking is: Is it the motivations, the models, or the tactics that you find wrong? All of them?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:55 AM
1

Elephants are found disproportionately in class Mammalia among all living things. 100% disproportionately. Chad is found disproportionately in criminals and pro athletes and frat bros, but not nearly as disproportionately (i.e. <<100%).
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:27 AM
1

Again, a poor leader who makes a real leader as a underlying, makes the first person a good leader? I can't quite parse this, but I think you're asking if I think if someone who is a figurehead of an organization who relies on an underling to do most of the actual leading is a good leader? No, I don't. And, I'm sure those people exist, as I have seen them too. But, that's not every situation. And, that's not Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:16 AM
2

Sounds like something easy to make up. So does an elephant, but essentially everyone has seen one in real life.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:11 AM
2

I've met all of the men you describe as well. They exist too. Especially the idiot multi-millionaires. If you haven't met Chad while meeting those men... I guess I don't think you've paid attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:08 AM
3

I'm only "hung up on having what 'Chad' has" inasmuch as I want to fuck women. Like I said elsewhere, the fact that he really does exist is actually comforting: He won the lottery. Move on. Agreed: phenotypes are malleable, to some extent. Indeed, that might be the heart of RP. But, I'll never really be Chad. That's OK. But, I'll always be, at best, ersatz Chad. Everyone will know it too, because real Chad is sooooo obviously real Chad. He sticks out like a sore thumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 03:05 AM
4

They are not stereotypes of attractive men. But, stereotypically attractive men can be found disproportionately in their numbers.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:54 AM
5

Honestly a man like you describe sounds like he'd be exhausting to date I imagine this would be true.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:53 AM
3

Frat bros and criminals are more likely to have Chad in their ranks than a bunch of web developers or historians. That's the only point wrt to those populations. The bigger point is that anybody who has ever met more than 100 people in their life knows Chad. They've met him. He's not different for every woman, and he's not a mythical unicorn. He's real and he fucks.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:52 AM
2

He's often a criminal or a frat bro, but not every criminal nor every frat bro is Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:44 AM
1

I don't think so. Rather the opposite. No matter where you find him, he's the same. Here's some less-flattering generalizations, if you like: He fucks and does not commit. He's pushy and arrogant. He's often loud.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:40 AM
1

I won't hide from that characterization. Sure: he is. The notion that men don't exist that seem (almost) that preposterously competent and masculine is what I am decrying. They might not scare the sun from coming up or go back in time and kill Hitler, but they do other things that are just as far removed from my experience as those ridiculous examples.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:35 AM
2

He's a phenotype.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:21 AM
3

you haven't given any specific criteria besides that That's the point, in fact. There's no list, other than the one in the TL;DR: hyper-masculine, hyper-competitive, and hyper-competent. These men are common enough that everyone has met at least one.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:20 AM
1

It's 4, separate, distinct social circles. Each is... some size. I don't know: maybe each of the 4 circles is represented by roughly 50-80 people on my FB friends list (I'm old). They have relatively little overlap. Each circle has more than one, but fewer than 5, Chads in it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:11 AM
3

It does matter to me inasmuch as I think the argument about what Chad is silly and disingenuous. I have met enough examples of Chad in my life to immediately recognize him, mostly because he is sooo easy to recognize. I find it impossible to believe others have not noticed this pattern. I actually find it comforting: Chad flat-out won the genetic lottery. I cannot compete with him, really. All I can do is the best I can do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:07 AM
3

This is (1) my social circle from high school, (2) my social circle from college, (3) my social circle from the place I started my career, and (4) my social circle where I currently pursue my career. This is where people would meet and fuck, yes?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:04 AM
5

I'm not gay. If you think my description of Chad sounds erotic, I think that proves my point. You just wanted to dismiss the point by calling me a closeted gay. To my knowledge, I am not.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 02:02 AM
2

Whatevs. Doesn't matter. The point is that Chad is not imaginary nor wholly context specific.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:57 AM
5

Terrific. I'm gay. How exactly is that not just being used an insult?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:56 AM
3

a) Despite being called gay already, no I don't want to fuck Chad. The notion that I can identify him makes me want to fuck him is silly. b) I ain't Chad. c) I know I have had sex with Chad's leftovers.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:43 AM
0

Have you ever known anyone who was exceptional at something? Like, truly exceptional? I suppose it is possible you haven't in that case.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:40 AM
1

I've never had a true ONS, so, yeah, every woman I've fucked has fucked other people I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:35 AM
3

We were typing at the same time.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/18 01:21 AM
4

Do you have a dog?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/18 03:48 PM
3

A lot of men want a woman who's sexually adventurous and experienced but at the same time... will get annoyed if she did those same things with her past partners and won't do those things with them. FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/18 03:46 PM
1

Just because impressing women is the most important thing to you doesn't apply to other men. Well, I actually think it does apply to other men (because having sex is, despite what some people claim, essentially the most important thing for all men), but that's almost beside the point. Rather, what was being argued here was that impressing other men was vastly more important to men than impressing women. That's what I find ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/18 12:51 AM
1

Yeah showing off to impress... I do this all the time... your friends... ...but never, ever for this audience. Always, the audience is women. Indeed, I'd never want, need, try to acquire, or otherwise concern myself with money or cars or anything unless it was to show off to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/18 12:38 AM
1

It doesn't make sense We are in agreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/18 12:31 AM
1

Yeah, I basically agree. I would be scared to death that I'm gonna guess wrong one of these days and try to pull this on a guy that's gonna kick my ass without uttering a word. But... This is a good example of why I have so much trouble believing all the PPD denizens who claim they have no idea what an alpha male is. You can literally feel the almost electric presence of a real alpha. It's like they run on a different fuel than most people: they move... more powerfully than other people. They ar…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 08:52 PM
1

It's to impress the bros. Stop acting like this isn't a thing. So you are impressed by a man having a hot wife? You consider him admirable? You think he is, in some way, your superior? You want to emulate him? The appearance of his wife tells you something about his intrinsic worth? men show off a fuck-ton. Incontrovertibly true. In fact, showing off a fuck ton is one of the most intrinsic things a man can do. There's showing off dominance and aggression -- that's for the male audience. Then, th…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 08:47 PM
1

Every point above has either a reasonable opening or a concrete kernel of truth. I would only submit that most of the "extra steps" are nothing more than pure misandry. Indeed, like I said, the first sentence of the final point is something I completely agree with.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 01:33 PM
1

You're saying that when you do this, the woman of the man you belittled is drawn to you? I've never tried being a big enough asshole to do this in an attempt to take a woman from another guy. It's always just some guy in the same area and some woman I'm talking to. It's the equivalent of shoving them down and taking a dump on them: reprehensible. But, scarily effective.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 01:29 PM
0

Do you really think women are impressed by men’s trophy wives? I really think that women are impressed by men having attractive wives. I really think that men notice those wives, but don't think it says anything about the man beyond the things they can already see. No she didn’t win him any female votes. I’m beginning to think you aren’t American. I'm full-on 'Murican. Do you know any female Trump supporters? I do. They think she hung the moon. They think highly of her because she is physically …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 01:02 AM
0

Do you really think that Melania didn't get him female votes?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 12:50 AM
2

They marry young bimbos because those are the people who have bouncy tits and asses. That's all. You're overthinking it. A lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/18 12:42 AM
1

Ok I just googled that and the wiki specifically says it was coined as a term to describe attractive women being used as a status symbol for men to impress other men. So the fact a woman coined it is irrelevant. That's what the woman thought! Only a woman would think that other men would admire other men because of a trophy wife.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 11:08 PM
0

1) The term "trophy wife" was invented by a woman. 2) I live in a world where "trophy wives" are somewhat common. They are trotted out for dinner parties to assure the other wives that the man is a safe bet. The other men think the trophy owners are just lucky. Not better, not admirable. This is a universal view among my associates.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 10:30 PM
2

So, an actual flesh-and-blood man is telling you his lived experience and you are telling him he is wrong? Good to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 10:18 PM
2

No. Lol. Men like showing their women off to other men, not to other women. Men do not want to show off their women to other men. Only a woman would think that! Showing an attractive woman off to other men is, frankly, needlessly dangerous and fraught. Which is exactly why trophy wives are status symbols among men. If a man sees a really attractive woman on a man's arm, the odds of him even seeing the man are essentially zero. The first thing a woman does when sizing up other women is look at he…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 10:15 PM
2

Eh if that was truly the case among “men” then why is there the trope of the trophy wife? Why do men like showing their women off? Who are they trying to impress? These are all women's tropes! Trophy wives might be useful to impress the wife of your boss, but, all other things being equal, the best thing to do with a woman good enough to be termed a "trophy wife" is to keep her the fuck at home. Women pay attention to status conferred by a companion. Men pay attention to tits and ass. Also, WTF …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 10:07 PM
3

You’re telling me that the guy in the group with hottest girlfriend doesn’t enjoy a certain status? Yeah, I'm telling you that once you're out of high school, this is nonsense. Guys might want to fuck your girlfriend, but they don't admire you any more because of that. Thinking this way is the apotheosis of female solipsism.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 09:48 PM
1

Women who had a previous marriage were much less likely to be open to remarriage than there male counterparts. 54% is women said they were not open to another marriage, while only 30% if men said the same. I'm willing to admit my bias regarding this question, but even then: Doesn't it make sense that this response from divorced women is given because it is socially acceptable? If I flip through the study, it's hard to say because widowed and divorced are reported together, but it sure looks like…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 09:45 PM
3

That's a lot of man-hating stuff right there. Cool. Your last(ish) point, though, I might even agree with: all men want women's approval more than sex But, I don't understand why you continue with: They want the approval of "legit" women because that's what they need to get the approval of men. What experience/observation has led you to this conclusion? It's 100% wrong, BTW, but I really am curious why you say it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 09:13 PM
0

I'm not that insecure. Have we not effectively outlawed (or, at least, made taboo) using "insecure" as an insult here yet? That is its only intent here.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 08:13 PM
4

Do you want to have women lust over you? Honest to God, I do not understand how any heterosexual, not mentally ill man could answer this question any other way than with,"Of course I do." I want to be able to eat enough to keep from dying, sleep in relative comfort, and not be eaten by wild animals. How is this not the next thing in the list, 'cause it totally is!
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 06:40 PM
1

I don't know what to tell you. As I said, I don't do this to close friends, as I suspect they would no longer be my close friends (not would I expect them to remain so!). I physically take something belonging to another human being and don't give it back (I have, admittedly, returned some items days later). The men are afraid to challenge me for it (I'm 6'2" with a 52"chest and 19" biceps). If that's not bullying, I do not know what the word means.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 06:07 PM
1

I've used this example before, but one of the most disturbingly effective things I have found is to just take some small item from another man in front of a woman. Just take it and refuse to give it back. Total asshole move. Nothing an adult human should ever do in polite company (or anywhere). It works like catnip. Edit: This rightfully makes the men want to have little to do with me. I wouldn't want to have anything to do with me either. Therefore, I only do it to men I don't know well.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 01:28 PM
7

Men, by and large, do not branch swing, where the term means what it means: They do not ensure they have a firm hold on the next relationship before letting go of the first one (see how that's what the term means, and doesn't mean anything else?). Women transition from relationship to relationship primarily through branch swinging. But, sometimes men do, in fact, branch swing. When they do, they are cheating. When this happens they either (a) don't care (These men are shitty, but they know they …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 04:32 AM
2

This is BS, inasmuch as you imply that those categories are somehow the same (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in that assumption). I don't expect anecdotes to CYV, but I am really popular with men. I have a large circle of male friends, and most of those men have professed the desire to "be me," both publicly and privately. I am not a "king nerd," i.e. I don't have a cadre of geeks that I lead. The men I am talking about are athletes, successful professionals, musicians, and the ilk. This m…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/18 04:01 AM
3

He's all right with this, though, believing that he has a greater mission in the world. This is the most nonsensical line in a nonsensical post.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 11:23 PM
4

A slut is a woman who professes to have dealbreakers, but never enforces them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 03:21 AM
5

some people still think that as long as 'commitment' is offered to a woman, that all her needs are met. Who thinks that?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 03:17 AM
2

Women accept commitment from low-value men. That fact calibrates to what extent they value it. Namely, they value it so highly that even the commitment of a low-value man is desirable. If women didn't find it desirable, they would not solicit commitment from low-value men. Is this rational? Maybe not (and maybe that is what you mean). Nevertheless, it is reality and the only thing that determines value is the "market" in this case.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 03:11 AM
2

You don't see most of the single women you know actively seeking commitment? I think you are very unusual if that is the case (assuming you are older than, say, 23).
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 03:04 AM
1

What do you perceive? Do you find that women are not securing commitment from lots of low-value men? I find that they are, and that they are actively soliciting that commitment.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/18 02:59 AM
5

Someone who is truly kind and loving will be loved in return for who they are. I fundamentally do not believe this is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/18 12:32 AM
8

I find this sad. I'm not trying to be mean to you, but this is literally one of the main reasons I decided not to have children. My offspring would likely be not-so attractive. I would not wish that on someone I professed to love.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/18 10:23 PM
5

This cover letter/resume metaphor is not the worst one. So, I'll do what people do and strangle it... Two things seem to me to be important to RP with respect to this metaphor: Men are told to work on their resume all the time, and no one ever tells them to make sure the cover letter is decent, lest their application get shit-canned immediately. Thoughtful people might be able to figure this out, but mostly only experience would help you here (i.e., you've reviewed resumes or saw someone else do…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/05/18 10:10 PM
2

Why would Chad fuck the post wall hag if he's got younger women? Why would Chad put an "or" where an "and" will suffice? Fine, I'll limit it to men who actually garner respect in western society. Hold on just a sec and I'll move my feet out of the way so you can get by. I don't want you to fall: Those goalposts you are moving look heavy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 08:42 PM
1

Chad fucks post-wall women? I don't understand. Chad fucks everything. Chad commits to nothing. Please, many women don't sharply decline in SMV with age. This is patent nonsense. Yes, they do. Go out on the street and pick 5 random men and 5 random women ask them just that question. The idea that you won't hear >=7 affirmative responses is precisely the kind of fantasy you are suggesting RP engages in. I think the whole idea of teenage girls being at their prime sexual peak is absurd. Same thing…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 08:34 PM
0

But how could she branch swing if she's post-wall. Chad's still happy to fuck her in the supply closet. She could also believe (wish? hope?) he's ready to LTR her. So the assumption is she is wrong about not being able to keep up hypergamous actions and has not actually, in fact, hit the wall when she "hits the wall"? I think this does, in fact, happen. The notion that women in almost all cases sharply decline in SMV with age is not some semi-secret RP trope that the rest of the world doesn't sh…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 08:14 PM
-1

That trap being what, though? Marriage with a heavy risk of divorce? Marriage with an essential guarantee of divorce. So, when she decides she hit's the wall, she goes full blown monogamous, and is ready to settle forever. But, at the same time, she's at the highest chance of branch swinging? How is that confusing? She, of course, thinks she's willing and able to settle forever, until she realizes just how miserable being with a man she has no attraction for really is. The only thing that preven…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 08:04 PM
2

You're gonna hear different things, but let me offer why the Wall is important to me. Frankly, it's because of the kind of still good-looking women you refer to in the OP: Their existence and their thought processes as they reach the wall are a danger to men who don't want to be caught in the AF/BB trap. Women, in fact, decide when they hit the Wall. Whenever a given woman decides she is there, that's when she will start looking--in earnest--for a BB. This putative woman may well still look quit…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/18 07:48 PM
1

When anybody asks what "selection bias" means, they ought to be directed to this post.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/18 03:17 AM
4

My God. These responses make me want to walk out into the ocean.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/18 12:30 AM
1

Finally, the chain of signifiers that are simultaneously present and absent that point towards the referent of "Derrida", insofar as we accept the metaphysical notions of being. I LOL'ed. Well done.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 06:56 PM
2

Christina Hendricks, Tiffany Amber Thiessen, and Grace Potter are what it is all about. I am finding myself looking for images of Hayley Atwell more and more nowdays...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 06:43 PM
3

You know, it's likely an explanation/theory that I don't want to push too far, but RP is all about gender differences. And, there are very few women's bodies that are more womanly--inasmuch as it is "other" relative to a man--than Iskra Lawrence's. All those curves are something that is quite different from my body or another man's.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 06:33 PM
1

I don't know if it was ever said, but she was clearly the "featured" dancer.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 05:33 PM
1

The black chick is named Darcell Grimes. Didn't even have to Google it...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 05:24 PM
1

Oh. Hell. Yes!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 05:22 PM
2

It's Iskra Lawrence. I have almost all images of her burned into my brain.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/18 05:22 PM
1

People who cheat are shitty. Men either (a) feel bad they cheated (beyond regret about being caught) or (b) don't care (i.e. are sociopaths) Women always have a rationalization for why they cheated. This is perhaps the primary reason why I am a misogynist.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/18 12:55 AM
13

Really? I'm perfectly fine with a woman breastfeeding wherever the fuck she wants. I don't find it titillating. It's just something I think nursing mothers oughta be able to do without getting hassled.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/18 12:51 AM
1

I don't quite understand how a grown woman doesn't realize that a man telling her that her "childlike wonder is contagious and delightful," means,"You're not smart, but I dig the manic pixie dream girl thing you have going on." It's the most stereotypical back-handed compliment I've ever heard.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 08:05 PM
1

How exactly are the bulk of responses on this thread from women different from, "No, these men are wrong. Their lived experience is invalid."?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 07:57 PM
1

I understand. I will say that I posted the comment before the advice tag was offered to and accepted by OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 05:28 PM
0

This is precisely the kind of horseshit line that I (a 40's man with a smart person job) would used in a 20's woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 12:50 PM
2

A man recently told me my “childlike wonder” was “contagious and delightful.” There are often debates here in ppd about what "creepy" means. This is the apotheosis of creepy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 04:29 AM
8

You, sir, do not know your place. You're BB. 'Cept, of course, you're ultimately not, as you deliver ultimatums. I cannot imagine much that would infuriate a woman more than that. You're lucky you haven't been seriously hurt.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/18 04:26 AM
3

It's obvious you are looking for support for/invective against someone you know. OK. Unemployed? Hell, maybe not: She has a nursing degree! Underemployed? Sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 06:25 PM
2

My field is more competitive than the job market for PhD nurses, and the number of physical places I can get a job doing what I am trained for is limited (very limited, in fact). Also, for me, I am well-established in my career at this point and I make a shitload of cash (compared to most people in my field). So, I would require a comparable position at her new institution (or one nearby) to get me to move. The only thing that might modify this would be if she was obviously gonna be a superstar …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 06:17 PM
1

Anyone with a semi-functioning brain understands that actually having options is indefinitely more important than merely pretending. I have an, at least, semi-functioning brain, and I do not understand this statement. I assume you mean "infinitely" and not "indefinitely." Nevertheless, how is it "more important" to actually have options? Do you just mean that it's easier to act like you have options in that case? If so, are you claiming that women are so insightful and intuitive that this fact w…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 05:51 PM
7

This is really specific. Like, really specific... The obvious question is: What do I do for a living? Am I easily movable in that sense? Or, is this a true two-body problem?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 05:30 PM
4

Admittedly, it is basically a line from a comedy routine, but men are very easy to please. Attention to providing sex and food is just about all men require actively. Men often desire lack of action with respect to other things. I do not want drama, or a list of chores, or needless angst, or a social calendar full of shitheads, etc. Conversely, any man who wants a clean house and does nothing to make it happen is an asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 02:31 AM
17

It is only wrong if you tell them you are attracted to them. No lies = no problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/18 02:24 AM
4

...and doing all of this seemingly effortlessly. TRP will always be try-hards, and that stink is hard to cover up. Nailed perfectly what women think the difference is. In reality, the difference is not just natural vs. not. It's whether truth was learned slowly, steadily, through experience... naturally, versus whether it was fed to one all at once, i.e. like a pill. The thought processes, opinions, rational conclusions, etc.--all the external trappings--are the same between a "fake" alpha and C…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/18 03:53 AM
2

IKR? I started to qualify it with something like, "Maybe if she pulled out a penis?" But, to be honest, even then: If "she" was attractive enough to garner attention, ...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/18 12:37 AM
2

No. There is nothing she could say or do that would make her less sexually attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/18 04:51 PM
10

At the time, I got up and left, but totally let her pass it off as a goof later. We are now divorced, and she admits that she never really found me attractive and that the sickness was the thing that really got her disgusted with me.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 10:59 PM
6

Admittedly so, now that I read your OP carefully. But, I will say a couple of things. First, I did think seriously about "leaving" for a while when this happened. I actually tried to figure out if I could hide well enough from her for long enough to heal up a bit. Second, it also doesn't fit your "happily before" condition: This was far more like a "straw that broke the camel's back" scenario. She never really found me attractive, and this just robbed me of the only real attractive quality(ies) …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 10:50 PM
1

That's a great picture of me you have. Again, I kinda wish it was accurate. Am I swilling cheap beer and wearing a MAGA hat in this picture as well? I'm curious what you're doing (or, rather, why). Most people here just like to argue or have a pet agenda to push (and maybe to harden). You seem to be just ranting, and ad-homineming like it's your job. Isn't that just tiring?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 09:37 PM
20

I got sick from a congenital defect. It made me physically weak and relatively (though not markedly) sickly. I needed some help to do the most strenuous parts of everyday living (think climbing ladders and gathering lawn waste) for about 6 months. My wife flashed her phone number (digit by digit, with her hands) to a guy in an outdoor restaurant as I sat right beside her.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 09:20 PM
1

Ya know, I do kinda wish I was a virgin. Then, I could chalk it all up to bitterness and inexperience or whatever. But, I'm just an old man who has seen a lot of the world from a lot of different vantage points. Unfortunately, my views are shaped from years of experience. Of course, that doesn't prove anything, necessarily: I could be insane. But I find that when I make a prediction about how a woman is gonna act, my predictions are accurate with depressing regularity. I wish it weren't so.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 09:10 PM
1

This is unassailably true.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 05:54 PM
1

There are a lot of comments in this thread where women are telling men how they feel and/or think about famous versus non-famous women. Many of these comments are based on anecdotes and suppositions.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 05:51 PM
1

Women can't get the men they really want to commit to actually commit, as those men don't need to commit. Therefore, they trawl the lower depths of available men to get one to commit to them (i.e. provide resources). Some terpers might claim this only happens when woman hits "the wall," but I'm not even that sure the wall is important to this, or that the wall is a very useful concept at all (construed as it often is to mean a particular age). This is not a particularly controversial an idea on …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 03:00 AM
1

because...women get into relationships with men...who they hate having sex with...because...they want to get them to marry them? Literally every. Fucking. Day.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 02:38 AM
1

So, you're obviously not bright, as you just can't formulate a thought in writing. It's not your reasoning that makes no sense, it's the actual fucking sentence! They do not make any sense! Again, why would a woman lie about not liking something she enjoys doing in order to not doing? OK, slowly: Sue wants Joe to marry her. However, she finds Joe no more sexually attractive than a boiled chicken (NB as you say, you can claim this never happens, but just because you want that to be true doesn't m…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 02:29 AM
1

Again, if you have "standards" that demand that you be someone's stalker, you're not in the right just because these are your "standards". This makes no sense. (Neither does the stuff before it, now that I read it.) "I don't do that anymore," "I don't want to do that anymore" You are a master of moving the goalposts! Those two sentences are completely different! But, as it stands, neither is anything but a lie. Sooo, what possible reason could a woman have to lie that she doesn't want to do the …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 02:12 AM
1

just look at all the men whining about women being manipulative when they don't want to fuck them or when they can't read their minds. So, you would suggest those men should maybe just shut the f up and stop claiming they are being manipulated, no? We would agree on that. A person has to lack agency to be manipulated. Just because somebody wants to manipulate me doesn't mean they can manipulate me. Those are 2 utterly different things. Anybody gets to do with their body whatever they want. As I …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/18 01:32 AM
1

...not because the guy manipulated and emotionally blackmailed her into doing it. ahhh... "manipulated." Manipulation is the ultimate boogey-man, isn't it? Either women (especially young women) either have agency or they do not. Which is it? She cannot play the trump card "I don't like something" ... That is not what I said. Rather, I said: She cannot play the trump card of "I've changed since then!" and expect me to just go along with it. Those are 2 utterly different things. If you cannot see …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/18 10:52 PM
1

But having men fall over themselves to do things for you isn't nearly as wonderful as winning the Superbowl. If a man does these things for a woman it creates the impression in her mind that in return,she owes him something. I think that is a perfectly reasonable response to the OP. I might say it is not a universally shared position, but it is responsive to the question and does not indicate a wistful desire for the things listed. And don't say we're "asking for it" by showing cleavage or weari…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/18 12:36 AM
2

It seems that to TRP, everything women do or say has a hidden meaning. Well, to be fair, that is, in fact, a central tenet of TRP. But, I don't think it means... They make us appear more complicated than we are. Indeed, quite the contrary.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/18 12:29 AM
1

I do not understand Yes, that much was obvious from your first comment, where you >made up what was meant by the women in this thread. This is a top-drawer asshole move. Congratulations!
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/18 12:26 AM
1

Do you think she meant, "Building empire is fraught with morally reprehensible stuff, and I've experienced bad things with men wanting me, only on a smaller scale."? If you do, OK. But, those are the only two choices wrt interpretation of what was typed. She had to have meant one or the other, or totally didn't have anything coherent to say at all. Do you really - like really - think you know the contents of these female internet strangers' minds better than they do? I explicitly, specifically s…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/18 12:23 AM
0

I can assert that I did not say "I wish they did" and I did not think "I wish they did," As you say, I cannot know what your really think, but you said... I am fairly certain no empire has ever been built for me. You then catalogued a couple of examples where men made poor decisions/lost their shit/did things that no one would consider positive reactions over you. It makes sense that you consider those reactions as negatives. Why wouldn't you? But, I do not believe that you were equating the ill…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/18 12:09 AM
-2

I do, in fact, maintain that every one of the comments that does say, "No man does this for me," (which is not every comment) directly implies they wish they did. But, (1) killing is not the only thing that was listed as a "grand thing" men do to get women, and (2) I had previously conceded that not every comment had an explicit statement. If explicit statement is the standard, no comment that does not specifically state every thought on a question is useless.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/18 11:58 PM
-1

Apart from that, I've never had a guy go out of his way for me like you're suggesting in the post :( Pffhaha. They are doing those things for attractive women. are obvious examples. This comment is a bit more subtle: I feel nothing about it because I know men don’t feel this way about me. Do you really want to argue that comment is not wistful disappointment?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/18 11:50 PM
-1

"How did it feel when you passed a kidney stone?" "Well, I haven't passed a kidney stone, so I don't know how it feels... but I wish I had!" This is, of course, a ridiculously poor analogue for what was asked. Something more reasonable would be: "How does it feel when you win the Super Bowl?" "Well, I've never won the Super Bowl, so I don't know how it feels. People do win the Super Bowl, and I know they receive additional money for doing so, and I know they receive some measure of positive noto…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/18 11:46 PM
0

Pointing out men don’t do these things for you doesn’t mean you wish they did. I completely disagree. Every one of the comments that says, "No man does this for me," is totally saying, "... but I wish they did." You can, of course, argue that since that is not explicitly said, that I am making it up. OK. I'm making it up. 'Cept, I'm not.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/18 11:32 PM
0

The mode response is clearly, "No man has ever done any of those things for me." I did not expect that. I expected to hear that men don't do anything for pussy, but rather for a host of other reasons. I might have expected to hear, "Eww. That's so toxic." But, I really didn't expect to see, "Goddamn! It would be awesome if I could get more guys to fight over me!"
/r/PurplePillDebate24/04/18 11:15 PM
1

Can you name a single activity you have ever really enjoyed that you would not enjoy now? I cannot. There are things I did that I would not do now. There are things I am incapable of doing now. There are things I am legally prevented from doing now. But, if I ever liked doing something, I like doing it now. This is because I am not schizophrenic.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 01:04 PM
1

Then, no. That is manifest nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 04:11 AM
1

Why can't you wrap your head around something sexual she did and like before isn't something she no longer likes or into? I can't parse this. I think you might mean: "Why can't you wrap your head around the idea that something sexual she did and liked before might be something she no longer likes or is in to?" Is this what you mean?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 12:23 AM
1

Wouldn't it make more sense to assume that a person making a stupid mistake will eventually realize it doesn't work in his/her interests, How is it not in his interest? He's dating you. He has no reason to infer what he done in the past won't work with you. Only if you respond without him having to do those things does he get any feedback. If you called him on it, he'd either do those things or leave.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 12:19 AM
1

It's like a man who previously orbited a handful of girls in his younger days, bought them concert tickets, clothes, jewelry, dinners, ... If the man you are with did this in his younger days and does not spend money on you or shower you with gifts or perform in this way, he does not find you as attractive as the women he orbited in his younger days. Period. You can say you don't want those things from him, and that is a reasonable stance. But, his behavior in this sense is a straight-up, rock-s…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 12:13 AM
1

People change. This is obviously true. But, no, I do not think people's "sexual interests" change. I think they might have tried something and didn't like it, but that's not really an interest changing, is it? That's just an experience and data point. I think the purpose for which young women engage in particular sex acts changes as they age. This is precisely the calculus I want to avoid them being able to perform with me. But, that specific comment was about sex acts that might require a certa…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 12:09 AM
0

Has she had PiV sex on the second date ever before? Or has that been something she has, for some reason, considered "more" than a blowjob (It seems this is a common idea among Millennials; seems weird to me)? Basically, in the case of "vanilla" sexual acts like BJ's, fondling, PiV, a little hair-pulling, etc., if she is trying to use doing that as leverage to elicit commitment -- while having done it readily with others without commitment -- it means she does not actually find me attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/04/18 12:02 AM
0

I would say those are actually two separate questions, but, yes, I can see how they are related. It depends, I think (NB that is the point of my list: it always depends!). For example, the hair-pulling or choking: If she has determined that she needs to trust someone well for that to be OK, even if she let somebody do it (i.e. trusted someone) she shouldn't have in the past, I would get that. That level of trust might well require exclusivity. On the flipside, if she's had more than 2 other dick…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/18 11:55 PM
3

The more of these threads I see on PPD (and PPD sees a lot of these), and the more I hear this kind of explanation for why a woman might not want to do X with you after she did it with someone else, the more convinced I become that lumping all "things" into a single monolith confuses the issue(s). So, in that spirit: If she tried anal, and I really want it (NB I really bugs me that this is always the go-to "thing" - I don't want my dick in an asshole), she should try it one more time with me. If…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/18 10:37 PM
3

If the arousal was incapable of being hidden (e.g. the vagina "appears" and her forehead and lips turn purple), then yes. I want to know how much of the tales we're told here on PPD of arousal being completely non-spontaneous and always the result of a slow build-up are true.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 10:31 PM
1

n. something given or received in return or recompense for service, merit, hardship, etc. I certainly do not perceive sex as a reward according to this dictionary.com definition. I do, I suppose, see sex as a reward the same way I would see getting a payout from a slot machine as a reward: I engaged in playing the game (put my coins in, and kept putting them in), I was there at the right time, and random stuff going on inside the machine finally resulted in me getting what I want. Putting aside …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 10:15 PM
2

I'd buy you a pumpkin spice latte if I could... ;)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 07:50 PM
2

She stuck with the “nice guy” who was broke as hell. No man who can keep a woman hanging around for 10 years while being broke as hell is a “nice guy”. If she's a 6, what was he?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 07:49 PM
1

6'3", 240#, 38" waist, 52" chest, 18" biceps, 26" thighs. me: 6'2", 247#, 38" waist, 52" chest, 19" biceps, 24" thighs I can't say that I've ever had a woman throw themselves at me, however. an arrogant prick... which seemed to really attract some of these girls Yep, yep, yep, yep, yep. I have a hard time looking at women and seeing past the evil. Women are not evil (well, not any more evil than men). They lie constantly -- to themselves and others -- but their actions are true.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 06:35 PM
1

This list is likely the list for most every woman. I think it is likely close to comprehensive (i.e. all of the items are important) and pretty much wholly inclusive (i.e. she doesn't want many other things on the list and/or would only just "tolerate" additional items). I am not attempting to impugn you as "basic," just sating that you might have come up with the Platonic ideal of the requested list.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/18 06:27 PM
1

You'll never find a genuine woman who actually likes you for YOU We are in perfect agreement on this. Nothing I do or do not do will change that. I mean, you're 40. I don't know if it has worked for you, has it? You're still alone. I recently got a divorce I initiated because my wife was never really attracted to me. I do not want a LTR ever again. I have plenty of friends. I do not want someone to "stick around." I might lie to get laid, but I will not lie to myself (or allow someone else to li…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 05:56 AM
1

Thta's literally what you said. Maybe you should re-read it. It worked on more than one 40-yr-old woman. It worked on more than one younger woman. It worked on more than one affluent woman. It worked on more than one working-class woman. It worked on a woman with a PhD. It worked on more than one woman with a JD. It worked on a woman with a PhD and a JD! See how that works? Sure, some men like submissive women - but to change your personality to try and attract men, but becuase that's something …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 05:41 AM
0

You're tried it on everyone, have you? How the hell did you get that from what I said? I obviously meant that all of the women who I have personally seen this work on include women from those groups. That cross-section is pretty broad, and includes women from lots of socio-economic, ethnic, geographical, and education-level groups. It is no more a statement of true universality than is a poll. But, polls (if people don't intentionally lie) tell something about what is real. Women are individuals…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 05:30 AM
0

So, let me be clear: It is a complete and utter asshole move! No adult should ever do anything like it! Given no reward mechanism, I would not do it! I don't like doing it. I feel stupid and bad doing it. But, it works. It works on women my age (40's). It works on younger women. It works on affluent women. It works on working-class women. It works on women with PhD's and JD's. It is utterly depressing how well and universally it works.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 05:04 AM
1

30 yr olds? Meh, it's often a crap shoot. 35 yr olds? They almost always have old hands - skin is starting to get a little translucent and the faintest of age spots starting to develop. It's a dead giveaway no matter how young she might otherwise look. Even the most sun-averse women today do not wear gloves.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 04:54 AM
0

And yet, showing measured aggression (e.g. taking a small item from another man, essentially challenging him physically to take it back) is like flicking a switch in my experience. Pupils dilate, necks get touched, suddenly I'm Mr. Interesting. So, you say it turns you off? You are an outlier, to say the least.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 04:50 AM
1

Belittling others (esp. men) in the immediate group -- sort of kidding, but with an edge. Talking just a bit too loud. Talking over the women. Embarrassing them (again, just a little). Being pushy with wait staff (more than what is necessary to obtain good service). Making it overtly clear that I have some money, to the embarrassment of others in the group. By far the best thing (i.e. seemingly the most effective) seems to be taking a small something from another man that does not belong to me, …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/18 12:58 AM
1

The difficultly is truly an issue when people men think they deserve better than what their natural options are regardless to sex. FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 10:35 PM
1

Was until not so long ago.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 05:52 PM
2

I can certainly say being a good person doesn't make him less attractive. There you go. Now we are on the same page! Being a good or bad person had no bearing on whether you want to fuck him or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 03:41 PM
1

I don't assume anything: that wasn't the original question/comment/part I responded to. Rather, what I said was that if I want to chase young tail, why would I want to commit to a particular one of these women?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 03:15 PM
3

First, I think charismatic and dominant are two different things. But, more importantly, I think assholes who express dominance in every situation may or may not be good people. But, they are exhausting to have as friends. They contribute little to the people around them. I think you and other women care deeply about whether your SO is perceived by others to be a good person. You also care if he is a good enough person to be trusted to some modicum. But, you do not care about either of these thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 03:04 PM
3

Yeah, I think you're right: we are not in the same page. Women think raw aggression and dominance are a good unto themselves in a man. They don't care if the man is a good person or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 02:41 PM
1

That's quite a leap you took from being an asshole to being a truly bad person. The point is that none of the traits that I value in myself and other men value in my company show raw dominance and aggression. As soon as I "artificially" become more aggressive and dominant, women respond. If I do not put on this mask, they do not. Confirmation bias may well exist, but I couldn't know. My observations are as carefully controlled as I can make them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 02:07 PM
2

I don't despair. I am not a loud-mouth jerk by nature, but I have learned to be an asshole in front of women. My male friends don't particularly appreciate this, but I'm not trying to fuck them. The things that make me a good friend (person?) are of no value when it comes to attracting a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 01:30 PM
0

"Reward" -- used here without a hint of irony. Nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 01:26 PM
1

It's almost as if... gasp...we know what we find attractive as a sex, while men don't! Except, of course, the picture on the right would work very well. "Work very well" means: This man would get matches and would obtain sex from some reasonable fraction of those matches given little additional effort. Your analysis of the picture smacks of The Fox and The Grapes.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 02:45 AM
5

This! I work to be a better man everyday, but I like the man I already am quite a bit. My accomplishments are, by and large, substantial and varied. Other men love me: I have a large circle of male friends and I easily slip into being the leader of any group of 3 or more men I am in. These things make me not one iota more attractive to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/18 01:31 AM
1

This comment should be framed. I've seen over-analyzed rationalizations for declaring images of men non-appealing on PPD. I have also seen comments highlighting the convoluted and detailed narratives women assign to images of men posted on PPD. And, of course, I've seen shaming of the "narcissism" exhibited by the shirtless selfie. But, I have never seen all of those things mixed into a miasma like this!
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/18 08:52 PM
1

I did sleep with a guy like a few times when I was depressed that I knew beforehand. I didn’t really like him, nor was I attracted to him, I was just depressed. But nice try? Ya know, I wasn't trying to "trap" you. But, your response describes what went on in your head. Did you know that you, "didn’t really like him," at the time? Or, did you only realize that later? Doesn't matter which: Whenever they were realized, those are your deepest, private thoughts. They belong only to you. Not being yo…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 03:47 AM
2

Not my situation though. OK. Accepted. But, let me use the story... And I did not branch swing I had no backup. Did you enter a relationship with a man you knew before the breakup at any point after the breakup? We got back together when I was 24, not exactly post wall lol. Ex-wife was 26 when we got back together. Of course that's not post-wall. But she thought she was! But I’m sorry if you yourself ... As I said, it is not a unique situation. 6 men I know well, and I suspect (though I don't ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 03:31 AM
1

I assume he is in a different place now. I really do hope that is true for you. Having said that, I'll own up to the fact that I asked because your story sounded just like what happened to me and several men I have known: in LTR while young woman breaks up with guy breakup ends up being a branch swing (she had a backup) several years pass... couple gets back together and marries None of these marriages have lasted. The woman returned to the former LTR as the wall approached, but was no more attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 03:15 AM
1

Quite the contrary, she'll make excuses for all sorts of behavior if she does feel that spark. This is pure truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 02:52 AM
2

I broke up with my second boyfriend. Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 02:46 AM
1

How would she be saving face? Admitting she was lying then doesn't paint her in a very good light, no? The beginning of the end was when she flashed her cell number to a guy at an outdoor restaurant. With me sitting right there. I was not attractive to her.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/18 01:47 AM
2

The second most attractive woman I ever had sex with gave it up for a McDonald's Happy Meal. No lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/18 04:56 PM
1

Yes, I would be hurt. Indeed, I was. My ex-wife told me constantly how attractive I was. She was lying. All. The. Time. Now that we're divorced, she admits it was a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/18 04:53 PM
0

So what's the end game then? This is the heart of your confusion. There is no "end game," per se. (other than in barely disguised prostitution scenarios) As opposed to every other male-female commitment? 'Tis a distinction without a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/18 02:56 AM
1

Is there a way for an aging guy to keep the interest of a much younger wife or GF? Why would I want to keep the interest of the same, aging, much younger woman? Kinda defeats the purpose, doesn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/18 02:38 AM
3

If you do have it you're a meal ticket. This is far worse.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 02:22 PM
0

Of course this is hightened [sic] online when you just have a picture... This is not "heightening" this proclivity, though. It's just nonsense here. These are images of men who posed for some pictures. We know absolutely, positively nothing about them, neither their public personae nor their private thoughts. Saying anything at all about their personality, motivations, actions, or anything not having to do with just their appearance makes no sense! Hell, a lot of respondents didn't realize that …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 01:49 PM
1

Though every time one of these women-please-rate-the-pictures threads comes up it seems like a complete waste of time, I will say I have learned one thing from them: The ubiquity, complexity, extent, and importance of the narratives women build in their minds about a man in a picture is abso-fucking-lutely incredible. Is it done in real life?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 01:13 PM
1

Actually technically speaking its a hatchback. Well, it doesn't have anything that could be termed a hatchback on it, so how's that? Nevertheless, you can call it what you want, but Porsche calls it a sedan: Page 4 of this Tho as far as the "sedan" part goes maybe someone wanted the Porsche but able to drive the family? Yes, I understand. My point is that this is a dumb combination of motivations, neither of which will be well satisfied by purchasing a Porsche sedan.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 01:04 PM
0

Well, first, that is only half (perhaps slightly more? perhaps slightly less?) of the deterrent. Nevertheless, the same question could be asked of any transgression of social norms: People finding out is not assured, but it is a danger. How big is the risk that people will find out? I mean, why in the world do you think you made your wedding vows publicly? I.e. why is a wedding a public event, where you get up in front of friends and family? I fully expect you will refuse to do this, but I'll as…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 12:55 PM
-3

if some guy comes along who is hotter or more charming or wittier or more charismatic or whatever, the downside of infidelity is so overwhelming as to make it not worth it. (And I'm not even referring to Mr. Upton finding out and dumping me; I'm referring to me knowing what I did, knowing that I broke a vow I made before God and him and everybody we know, and having to live with that.) And this, boys and girls, is precisely why marriage exists in a world where women are no longer considered chat…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/18 05:10 AM
1

You're not wrong. :)
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:53 PM
1

What’s a stereotypically expensive car? A late-model Mercedes, a Tesla Roadster, a Range Rover, or a larger BMW would all be considered relatively expensive cars where I live. My Dad was driving a panamera you think he had some kind of crisis? Why would anyone buy a sedan if they were gonna buy a Porsche? I do not know if your dad was having a mid-life crisis. I do know that, "He bought a Porsche," is standard shorthand for, "He's having a mid-life crisis."
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:52 PM
3

Are you an actuary? Thank God, no.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:48 PM
2

You know, having grown up with most of my wardrobe coming from Walmart or Family Dollar, I get it. But, as much as I kinda hate to say it: I bet $70 sweatpants would feel better.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:31 PM
2

What do you mean by none of it matters? I signal to the outside world that I have a considerable amount of resources, but I think my conspicuous consumption is in keeping with the reality of my situation. I do not have top 0.01%-like resources (i.e. I don't have "fuck-you" money -- the figure I have always heard for this is $5M). I can discern no difference between how women react to me now that I have these resources versus how they reacted to me in my early 30's when I did not have these. I am…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:29 PM
7

I'm over 30. I drive a stereotypically expensive car, but not a mid-life crisis car (i.e. not a Porsche). I have a $60 haircut (high for where I live) and my wardrobe is devoid of Old Navy, Gap, or any no-name stuff from Target, etc. I own (outright) a high-end home in the most expensive part of the city I live in. I currently make somewhere around $200k/yr. None of this matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/18 07:15 PM
1

I don't necessarily disagree with you regarding the outcome and the fault. But, it's not really a strategy inasmuch as it involves no real thought or planning. It's just that the most attractive woman who was willing to sleep with them didn't find someone else fast enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/18 02:24 AM
3

I know one small, very specific category of men who did this in my experience: ROTC/reserve officers about to go active duty, especially those about to go out of the country. Perhaps unsurprisingly, none of these marriages have survived the intervening years. Every other man I know married the most attractive woman he ever had sex with.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/04/18 11:35 PM
7

Have you ever known a woman who didn't lie to you about something? I have not. Ever. Sure, you can ask the same question about men. But, I have, in fact, known men who have never lied to me (admittedly, as far as I know). Furthermore, every man I've caught in a lie has been contrite. No woman ever has: It was always justifiable. What other... tool (for lack of a better word) did women have historically to affect and shape their world?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/18 09:15 PM
1

But in my experience I've never met a man who's baseline goal is to find a woman to fuck. In my experience, I have never met a man who did anything, ever for any reason other than to get a woman to fuck. Literally anything beyond eating, defecation and voiding, sleeping, and finding shelter.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/18 05:26 PM
1

taking for granted the gifts that one has Even better is to deny/hide/obscure any work went into achieving anything that is desirable. Sprezzatura has been defined and desirable for at least 500 years!
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/18 02:22 PM
2

His only goal was not just to sleep with her. He really liked her and wanted to be her boyfriend. I don't understand this. If poetry was such a huge part of her life, while he couldn't stomach it in large volumes, why would he want to be her boyfriend? Just because she was attractive? No: he wanted to fuck her because she was attractive. He might be "sad" that he is reviled by folks he still seems to know(??), but that's a lot different from wanting an LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/18 11:06 PM
6

He still made "the big leagues" though... Jesus Christ on a cracker...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/18 04:34 AM
1

It's pretty clear that OP is right, using almost any metric you want to choose. I wonder how much of the difference just boils down to opportunity? Women who stay home have everyday friend and acquaintance circles composed primarily of other women. Even women who work often work in environments with a lot of other women. I'm sure that this is not all of the effect, probably not even most of it, but I'd bet it's some of it. I also wonder how many women answer "no" to the survey because "the marri…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 11:31 PM
1

I am fairly aware of my personal biases, and fully admit some of them cannot be proven. You are also quite right that: You seem to be operating under the belief that men routinely marry women they are super attracted to but not women. Though you think that is misguided, it is, in fact, perhaps the the "TRP trope" that I am most convinced of. Much of that belief stems from the large number of men I know in that situation and the large number of women I know in the corresponding situation. I admit…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 03:15 AM
0

You are right in this respect: I don't know anything about your life. You could, in fact, be that rare woman married to the most attractive man you've ever been with. But, your visceral reaction and careful use of language is all the information I have. Based solely on those, the approximation (or fiction) of you I have is rationalizing.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 02:55 AM
0

So if a women tells you she married the man she is most attracted to you just assume they are lying. I do not believe you are lying to me. But, yes, I believe you are lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 02:44 AM
1

Tbh I don’t know how you even know all these men’s and women’s past partners to be able to make this conclusion with confidence. And yet, you say... as to my friends i know well, I don’t know any who “settled” in the attraction department So, maybe I know my friends only incrementally better than you know yours. I have many male friends whose entire sexual pasts I am confident in knowing. I have many female friends whose sexual past I independently know well enough, i.e. I know the better lookin…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 02:22 AM
2

So, all truly attractive men are really in the LTR Prospect bin. The Causal Fling guys just got lucky, a la being born in a first-world country or finding a $20.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 12:03 AM
2

It's a reasonable question, but I don't think so. I have no way to prove this to you, but: Every married man I know is married to the most attractive woman he has ever had sex with. I do not know (well) one married woman for which that is the case (i.e. she married the most attractive man she ever fucked). It's mostly because of the small-number statistics. Men discern some approximation to their SMV via what small number of women are willing to have sex with them. If an outlier to that (often p…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/18 12:00 AM
2

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/18 11:37 PM
3

Desperate? No. But, finding a woman willing to have sex with you is a fairly rare occurrence for the average man. I agree most men want LTRs eventually because they want to reproduce. Absent that motivation, most men would not deign the other advantages of an LTR (companionship, etc.) more attractive than the possibility of variety, no matter the effort required or the poor odds.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/18 11:26 PM
3

Where does the man that inspires, "I don't know what happened. I just had to fuck him," fall in this categorization? He seems to be nowhere: He can't be the LTR Prospect, because control is maintained and used to vet and discern. He can't be the Casual Fling, because you know what happened then: The woman was horny and he was used.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/18 11:19 PM
3

I think most guys are like that until they meet a woman they really like. I've seen responses like this come up a lot in the past few months. Namely, that men get clingy fast and hard when they get clingy at all and that their desire for an LTR is often greater than the woman's. I'm willing to entertain the notion that this effectively happens like this, but I think the reason why it happens is being misunderstood. It's certainly not that the average man is often overcome with the desire to lock…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/18 11:13 PM
6

Reading OP, I was met with the growing realization that I couldn't refute anything that was being said without having to resort to basically calling the poster a liar. That is not super useful. But, then I got to this: The tradeoff to me is that although the guy I like gets sex later than the “meh” guy, the sex he gets is also my best sex. Controlled effort (and that is what is being described here) does not best sex make. The best sex for a man is abandon. It is the mirror image of the female f…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/18 05:53 AM
10

So, honest question: Which is it? Did you know they were assholes and didn't care ('cause they were nice to you)? Or, do you think they weren't really assholes? Spoiler alert: the first option is the"better" answer. Better inasmuch as it's honest and not delusional.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/18 04:45 PM
23

If you let beta nerds get a couple shots off in the big leagues Sometimes, if you seem to arrive at the same result with people over and over again, it might be advisable to ask, "Is it me?". "The big leagues." That's terrific...
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/18 06:02 AM
3

Yeah, I agree. She's fugly by any standard. I would swipe left (and I swipe right on anything that looks kinda human!). There are other pics on her Twitter. I will give her this: She picked a good picture of herself for her avatar. I assume she did the same thing for the Tinder profile.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/18 04:46 AM
8

Occam's razor says the husband is a plain-looking beta schlub. He matched only with women around his age looking for a provider. When it became apparent he wasn't available for provisioning: instant hate. He really should do the fake-picture Tinder experiment as a follow-up: Exactly the same bio, just male model pics. He might even match the same women! Tell 'em he's married in the first message. The reactions will be totally different. Edit: Well, you can make up your own mind. Her and Him
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/18 04:10 AM
1

Was this comment meant for me? Yes. Your twisted caricature of the Pareto principle in this case is nonsensical, and I suspect you know it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/18 11:03 PM
2

interesting but non-scientific data. It's purely empirical. It is just observational data: It is neither scientific nor non-scientific, as nobody has a good theory to explain it. Also: you are offering far more in this statement than the crusaders do. The crusade claims that the OkCupid data are meaningless because all people in dating sites are damaged. I'd like to see some future studies replicating this effect,... Literally pick ANY situation where simple economic principles can be brought to…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/18 10:57 PM
7

I am honestly amazed that you think anybody would come to that conclusion based on the conditions of the gedanken experiment posited by OP. This "crusade" against the OkCupid study and the empirical reality of the Pareto principle is like climate-change deniers: "I don't like what I perceive as the outcome of admitting this blatantly obvious fact, so I will dismiss it out of hand as pure fantasy!"
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/18 09:39 PM
5

By your own telling, you went on a date with this guy. The most telling thing is: You remained on a date with this guy. You were, according to your recounting, at various times ordered around, infuriated, and otherwise 'put off'. Yet, you also went in for a kiss. (!?) Blah, blah, blah... If this idiot had been just barely less incompetent, your legs would have been in the air by the end of the night, regardless of your religious convictions.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/18 04:26 AM
1

He's funny. He's cute. Funny mentioned first. "Cute" is the ascribed adjective. comes to chat with me multiple times throughout the day, mostly silly stuff like something on his phone to laugh at, etc. Yeah... You have no need to be concerned. Your boy is BB, through and through, the very opposite of Chad. Ride off into the sunset with him. And, by "sunset," I mean a long marriage where he thinks you find him truly attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/18 05:43 AM
6

I assert that comma splices are immoral.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/18 02:49 AM
1

More than 95% of this piece has nothing to do with flirting. The author gets that out of the way immediately and moves on to how an attractive man -- i.e. one which she has enthusiastically engaged with -- should treat her. The only flirting advice is: be attractive, don't be unattractive. And, we'll let you know, unambiguously, which you are.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/02/18 11:28 PM
8

Yep. I'm always on board for "watch what they do, not what they say," being applicable to both sexes.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/18 02:34 AM
12

That's pretty much true as well. There you go...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/18 11:49 PM
3

edit: vince vaughn in swingers Atlas: you are so money.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/18 03:42 PM
1

This thread is full of most of the traditional PPD arguments to dismiss the very notion of Chad. Chief among these are: 1) Chad is an utterly nebulous concept and the characterization of a given man as a Chad is completely dependent on context and the women doing the beholding and... lots of things. 2) Chad is always fundamentally flawed in some way: He's always bad at sex. He's always stupid. He's always a social misfit. 3) Chad really isn't Chad: No man can achieve peak Chadliness because no m…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/18 06:38 AM
1

Weird, huh?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/18 10:55 PM
3

but many men enjoy that kind of life. Agreed. That's exactly why the red pill analogy "works": You can stay in your pod and be a heat-generator, or you can realize what is really going on and be a man. they are either having sex with a chad who doesn't give a fuck about them and/or married to BB. Also, 100% agreed. Where's the Chad/BB line, though? 5.9? 6.1? (>8.0 is the likely answer) You sure do seem to be asking for a Goldilocks scenario: attractive enough to sorta want to fuck, but not too a…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/18 09:25 PM
2

the optimal mate for a woman is a man who is a slightly traditional provider, believes in true love and being with one woman but is also somewhat physically attractive But, this is the reality that the "red pill" lifts the veil on for men. If my wife thinks I am a provider and "somewhat" physically attractive, I have fucked up. I have put myself in a life that will not withstand introspection and will cause me nothing but mental anguish. Fuck. That.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/18 09:10 PM
4

Eventually, he convinces her to sleep with him, even though she didn’t really want to, but was too weak to say “no”, so she said “yes”. I honestly do not understand this sentence. What do we mean by "convinces"? Does convinces mean persuades? Cajoles? If she's actually convinced to sleep with him, she's convinced! If she's convinced, she wants to. Could it mean "tricked"? Sure. But, she still didn't fall on his dick. Are young women weak-minded or not? If they are, then they shouldn't be allowed…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/18 08:05 PM
1

Rollo appears beside you in the theatre line: "You know nothing about my work..."
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/18 06:26 PM
1

It's purely about convenience. What interaction with women isn't "superficial" in this kind of sense? Go to Hooters. Go to a diner. Go get your hair cut by a woman, for pity's sake. It's all you paying money for their "attention." To wit: other men genuinely get this for free What other men get what "genuine" experience for free? Men who get anything that is genuine from women are rare.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 03:58 PM
4

So, nobody is really asking for this info, but where else would I share this? I've seen/felt/manipulated (but not "used") a RealDoll and I have watched VR porn on an HTC Vive. I can't imagine wanting to invest in the RealDoll -- It's about 100 lbs of dead weight. If I wanted that, I'd get married again and just wait a while, amirite? (I'll sprinkle a 'LOL' here to make sure everybody parses that as a joke). The VR porn: I was not expecting much. Most of what is available, it seems, is POV and a …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/18 03:33 PM
5

Do you have any reason to believe that this straightforward caveat was/is ignored in the papers OP's articles reference? I read 2 of them(ie the papers) and (a) they do support the initial assertion (if not the pholosophizing) and (b) at least one of them explicitly discusses the fragility of the Y chromosome.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/18 10:52 PM
4

I.e. hypergamy does real, is visceral, and can be "overridden" by rational choice. Makes sense to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/18 04:49 PM
1

The meaning of "hit on me" is, of course, the subjective "out" here.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 10:38 PM
1

s/student/woman/g ; s/teacher/man/g = RP rant (NB Not that anything is wrong with these guidelines. They are very reasonable.)
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 10:37 PM
1

How about a 6'8", 300 lb. dweeby teenage boy?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/18 10:33 PM
1

Friendo, you just spent a good amount of time telling me the exact opposite. Nope. All I know is what they do in response to stimuli. No idea what their internal monologue is.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/18 11:01 PM
1

You seem pretty confident that you know what other men think, while being simultaneously certain that I don't. Indeed. I am equally as confident that you know what other women think, while I don't. That's not a particularly arrogant position. Look, I'm old. I've known a lot of men in my life. I've known a lot of men who have had a lot of sex with women. Every dang one of those successful men -- without exception -- espoused RP tenets in private. All the women they were fucking thought they were …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/18 06:01 PM
1

I get that you don't like it. Makes sense. But... The odds that any particular man you've found attractive does, in fact, think about women in essentially exactly the way described by TRP are very high. Attractive men -- men women want to fuck -- think about women the way TRP describes. It doesn't matter if they've seen those notions codified in something like the TRP sidebar or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/18 05:44 PM
1

I don't like the type of men you call "alphas" Given the abundant confusion and divergent opinions about what this means on PPD, I can only say that you likely (through no fault of your own) don't have any idea what type of men I call alpha. Men who treat women as inferior are not attractive to me. Understood. But, we were talking about how men think: what are their thoughts and convictions and how do they conceptualize their relationships. Lots and lots and lots of authentic (i.e. men you have …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/18 05:00 PM
2

Although I must admit, the idea of unknowingly fucking someone who thinks about me the way red pillers think about women does make me want to vomit. Of course. I understand. You are free to believe that no man you have ever fucked1 thinks the way red pillers think. The overwhelming odds are, however, that most did, whether they have ever seen TRP or not. Men who think about women the way red pillers think about women are attractive to women. Alphas think this way, and "faux" alphas think this wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/18 03:17 AM
1

It's not bloopers' responsibility to provide an alternative. No one should be expected to provide an alternative path to an end they do not think is worthy of attaining. So, what OP is really trying to tease out (I think) is the difference between (a) not caring about a "plight," nor offering advice to avoid/remedy it, and (b) active derision of those who seem to be in this plight and are trying to remedy it themselves. (a) is not on bloopers to do, in any way, shape, or form. But, WTF (b)? Why …
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/18 10:57 PM
1

This is cool!
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/18 12:42 AM
3

Just the fact that personality cults have even existed(and still do exist by the way) refutes your idea that it is only females doing this. I do not understand this comment at all. I agree that personality cults do exist, but men do not find any woman more attractive if she is the focus of one. Period. If there was a male who was; good looking, socially skilled, talented and financially well off, and no one knew he was, so he had no status, would he still be attractive? He would, of course. He w…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/17 08:17 PM
12

While you are certainly correct that the cult of personality (?) is alive and well in our society, that's not really the point, is it? Rather, OP draws the distinction between men and women wherein status -- per se -- has no bearing on male attraction. If I could find a woman who looked as good as Kim Kardashian I would be equally attracted to her. So, it's not so much a question of "status alone." It's a question of status at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/17 05:52 PM
3

This is perhaps the most bizarre view of being physically attractive I have ever read.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/17 12:37 AM
1

Note: I'm not saying TRP is actually faking alpha, but that's how they see it. Hell, I'll say it: TRP is about producing fake alphas. That is, as you suggest, why women hate it (women hate it, they don't have to carry the label feminist). Women abhor having their feelings about a man confused or interfered with. They want to be able to determine the genetic fitness of the men they encounter. TRP and PUA and lots of other things make that more difficult than they would like. Any "system" that pur…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/17 11:37 PM
2

Easy peasy guaranteed perfect male body. I cannot believe a human being actually believes this! First, the guys in your swimming team were swimming because they were built like that. There are plenty of men who could swim 6 hours a day and would have bodies nothing like a stereotypical swimmer. This is the kind of thinking that leads to preposterous standards for male bodies.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/17 04:32 AM
2

"Emotional cheating" -- I kind of expect that an LTR emotionally cheats on me all the time. That is her "default" state: She's constantly casting about, trying to have her hypergamy satisfied. Sometimes, it kinda is satisfied, at least transiently. That's essentially emotionally cheating, right? If she "follows through" in her hypergamous hunt, that's physical cheating. That's when I have lost. Please don't read too much into this metaphor, but: If I live in an apartment with a tiger, I assume i…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/17 02:58 AM
1

Let me edit that last sentence (realizing that renders it not your sentence anymore, but bear with me): You’re saying you don’t care if your wife consistently lusts and loves after another specific man more than you? Hypergamy means that this is essentially always true. Life with a woman in a LTR is a constant tide of this. So, I care, but (a) it don't matter, 'cause it's true, and (b) my "job" is to render it moot at any given instant. I think this point of view might actually be illuminating t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/17 02:45 AM
2

Just to reiterate something that was said by me and others in another thread a little while ago: Goddammit, I hate the fact that all these women are agreeing with huge swaths of RP! If it weren't for the fact that I value the truth more than anything, I swear I'd prefer it if they just said it was all bunk!
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/17 02:30 AM
5

This seems fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/12/17 02:26 AM
1

Oh. You mean (a) be more attractive, (b) take charge, and (c) do a bunch of choreplay. (a) and (b) are quintessentially RP concepts. (c) is a pile of horseshit. You get a clean house and a dry pussy from choreplay. This litany is a set of talking points from a 1990's Cosmo article.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/17 04:11 AM
2

What form might this "effort on his part" take? Begging? Or do you actually imagine the man reclining on his couch and commanding, "Service me!"? Honest to God, I have no idea what you mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/17 03:40 AM
2

Yeah, she knows.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/17 10:17 PM
8

I must admit that I hate that anal is the act that is most often used to highlight lack of attraction. I'd like to hope that its deep taboo is the only reason, but I am unsure. I do not ever intend to put my penis in an asshole. Period.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/17 06:16 PM
2

Yeah, but... Campbell's hero gets called to action, is beset by trials, and triumphs! Every time. Being romantic is hard work which rarely pays off.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/17 12:12 AM
6

The distaff responses in this thread make it obvious that these women are sure that any man that will approach them is woefully ill-informed and completely devoid of any introspection. Selection effect much?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/17 11:50 PM
3

So much this. I never had to work at school. Ever. But, I had to work at being a good football, basketball, baseball, and, later, lacrosse player. Nothing I have ever done in my life taught me as much as being on a sports team. Perhaps most important was the ability to constructively work with complete assholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/17 04:31 AM
1

and neither should any guy who has any self-respect. I am sorry you derive any measure of respect for yourself based on your behavior on Tinder. That seems tragic to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/17 08:43 PM
1

by being discerning in the first run through you get 0 or very few matches This is exactly, precisely what happens for the vast majority of men! I'm really surprised anyone is unaware of this fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/17 08:41 PM
1

I'm not taking it as an insult. I'm also not trying to be needlessly argumentative. Rather, I see this discussion as immediately and directly germane to one of the main topics of this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 11:44 PM
1

If he's outgoing enough to pursue another woman that's not her, then can this woman safely assume that he's not into her? No. It just means the other woman was just explicit enough to make the risk calculus work in his favor. You build up slowly over time and retain plausible deniability until you are absolutely certain she will say yes. Surely you realize that y response to this will be that it is the perfect recipe for getting friendzoned. Seriously, it really is an excellent way to ensure tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 11:13 PM
2

One example: Politely and straightforwardly asking any woman you work with out on a date, whether your request is made at work or not or whether you are in the chain of her reports or not. Hell, I don't even disagree that this would present a workplace problem. I think it should be disallowed by workplace rules. It presents a very real possibility that the workplace will become a toxic and ill-functioning environment. If she rejects me, it's gonna be weird. That weirdness could directly impact h…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 11:11 PM
2

Look, I'm not calling you some idiot. I'm sorry, but you kinda are. You are saying, "I can't see how you can possibly see the world that way and your behavior seems irrational to me." What is that other than idiocy? The problem is that your perception of my view is the apotheosis of solipsism. Here's an analogy: Let's call the SMP a "sexual landscape" instead (for reasons I trust will become apparent). Your view of the landscape is clear: You see it as a vista of levels and avoidable pitfalls, l…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 11:07 PM
3

I don't disagree with any of these points. Many ways of being accused of failing to obtain consent fall well short of these pathological things, however.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 09:38 PM
3

Idk, just seems a bit bizarre. How is it bizarre? I am told (rightly, in the sense that it must be this way) that I need to approach women if I want to have female companionship (in whatever sense, casual sex to relationships). I am told, also rightly, that only some of those women will be receptive, and the only way I will know is to approach. That's why I swipe right on every woman. So what if I am not attracted to them? Is it somehow unfair to them if I swipe right in this instance? If so, wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 09:16 PM
-1

Well, as was pointed out by Groovy, Tinder selects against swiping right on everyone. However, Bumble does not (at least, not as strongly). So, yes, I swipe right on every woman on Bumble. Period. Why would I not? I would do the same thing in meatspace if there was no downside. I would hit on every woman I laid eyes on if I did not risk substantial embarrassment. Note also that the odds of embarrassment (i.e. rejection) don't correlate monotonically with how ugly a woman is: A LOT of ugly women …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 09:04 PM
3

If I have to take chances, I must take many chances. To do otherwise would be stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 08:40 PM
3

I understand. But, that wasn't the point: The complaint of many women who use Tinder is that men swipe "indiscriminately," even in the face of this deterrent. But, men are generically indiscriminate in this sense. Women want men to take chances, but only on them as an individual.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 08:39 PM
3

Men who are actively seeking to get laid are throwing a ton of shit at the wall just to see what sticks. Jumping from woman to woman throwing shit at them is not "selecting" in the way PPD defines the term. This observation is key to how fucking stupid the Tinder complaint of, "Guys shouldn't just swipe right on every girl," is. If I do swipe right, it is never because you are special. It is because you have 2 X chromosomes and I am casting about all the time. Solipsism.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 08:20 PM
2

Will being rejected kill or permanently damage me? No. But, one of the things bloops and reds on PPD seem to be in predominant agreement on is that there are only two answers from a woman: no and FUCK YES! So, if the answer is not an obvious "FUCK YES!", what's the point of the risk? Risk is something men should embrace, but only if the reward is possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 08:14 PM
6

First, thank you for asking this question. Is this true men? If you aren't pursuing a woman does it mean you are uninterested? Fuck no. There are myriad reasons why a man might not pursue a woman he finds attractive. Others have already cited just generic shyness and intimidation, but there are also many other, perhaps more subtle, reasons. Here on PPD we are often told that the only place to meet "acceptable" women is within social groups we already frequent (i.e., women in bars are trash; the …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/17 07:58 PM
1

Holy shit! The most popular bar where I went to college was called The Library! Oh. Wait. I guess every college town has a bar called that. Nevermind. 😀
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/17 03:52 AM
3

Don't me happy for me: I, like you, am watching every democratic norm the US has be eroded, day after day. I'm just a combo of (a) ugly, (b) white trash, and (c) very highly educated. I.e. I have a clear view of what the world is really like.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/17 12:30 AM
6

Proud to say I'm a genuine RP misogynist. Voted for Hillary, 'cause I'm not a racist or a retard.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/17 10:50 PM
1

Certainly not. The expectations are, to be sure, fantasy and the only rational course of action is to dismiss them as such. The expectations are nothing like an addiction, however. And the prescribed measures are the only measures that are effective. Addiction makes people rationalize irrational behavior. RP is the exact opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 06:58 PM
1

How is it obvious to you that the fault lies with women and not with men's expectations? Not that he needs help, but his commentary says precisely the opposite of this! I.e. The fault is wholly that of the man and his expectations, for they can never be met.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 05:41 PM
6

I will play the role of a standard blue PPD denizen and cry foul on this. First: Jesus. What a miserable fucking man-hating generalization. Second: You have no reason to believe this, but I have never wanted a woman to sit and listen to me ramble or to be the audience for my holding forth on some topic. So, NAMALT.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 04:09 PM
3

If women didn't reward red pill behavior and if they respected you for beta nice guy behavior, I'd be as blue as a smurf. Fuck yes. It is exhausting having to continuously modify all of your behaviors relative to how you deal with the other ~50% of the population (i.e. what you naturally do when you interact with people). But, doing just that is the only thing that brings any sort of result.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 04:02 PM
0

You will never see me make that argument with regards to the male or female sex drive You can't pick and choose: Either we're animals or we are not.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 03:53 PM
1

Literally just think about biology for a minute. Women can get pregnant for a five-day window every month. Men have no such limits on their reproductive capacity. That alone should tell you something. Fair enough. But, please realize you are putting yourself in the penalty box if you make a bloop-like "biology is not destiny" argument in the next few months.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/17 12:58 AM
2

OP: could you go ahead and state what you think "hypergamy" means? Because, you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 10:13 PM
1

Capable men quickly and efficiently create very democratic, flat clear hierarchies FTFY
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 07:09 PM
5

I think it is important to note that a man who exhibits significant alpha personality traits is not the same thing as an alpha male. TRP tries to train men to exhibit alpha traits, but most men aren't alphas. These TRP ur-alphas can do a lot of things, including both looking like an alpha in some situations and giving away the game that they are not the somewhat sociopathic specimens women have evolved to desire (because of their genetic fitness) in others. An authentic alpha would never conside…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 06:46 PM
1

This is just gobbledygook. Einstein would probably pursued science had he been a monk or celibate for some reason or other. You have no basis in any sort of fact to make this assertion. He was an under-employed fuck-up as a young man with a lot of time on his hands. We do know he spent a lot of effort scamming chicks. If his skill in math had been a bit less, he probably would have just tried to start a business. In fact, there were a decent number of monk-scientists and mathematicians, like Mar…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 02:10 AM
3

<sigh> Yeah, I wouldn't know why scientists work the way they do, especially scientists who work on things that have no immediate practical application... <end sarcasm> Newton was bat-shit crazy. There's this meme going around that he never had sex. This is likely stupid and we'll never know: But, more importantly, it doesn't matter. He was nuts. Quit working on the calculus to return to alchemy. Einstein might have been a good example for you to use. More recent, a bit better known to most peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 01:54 AM
3

Horseshit. The only reason to make your mark on the world is to get more pussy. It's turtles all the way down...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/17 01:36 AM
0

I'll say this: PPD helps me feel much better about online dating, specifically about the lack of success most men (including me) find. I did not fully appreciate how little authentic information you can get from showing women pictures of men until I read the tons of posts like this over the past few months. I'm fully convinced that >80% of the female respondents to this post would fuck all of the men pictured so far if they met them in meatspace, given adequate conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 10:10 PM
3

This is a just-world fantasy. At best, there is no correlation. In practice, the halo effect attractive people experience means that Chad is more likely to be successful (i.e. not a loser). To the specific question: Pussy is, and always will be, the dominant motivator for the overwhelming majority of men. Yes, including married men. Does the fact that my buddy has never needed to struggle in any way to satisfy his sexual desires account for his utter failure to develop into an adult? This is tru…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/17 10:04 PM
2

But, how did the experience of your youth tell you the 8% number? If you made measurements of ONS's and arrived at 1 out of 10 being a good (i.e. orgasmic for you) experience, how can you "tell" that another 4 or so out of 10 could do it if they wanted to exert the effort? [BTW: I assume that's what you mean by your numbers -- Not that 8% of the 20% can make a woman orgasm, which would be 1.6% of all men]
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 10:47 PM
2

Thank you for your honesty. If you don't mind, one more question: You have a rather precise series of cuts wrt to culling the herd here. How did you determine the last 2 cuts (the ones at 8 and 3%)?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 10:28 PM
3

So, that's an interesting gedanken experience for us men to undertake. You're suggesting I imagine a world where every woman I see is horribly unattractive. Yeah, I admit, that's hard to do. I see lots and lots and lots of attractive women everyday. I also look at every woman in my field of view. I see the old ones and the fat ones and the really ugly ones. They are there, but I see lots and lots of plenty attractive ones as well. But you're saying that's not your experience as a woman at all. R…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 10:03 PM
6

This is the most sex he's ever gotten, it's the best sex he's ever gotten. This is a point that I see women on PPD never quite grokking: Most men marry the most sexually attractive women they've ever had. The converse (by the distaff PPD'ers own admission!) does not generally happen.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:51 PM
3

Even with women you are LTR'd/invested in? That "stage" is not something that is commonly considered when abundance mentality is discussed, as far as I know, but it's a good question. I'd say if a man really cares about a woman and their relationship ends, it would, as you suggest, be really hard to just brush it off as one more woman. But, you know, it's hard to brush off getting rejected over and over and over and over and over again by rando women. Women do not ever have that particular exper…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:44 PM
4

he has no social proof or pre-selection, does that potentially decrease her attraction for him? Sure, to some extent, but... The effect that exhibiting an abundance mentality has on women is ephemeral and non-distinct. Wasn't there a thread in the past day or so about faking confidence and how it doesn't work for some guys? Abundance mentality is just a corollary of irrational confidence. If a guy who--when examined rationally, has no right to feel that way--exhibits abundance mentality, it give…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:34 PM
8

If I understand it correctly: A man should strive to have a lot of options in order to not become attached to one woman in particular. Not to be overly pedantic, but I don't think you quite have it. Specifically: Sure, a man should try to have as many options as possible. But, as you rightly assert, that is nigh impossible. But, a man should act and, indeed, think as if he does have many options. So many options, in fact, that the outcome with any individual woman is utterly inconsequential. So,…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 09:04 PM
1

That's true enough, but it is always observed to obtain in market conditions with finite resources and a sub population of "rich" consumers. That's an apt description of the SMP. Importantly, though it doesn't seem to occur everywhere, it does always occur when these conditions are met, no matter what kind of particular market is being looked at.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/17 01:42 PM
1

80/20 is statistically wrong. Based on some of your earlier comments, for some reason you want this to be true. But, the Pareto Principle is an empirical finding, not a theoretical construct. It has some theoretical explanations, but it's just observation. Observing it among modern humans is fraught with problems, but every measurement I've ever made in real life is consistent with it. Sure, that's anecdata, but I'm not cherry-picking. This seems to be a corollary of your "belief" that the Paret…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 10:55 PM
1

I wouldn't say that men can't ever empathize with a woman who is pumped and dumped under circumstances like this. Rather, (a) if men are supposed to "just get it," why couldn't she have seen it coming, (b) if the tables are turned like this, the woman will be supported and celebrated for her "choice" (i.e. she got hers and ignored the loser), and (c) as you say (though I don't agree 100%), the measuring sticks for men and women are different (RMV vs SMV).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 10:44 PM
17

You deserve full credit for listing pretty much actual, unambiguously RP tenets and not just a litany of strawmen. Brava!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 10:40 PM
1

You know what: I misread your comment. I apologize.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 10:37 PM
1

Humble isn't unattractive Do you really mean just this?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 09:05 PM
2

How would you feel if you liked a girl and had drunk sex with her, but she turned you down for a relationship only to turn up with a hotter, taller guy the next week? I don't really mean to derail your main argument, but... You realize this is, in fact, a reasonable proxy for most men's experience in the SMP, right? This is situation or something much like it is what most men experience all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/17 08:59 PM
2

I'm a 4. Maybe a 4.5 if you like bigger men.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/17 06:44 PM
1

Will a 9/10 always be more arousing to you than a 5/10, regardless of her availability, her interest in you, her personality, the context, and the relationship you have with her? A given 7/10 might be more arousing than a 9/10 if she were particularly sexy in some way. None of the caveats you list would have one iota of impact, however. Don't care about any of those things, because claiming that they impact how arousing someone is is kinda crazy. Those things could impact how one acts on arousal…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/17 06:20 PM
3

Thank you for your honesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/17 12:41 AM
1

Less hot women don't get as much attention and routinely do approach because of that. I know of no "less hot women" who routinely approach. Even in online dating (e.g. Tinder, Bumble) every HB5-6 insists on male approach.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 10:55 PM
1

Think about the explorers who left their wives at home for decades to go get lost in a jungle on another continent. I invite you to revisit this comment and consider that leaving one's wife for decades and doing it for the nookie are not, in any sense, mutually exclusive.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 10:52 PM
1

All women lie about attraction. All women are hypergamous. All women rationalize acting on their hypergamy and the associated lies. All women are attracted to physicality and aggression. All women are solipsistic when it comes to understanding their attraction. But, some women are smart (others are not, just like men). Some women have geeky interests. Some women are better bets for success in any given profession than a large number of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 10:50 PM
1

If women approach men it is assumed by men the women want sex. That's problematic. If women approach when they want sex, how is that problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 10:45 PM
0

I think the notion that women are genetically or otherwise generically ill-suited for computer science is silly and counter to tons of evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 07:37 PM
1

You are free to, of course. Nevertheless, it is a fact. Source: being a person with a penis and an occupation that contributes to human knowledge.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 07:35 PM
1

I think the sexism is justified in a way. Male dominated spaces are dominated by males for a reason I'm an honest-to-God misogynist and this is one of the most sexist things I have ever read on PPD. To be clear, I'm not just arbitrarily berating you: I disagree with this statement even though I firmly believe AWALT and really do hate women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 07:08 PM
1

do women motivate men to achieve something. I don't think it does. I understand. And, I can see how you would say that: A man who wants sex will be a man who pursues sex. The time he spends pursing sex is time he doesn't spend on achieving things. I am trying to say that the men who are achieving things -- in knowledge, in technology, in architecture and art, certainly in music, and in other important spheres of human endeavor -- might well achieve some fraction of their output in the absence of…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 06:33 PM
1

They could, indeed. Are you trying to intimate that this existence for a woman would, ultimately, be unfulfilling to her? If so, I guess I can understand and even agree. So what? Again, I was talking about men. Men do things to get laid. Is it their sole motivation? No, but it is far and away the most important and the most effective motivation. Nothing else even comes close: not building a better world, not discovering something new, not anything. Those are good things and men like doing them. …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 06:20 PM
3

How do you explain that women want to get jobs and contribute to something Well, I don't explain it. We were talking about men. I did not list the women I know who are university professors (they number 4). I admit, not saying this was an oversight on my part, but I really did think it was blatantly implied. I do not know their motivations, as we have not had the kind of intimate talks about this subject that I have had with the men. ...when they could get more male attention by doing nothing al…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 06:12 PM
2

I think a university professor is motivated by the subject, not because he thinks women will like him. I know a couple of dozen university professors. I have known 8 of them for more than 20 years, and 2 of them for more than 40 years. All of them are glad they have a job where they can contribute to human advancement. However, every one of them would take another job in a heartbeat if they thought it would get them more women. Or, if they thought they would get just as much female attention if …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 05:48 PM
5

To be honest, I don't agree with the RP view being questioned here (i.e. I don't think women's acknowledgement or lack thereof of men's "problems" in the SMP is a thing), but let me suggest one possibility anyway. Maybe women -- given the relatively more egalitarian and gender-equal society we now live in -- would drop the ridiculous pretense of never approaching. I know some women approach some men, but it takes a top-top-top level man to cause that. Maybe women could shoulder some reasonable s…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 05:30 PM
3

I don't think men are motivated by women. Ya know, I can't prove or disprove this statement in any way. But, honest to God, I find it a shocking statement. I know a few dozen men --- maybe as much as a couple of hundred -- what I would consider "well" (i.e. we've talked about life and achievement and happiness at some point). All of them are motivated by women, specifically by being desired by women. Every. Single. One.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 05:22 PM
0

Neither is someone else's desire. OK. That's a useless aphorism and doesn't do one thing to speak to the original topic. The notion (which, if I try to parse your faux-pop-psych comment, is what you might be driving at) that other's perceptions of ourselves shouldn't matter to us is complete nonsense. To be sure, relying totally on other's impressions is not healthy. However, the opposite is at least as unhealthy. I can appraise my worth for myself all I want, but without external "calibration" …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 05:13 PM
1

Money is not part of me. It is something I have via a combination of my accomplishments and luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 04:50 PM
1

The need to feel wanted or desired for more than a[sic] superficial reasons is something all humans can empathise with. Why the qualifier "superficial" here? I am perfectly content to be desired for wholly superficial reasons. The superficial is part of me, just as surely as my accomplishments and thoughts. I have gobs of evidence that shows that neither my accomplishments nor my thoughts elicit any desire in women. That's fine: I just need to know that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/17 12:45 PM
1

I do think the Weinstein case had to with lack of attraction. Weinstein seems mentally ill to me: he could (and, I'm sure, did) have his pick of lesser starlets and hangers-on. But, he felt the need to push himself on women who considered him beneath them, despite his considerable power. His attempts to get them to engage in sexual exploits with him were (apparently) downright comical. How much (utterly consensual) sex with very young women do you think Harvey has had over the years? I think it …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/17 03:35 AM
1

I understand. But, I don't think this is a good counterexample: The Duke lacrosse scandal was motivated -- on several levels -- by things that have nothing to do with attraction or not. It's not like the stripper found the lax bros "creepy."
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/17 02:14 AM
3

I mostly agree with this. But, I don't think he was lazy. Rather, kinda mentally disturbed: He could have had any number of hot, no-name women. Instead, he felt compelled to "tag" famous, semi-famous, and/or aspiring actresses. Dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/17 11:36 PM
2

The Duke lacrosse team didn't sexually assault anyone. They hired a stripper that lied.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/17 11:16 PM
1

If anything, the quality of the men I got later on improved, in part because I started vetting with my brain and not other organs (ahem). This use of the "quality" in this statement gives the game away. Which is it: Did you fuck hotter guys when younger or not? If you would have dated those now-balding men in high school, they would not have been waiting later in life for you to decide to LTR them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/17 09:20 PM
1

Well, people (men and women) do decay, it's true. But, that's not the point. The source of your mystification is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding. Rather, women don't lock down the same guy from earlier. They lock down the guy they would not fuck back when both of them were 25. Not the same thing at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/17 08:51 PM
1

Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/17 02:56 PM
1

Just promise me that you'll only ever have sex with hot men, even 10 or more years in the future. Completely serious: Don't lie. To yourself. Or to some poor chump.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/17 03:23 AM
1

I think this is an interesting perspective, I admit. But, I will say that I find the notion that, "that's just how it works," to be depressingly fatalistic. More to the point, I think a lot of men do not realize this is "the deal." They think they are getting a woman who authentically desires them when they marry. Do women realize the reality? I actually kinda think that most do, even if they (defensively) convince themselves that their "tastes" and standards for attractiveness have really chang…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/17 02:28 AM
3

Women may well want to have a serious relationship when they are 28, while eschewing one earlier. This, however, is not really what OP is on about. Rather, he's talking about when looking for a partner who is looking for the same thing as I am now means a woman picks men who are substantially less attractive to her than were the partners she had earlier in life. She is forced to do this because either those attractive men will not commit or they are already committed to others. This is a shit de…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/17 10:59 PM
3

Priorities change as we get older. Its the way it works. This is just a lie. It is not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/17 10:05 PM
1

I think we might be arguing two different things. I was only responding viz a viz the TRP definition of alpha widowhood. We can argue whether it shouldbe the case, but much of what gets talked about on PPD is the TRP lexicon and vocabulary. You seem now to be arguing what you think something you might call alpha widowhood would be?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/17 10:54 PM
4

Well, I didn't quite expect to only see: "men do it too!" and paper-thin excuses as pretty much the only top-level replies, but there you go. Even the usual criticisms of the "design" of the experiment were pretty half-hearted. I imagine the women of PPD sitting in front of their screens saying, "Yeah, I'd fuck 'em too."
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/17 10:51 PM
1

I think you are partially correct. I did not mean to suggest that alpha widowhood is about sex exclusively (or even primarily). I do, however, understand the term of art to mean the calibration of her SMV a woman has from banging Chad and the resulting dejection she feels when she can't get a Chad to commit to her. I think that definition fits my statement. Conversely, I do not think it has anything to do with the immediate (and/or lingering) feeling of rejection or loss from getting dumped or l…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/17 02:29 AM
6

Most of the men here believe that women can get absurdly attractive dudes for casual sex. Yep. I am, frankly, astounded that you would suggest that this is anything other than a blatantly obvious truth. I have only a lifetime of measurements that confirm that this is true. But, seriously, how could anybody think it's not true? Men will fuck a lot of things...
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/17 11:14 PM
8

Do none of the men here entertain the idea that THEY could be the best she's ever had? "Best" is an interesting word to use. Let me put it aside for just a sec. We are often told here on PPD that men habitually overestimate their own attractiveness. Hell, I don't even disagree with that. But, which is it? Do I overestimate my own attractiveness, or do I have a realistic picture of my attractiveness versus the attractiveness of other men? Every woman I have ever had sex with has--without exceptio…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/17 11:10 PM
8

I can't accept the premise of your gedanken experiment. Specifically, if a girl has "a history of casually sleeping with guys," she may well have slept with some guys more or less by me, but she has also slept with at least one Chad. Any woman who has slept with, say, more than 6 men casually (yes, I made that number up, but I will stand by the estimate) has slept with at least one very attractive man. Ergo, she will be alpha-widowed to some extent, regardless of her otherwise relatively well-ad…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/17 10:58 PM
1

Purge Week's asymptote to Godwin's Law takes its penultimate step...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/17 02:17 PM
1

Came here to say just this.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/17 10:10 PM
1

I understood perfectly what you said. I think you are a piece of shit for saying it. You are using "insecure" as a fucking insult and nothing else. So, you think he's "insecure" and deserving of being made fun of because of it. OK -- fair enough. I think you are miserable excuse for a human being for thinking that. Moreover, I think you are stinking bag of puss and excrement for saying it. You know precisely jack and shit under what circumstances he asked the question. You also have no idea what…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/17 09:53 PM
1

i mean do u need to ask 20 women IRL or make one /r/rateme post or /r/amiugly 1) Yeah, that's what you meant. "...how insecure are you" makes that clear... 2) I think you will find that male posters on /r/rateme or /r/amiugly draw far fewer than 20 responses unless they are male models or complete freaks.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/17 02:03 AM
3

Yeah. What a fucking loser. Why doesn't he just "get it"? God...
/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/17 11:27 PM
2

I can't tell if this is for purge week or if it's an actual thread. Never put an "or" where an "and" will suffice.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/17 08:07 PM
1

Wrong. They prefer Knuckles the Echidna, 'cause he wears red. Citation: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/head-games/201412/the-mysterious-power-red
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/17 07:39 PM
1

Gulab jamun and the Harlem Globetrotters animated series. I.e. You are right up there when it comes to good things!
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/17 05:17 PM
4

It is, like, the 832nd very best thing in the whole world that this is not a bot.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/17 03:30 AM
2

I do not think that telling them to fuck off and slinging insults at them is the hallmark of contempt. Contempt is far short of that. That's rage.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 02:19 PM
1

ENFJ, according to every assessment I have done.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 05:03 AM
3

Do you mind if I ask how old you are? Old. I'm in my 40's. I am not trying to engage women who are significantly younger than me. I would feel foolish. I would probably guess that you're super creepy and don't know it. Well, it's a tautology to say that I can't know if this is true or not. However, I don't think it is. Or I would say you're misperceiving the reactions/motivations of others. Yeah, this makes more sense. But... I would posit that I might be misunderstanding motivations, but the re…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 04:24 AM
3

I kinda answered this in my response to /u/Unabummer80. You would be right to be weirded-out if I was just trying to lock eyes with all the women as they pass me. I'm talking about trying to engage eye contact with women (who are, admittedly, still strangers) when the situation makes social sense. Things like one of us mistakes the Starbucks as ours, or when they drop something, or something else strange happens and it is obviously worthy of comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 04:04 AM
3

Thank you for your constructive comments. I do not mean to be Eeyore in my response. but if we go out for a beer or something then they're suddenly much different. We all (i.e. my group and some others; roughly a dozen women or so and ~18 men) go out for beers every two weeks. Same thing happens. I literally sit and hold court with a bunch of guys for two hours. Are you like leering [sic] at them ? Staring ? Maybe, but I'm not talking about vapor-locking on every attractive woman I see. Rather, …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:56 AM
2

because honestly it sounds so far-fetched that I'm tempted to think you're suffering some kind of paranoia Maybe I am insane. I guess we can't know. Do you think this is just how women routinely deal with less-than-Adonis men - by openly sneering at male strangers on the street? If those men actively try to make eye contact, yeah, I guess I do. I have to say I would bet $ there is something more going on than you simply being not-Chad and women all being awful cunts. Maybe so. I do suspect there…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:50 AM
4

I said specifically: if they do consider my existence, they deem me deserving of scorn I.e. if a women looks me in the eye and curls her lip, I do not think I am misinterpreting that as scorn.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:28 AM
1

It's funny: I was just thinking something like that. Rationally, I can understand women trying to be pro-active in their avoidance or whatever. I believe women when they say they are hit on all the time, especially if they are attractive at all. Launching preemptive strikes (in a sense) could be construed as a defense mechanism. But, OK -- So, it makes sense. It still happens just as /u/NietzscheanStoic is describing in the quotes in OP: Active contempt is communicated clearly if a man does not …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:25 AM
4

"contempt" versus "overwhelming indifference" -- That is a distinction without a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:18 AM
1

I think that a spectrum of reactions from people who are not close acquaintances can be expected. That is certainly what I find to be the case from men: some guys who are unfamiliar to me are friendly, some aren't. Some want to engage, some want to be left alone. I do not see this variety of reaction in women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:16 AM
1

Do you mean people you see on the street or people you know well? This is a good question. I mean both. I work in a large organization, with people who have lots of different roles. The women in my immediate workgroup tolerate my presence and will come to my office if they need something. But, let's say we have a birthday gathering for somebody. You know -- coffee and a piece of cake: 15-30 minutes of co-worker conviviality. I am shunned. I'll try to engage in conversation -- trying to walk that…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 03:13 AM
2

Worthless in what way? Only being worthy of interacting with if compelled or otherwise forced into it by needing something I have. It seems a lot of cynics here on PPD will say that this discounting of essentially all other humans by most people is the standard state, but I don't think that way about most people. I might interact with a particular person more or less than another person, but I am generally interested in people around me. Why do you say you are deserving of scorn from women? I do…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 02:49 AM
5

Contempt is not hate. con·tempt kənˈtem(p)t/ noun the feeling that a person or a thing is beneath consideration, worthless, or deserving scorn. I do feel that most women I see on a daily basis hold me in contempt. They consider me worthless and, if they do consider my existence, they deem me deserving of scorn. Every indication I witness supports this view. This contempt is significantly removed (in the rhetorical and procedural sense) from them just not wanting to fuck me.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/09/17 02:20 AM
1

May I ask: did you fuck Mr. Not-a-fuckboy?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/17 05:41 PM
1

If not (evidence to the contrary notwithstanding), I understand your first comment. Otherwise, I do not.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 04:47 PM
1

Do you know what "analogue" means?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/17 04:34 PM
1

"Credit" has nothing to do with it. Admittedly, this guy sounds like a gigantic pussy, but why would this generally obtain with men? More to my point, it's just not germane to the debate over whether or not dread game works on married (or otherwise) women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 09:47 PM
1

I'm really confused: The linked post is from a woman, yes? What the fuck is being debated? Women don't dread men. Well, they can try, but there is nothing about the male human psyche that will respond favorably. The discussion of whether actual cheating is the asymptotic extreme of dread is moot with respect to this "evidence."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/17 09:42 PM
1

I knew someone would seize on this. Thankfully, it was a non-sociopath. Yes, I am sorry to report such monsters are among us.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/17 12:08 AM
3

If you catalog every, single little "compromise" you make -- keeping the ketchup in/out of the refrigerator, watching TV with/without the lights on, matching socks a certain way -- that's indicative of an unhealthy relationship. I think lots of people do this. Claiming you have a healthy give-and-take because you are willing to "compromise" and accept the darker blue paint in the bathroom is ridiculous.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/08/17 03:15 PM
3

Ya know, she was actually #6 on my search results, but I know of Ashley Graham. I think her body is bangin', but her face and personality are a little... off to me. But, yeah, she's plenty hot.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 11:44 PM
3

I ran this experiment just now: The first 5 "real" pictures in the image search (i.e. of women, non-memes) are all women I would cut off my pinky toe to fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 11:21 PM
1

Notwithstanding what I think of the veracity of the rest of your reply, I for one would not demean you as a "pathetic Chad-chaser.". Indeed, I would applaud your good sense and honesty: You should not settle. It's possible you can get a man you really desire, and you do other potential suitors a great service in not lying to them. Do you: you would get no argument from me in this particular case.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 05:36 PM
2

You mean the woman could get sex with a more attractive man than her husband I mean a 32-yr-old female fiancee has already -- with very high probability -- already had sex with a man far more attractive than her BB husband-in-waiting. A younger bride does have a lower probability of this situation, but it's definitely far from zero. To wit: Can't the man just marry a girl much uglier than himself, as a way to be the most attractive man she's able to attract? In my youth, I came this close to mar…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 03:56 AM
2

in an ideal situation...they are trading children for children, companionship for companionship, and sex for sex. I trust you will agree with me that this is, in fact, an idealized situation. Nevertheless, OK... So, we get married and both want kids, so we have kids. And, we both want companionship, so we provide each other companionship. Sounds great. Now, as a man, if I married you, the overwhelming probability is that you are at least close to the most attractive woman I have ever been able t…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 03:37 AM
2

I think a lot of people would be scandalized by the notion that wanting to be authentically desired by your wife means you value sex more than having children. Furthermore, no man should be trapped into having children with the promise of wild sex I understand your (slight) hyperbole in making this point, but, of course, every man (for all intents and purposes) is promised precisely this in exchange for having children. It is, of course (as you correctly suggest) complete horseshit and almost ne…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 03:21 AM
2

If it's okay for a guy to think like that, why isn't okay for a woman to think like that? It's "okay" for a woman to think like that. Indeed, she can think any way she wishes. Also, if that's the deal she wants to present to a man with whom she wants to have children and he accepts the deal, all is well. However, if she promises the putative father of her children a married (or otherwise paired) sex life as rich and as enthusiastic as she has engaged in previously, this is simply a manipulative …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 02:42 AM
3

Consider: she might have been hoping it would last forever, or it might have been with someone who would have made a terrible father. Seriously: How are either of these "better?" All either of these mean is that she is not too bright or knew full well what she was doing and has every intent of hooking some poor sap later.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/17 01:25 AM
1

I would feel relief and a sense of calm. It would be the truth. The unvarnished truth. I am far more offended by living the lie. My wife would never say this to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/17 01:15 AM
6

fucks almost any man that hits on her I do not believe this particular observation. I believe that you believe it, but I'd be willing to bet an arbitrary amount of money that neither of you notice the men she does not fuck. And, yes, I am accounting for the fact that said men must actually hit on her. You perceive the fact that she's having a lot of sex and some of that sex is with men you wouldn't seemingly fuck as her fucking "almost any man that hits on her." It's pure selection bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/17 09:01 PM
1

I guess I think he is, albeit with a particular twist. The question is, I suppose, whether the kind of neuroplasticity described in the link can elicit changes like this: http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/males-and-females-differ-in-specific-brain-structures
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/17 07:36 PM
2

http://lifehacker.com/the-science-of-practice-what-happens-when-you-learn-a-510255025 First link I found. There's a lot of research on this nowadays, given how much better we can image brains (and, importantly, non-destructively image for human brains!).
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/17 07:11 PM
5

I am a misogynist but not a sexist, meaning I believe women are perfectly capable of doing things but I don't like them as people. I do however take issue with the amount of hostility women treat me with. Holy shit! I was never abused as a child, but I could have wrote this! I hate the lip curl: The open, hostile, ostentatious, over-the-top "ignoring" of me. I also hate the rationalized lying. People (i.e. both genders) lie, but women always have a rationalization.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/17 04:06 AM
1

Again, not really sure what's being tried to be communicated, but I fundamentally disagree with each of these three sentences, individually and as a whole.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 10:31 PM
2

Don't string them along because you are stringing yourself along with them. This is a bizarre platitude. I have no idea what it means. Getting laid is worth quite a lot, in fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 01:04 PM
2

then whats the point in living, since the burden of performance never ends? Does that fact cause you to despair? It shouldn't: It is just what is.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:28 AM
5

I would like to become a kinder human being and learn to do a better job of spending my limited time on this orb doing things to make myself and those closest to me happy. I would also like to learn something new every day of my life. These things -- and a handful of things like them -- are what I would work on to be my most authentic self. Though I freely admit I do work on things like this every day, I love myself. The way my male friends and acquaintances act towards me lead me to think I am …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/17 04:15 AM
1

He doesn't. Credentials matter, so this is important.
/r/TheRedPill08/08/17 10:34 PM
2

What you - and other straight guys whining about this - don't get >is that the bottom of the barrel straight guys offering strings-free >sex to women are as attractive to us as gay guys are to you. You may not understand it, but it's the reality women live daily. I believe you. I also believe you are correct in saying essentially all women think this way. But, I also think you believe the "bottom of the barrel" to you is good enough for "other" women. But, all women think this as well...
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/17 05:30 AM
1

Almost my story exactly. Same gender, same pill, same age. Hell, maybe it was the same girl?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/17 11:31 PM
4

Everyone our age is more comfortable in their own skin - inter-gender friendships aren't typically rife with barely-concealed sexual chemistry. We're just, you know, friends. Indeed, this is a comment from "a woman's perspective." It is not true. To be precise, you might think it's true, but your male "friends" do not feel this way. It has little to do with being more settled as a human being or not. If you are attractive, all your male friends want to fuck you. The rapid decline of male desire …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/17 10:27 PM
2

And not sure why red pill guys are so eager to be "Mr Good Enough". Sounds like a shitty life to me. Agreed. Literally one of my worst fears.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/17 08:09 PM
3

This. Never ascribe anything to a man's agency that can be ascribed to a woman's agency. Women decide when they're gonna be fucked and by whom.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/17 05:16 PM
0

Whenever a reference to a story like this gets posted, there is a parade of, "This is fantasy," or "There is no way this is not made-up!" What does it matter? Is it just unbelievable that someone who subs TRP is one degree of separation from somebody who went home with Chris Brown recently? I mean, c'mon: The only reasonable Bayesian prior is that, in fact, Chris Brown did take at least one random, non-famous woman to his hotel room in the last, say, 2 weeks. I don't know if this dude knows that…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/17 03:58 AM
3

Better he know what it is, and make a choice to accept it, or not. Agreed. The worst thing is to live an unexamined life in this regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/17 07:40 PM
1

From my own POV money = freedom and that's my highest goal. This makes a lot of sense. But, I would ask: Why is freedom your highest goal? I don't necessarily disagree, but do you mean freedom from or freedom to? Just freedom not to worry? Or freedom to do something else? Why would you do something else? I'm just saying that the bottom of this very same spiral leads to one thing: getting laid.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/17 07:57 PM
1

Do you seriously not care about having luxuries in life above just basic sustenance? A large TV? Yeah, maybe. Enough to put up with all the bullshit I put up with in my job? No. For a nice car? Hell no! Do you never spend your disposable income on cool stuff you like without doing it to get your dick wet? I spend my disposable income on stuff I like, sure. The stuff I really like is fairly cheap. The stuff I spend the most money on (including travel to other places) is all basically some sort of…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/17 07:31 PM
1

So you'd be homeless if it wasn't for getting laid? I don't get this logic. Meh. more or less: I would take a job that was adequate to meet my basic needs for food, shelter, and health insurance. Why in the world would I do anything more than simply keep myself alive were it not for the possibility of getting laid?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/17 07:05 PM
1

This. I would quit my job. I would not groom myself. I would not exercise. The list in nearly endless...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/17 05:51 PM
1

My parents were effusively affectionate with each other. Lots of PDA. I did walk in on them one time when they were in a state of semi-undress. Looking back on it, it was kinda cute that they tried the be-cool-and-unperturbed-and-he-won't-know-what-we-were-doing thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/17 05:19 PM
2

This is an excellent rebuttal of OP! As such, it will be roundly and utterly ignored.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/17 10:10 PM
1

The word "sprezzatura" is about 500 years old. If you think it doesn't apply here, you are a literalist sperg, incapable of generalizing any concept. (That is a trait that is certainly off-putting.) There is a reason this word is still in common parlance.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/17 02:34 PM
1

Google "Campbell" + "monomyth," then "Persephone." Essentially time invariant.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/06/17 11:00 PM
1

I don't really think this is your beef, but... That particular sentence is certainly deductive, but lacking any explicit logical antecedents. An (poor) inductive argument for what was trying to be said would be something like, "Cuckoos steal nests to provide for their young. Some catfish trick other fish into brooding their young. Other species have dozens or even hundreds of young at a time. Therefore, all organisms ensure their reproduction either through securing care from other sources or by…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 07:28 PM
1

Hubris is a fascinating word to use. I haven't experienced purple, winged giraffes flying out of my butt either. I may experience just that in the future. If it does happen, I'll have to consider a host of possibilities. One of those possibilities is that I have gone stark, raving mad. It will not be the only explanation, but will be the most likely. But, seriously, your comment did make me smile, and it wasn't a smile of condescension in any way. I was just pleased that you didn't back off your…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 07:13 PM
1

It proves that looks, and the neurochemical rewards attached, are a subjective experience. It absolutely does not say that at all. It says that phenotypic expression of preferences is affected by environment. There is no question of subjectivity,per se, nor is there any evidence (from the paper itself; Google is your friend) that this expression is effected through short-term changes. You made that explanation up out of whole cloth.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 04:02 AM
1

And ignoring the way attraction and the human brain works. I quite simply am not ignoring the way "attraction" works at all. I am marking a distinction between what OP asked and this conflation with "attraction." It's not that hard to understand. Also, your first link: different people perceive physical attractiveness differently. OK. So what? That says nothing about how an individual can claim that someone becomes more physically appealing to them because of their emotions. Those are 2 complete…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 03:26 AM
1

Evidence for what? That corporeal objects do not actually change their appearance because of the observer's feelings? I'm afraid we have to agree that is axiomatic if we're gonna say that an objective reality actually exists. If you don't want to do that, cool. I can't argue.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 03:12 AM
1

People make their own rules for what they want to see Sure. They are free to do so. Nevertheless, their new rules are nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/17 03:11 AM
1

We're getting a bit afield from the original point. An offhand, hyperbolic compliment? Of course I can parse that. "You're the cutest thing in the world," or, "You're the sexiest MF ever," are wonderful compliments. We're talking about (seemingly) more reasoned observations, and, most importantly, what women say here! They're not paying compliments to their SO's. They're telling others that their perception of the looks of their SO has changed for the better--and markedly for the better--from th…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 10:53 PM
0

And if by that she means you are the man she's been most attracted to? What about that? Good/bad? It's good. I'd be crazy to say that isn't good. But, that's not what she said. And, it matters. Since the original statement is obviously, demonstrably false, how can I believe any estimation she makes?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 10:39 PM
2

Yeah but have you met OP yet? Touche'. but I can see why people would chime in and be thinking of attraction wrt this thread. That was kind of the point I was first raising. Here's my beef: If a woman who has strong feelings for me tells me I am the most handsome man in the world (has happened), she is lying. She just is. It ain't true. All I hear is the lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 10:33 PM
2

they mean their attraction to them is altered negatively or positively. If you mean objectively assessing someone as good-looking/bad-looking versus being sexually attracted to them yeah those are two different things. I understand. But, this is not what the OP asked! He asked whether your partner (or whoever) becomes more physically appealing to you. He did not ask if they became more or less attractive to you. I agree, these are two different things, but you can't have it both ways. Saying thi…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 10:19 PM
0

This post is gonna be a shitshow. Lots of PPD women will answer, "Yes! Of course!" They will do this without a hint of the notion that they are basically admitting some more-or-less mild form of mental illness wherein their actual physical perceptions of an external object are changed fundamentally by feelings. The rest will conflate attraction with perception of physical attraction and will subsequently dodge the question by claiming that the two cannot be separated. This also seems silly to me…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 09:59 PM
2

It has helped me understand why I have been unsuccessful and what I would have to do to be successful. I start at a disadvantage, so I would have to do a lot. That's just the way it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 04:03 AM
1

I don't know--enough? My smile isn't crooked. I don't think that is the primary problem: My face, as I said, has other problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 04:02 AM
3

Yep.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 01:22 AM
2

You've hit upon it: The "paper" -- the "scorecard," if you will -- is a lie! A damnable lie! These characteristics and achievements have given me an otherwise fulfilling life and circle of male friends -- outside my closest circle, who are truly close confidantes -- who are proud to know me. They mean precisely jack and shit to women. This is what TRP crystallized for me. I pretty much know why I am unattractive to women. First, I am not physically attractive: my face is not symmetrical and it h…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/17 01:21 AM
4

I understand what you are trying to say, and I won't ascribe anything less than positive motivations to you in saying it. But, this notion that validation is not to be derived from others' reactions to you is hogwash! To be sure, the perception of others should not be the only way you measure your self-worth, but to say that your self-image is derived entirely from within yourself is both impossible and, I would submit, dangerous. Without the calibration of others' view of me, my sense of self i…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 10:54 PM
8

I would literally give my car to be looked upon with real lust by one woman, one time. It is the single thing I find most crippling to my self image and self worth.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 06:21 PM
3

Gotta give it up when it's due: this is spot-on.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 06:20 PM
1

This basically asymptotes after effort~25%. Sounds about right, actually...
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 12:56 AM
6

A happy relationship is 5% being with the right person and 95% being the right person. Truth. Most people are remarkably shitty.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/17 12:26 AM
1

Yeah, I'm ugly. If you asked me that question and I had lived on a desert island for most of my adult life, I don't think I would say I'm ugly. But, empirically, it seems that I am quite unattractive. I get women ostentatiously and needlessly dramatically looking away from me when I pass them on the street, etc. If I find myself in some situation where complimenting my appearance would be somehow polite or socially appropriate (think -- I have on a suit, stylish shoes, and a fresh haircut), thin…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/17 02:23 AM
2

Occam's Razor says you're probably right.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 01:26 PM
1

It may be that you (and I) are outdated inasmuch as we don't see our existence as absolutely essential to the Universe. (That said, I do consider my existence very important--to me!).
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 03:48 AM
2

I have been to a strip club. I know lots of men who have been to a strip club. However, I estimate fewer than 25% of all the men I know have ever been to a strip club. Can I know for sure? Of course not, but going to/having gone to a strip club is something men talk about with each other, so I will stand by my estimate. Women assume men have had as sexualized an existence as they have had. It simply is not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 03:46 AM
1

All of this is not completely unreasonable (well, maybe a little), but none of it is what you said! You said most men have visited a prostitute, which is insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 03:43 AM
3

The careful parsing of what you would and would not sacrifice for your partner, and the near universal eschewing of giving up your life. My deep-seated RP tendencies want to say this is just a woman thing, but I suspect the men in many of these relationships would also say no to giving up their life.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 01:16 AM
2

I think it would be interesting to see (approximate) ages. As a Gen X'er, I find several of these responses very millennial.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 12:50 AM
2

It is literally crazy to think that 51% of men (or, hell, 33%) have visited a prostitute, an AMP, or paid a camgirl. To imagine that the odds are high that any man you meet has actually availed himself of these services is to engage in a level of paranoia that I cannot imagine.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/17 12:43 AM
2

Do you really think 51% of men have seen a prostitute? That's... amazing.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/17 06:04 PM
5

Agreed. But, how can a woman be sure the guy doesn't care? It's turtles all the way down...
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 07:06 PM
1

How is it manipulative to communicate exactly I how feel? That is not what you said! You said: my SO knows how I feel These are very different things. You can now say you meant the first, but I find that people often say (type) what they really mean the first time. I used to really love league of legends but I just kinda stopped playing. OK, but I think it's likely remarkably straightforward for you to list all the reasons for this, with little effort, if you were so inclined. I think you are re…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 03:02 PM
6

I guess my answer would depend on how much you think (or know) your SO wants it. Would he want it with greater frequency without knowing your "lack of enthusiasm"? You seem to suggest he might: I personally don't make it off limits but my SO knows how I feel If so, you are manipulating him, pure and simple. I mean, this: I'm not sure why that changed. doesn't really sound like a rational excuse, now does it? Is there any other facet of your life wherein you don't enjoy something as much as you u…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 03:51 AM
4

Does that sound like a con too? Yes. It does.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/17 03:36 AM
7

I have a filter and am able to discern between things to promote and things to avoid I kept that to myself. I.e., don't "just be yourself." Be funny, be interesting, ... Quintessentially RP. ...just don't be rude is all that advice is saying. Being rude or not matters not one bit. Be attractive. If attractive, you can be arbitrarily rude. If not, you can rude or not, it won't matter. Don't hide your feelings:...Have a filter and use rational judgement. I.e. Actually, think about what you are abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/06/17 09:59 PM
1

I am sorta surprised by the reactions so far. I'd do it. There are 2 kinds of women in the world: size queens and liars.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/17 10:00 PM
1

He's devoid of superego. He's also just flat out abusive. The character seems to be written as person trapped between adolescence and manhood, and kind of sucks at both of them. Do we see him with male friends? (I haven't watched enough to see, so I really am asking.). His lack of male friends rings true to me: I wouldn't want to hang out with such a weird asshole either.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/17 10:51 PM
2

You know, you're right: the trend is not universal here. But, the number was great enough that I had an immediate, visceral reaction. I literally felt tired upon reading the thread: it would take a lot of effort to be as much of an asshole as some responses are suggesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/17 10:45 PM
2

Those that have not specifically mentioned asshole behaviors have not disputed OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/17 09:59 PM
1

Adam Driver's character in Girls, eg, is unequivocally an asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/17 09:59 PM
1

Jesus. All the answers on this thread so far: Be a fucking asshole... but not a really bad asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/17 09:48 PM
6

Edit: Ignore the case where she complains about your choices. Yeah, but that's the actual problem. The most common scenario is that neither one knows where they want to eat and want to push the decision off on the other one. Both people being a little kinder to one another would go a long way, but if you have the guts to pick a place, it oughta be respected.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 01:43 AM
1

You can say I have it completely backwards, but plenty of comments betray otherwise. Also, note that I am not saying that just being physically attractive as a woman is not enough for a man to want you. It totally is! Rather, I'm saying that guys do not immediately classify a woman as just one thing in some attempt to pre-emptively rationalize being rejected, etc. I see women doing this all the time. Men might do the "she's a bitch" thing to rationalize, post hoc, but not this making women just …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 01:20 AM
1

As an aside, I don't really see how this is "female-centric." It's not like guys don't refer to girls as "That hot chick" or "The girl with glasses" or, my personal favorite, "Tits McGee." We use a stranger's most prominent trait to describe them all the time - if his most prominent trait is that he's handsome, then yeah people will call him that. You call this an aside, but I really think it is my point. "That hot chick," may well be a useful label, but no half-way sane man then assumes -- with…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/17 12:57 AM
3

First, this is an outstanding post, and has sparked one of the best (i.e. real information filled and very civil on both sides) conversations I have ever seen on this sub! Seriously, it has restored a bit of my faith in the usefulness of interacting with internet strangers (but only the right amount -- a bit). So, let me pick my nit: What I mean when I say they're average is that they are unremarkable and ordinary in most ways -- they are not rich, they are not stunningly handsome, they don't ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/17 11:18 PM
1

haven't you ever lost attraction to someone because of how they treated you? No. Never. I have, on the other hand, decided that being in a relationship with them would be an unwise thing. Attraction is still there. If attraction is this tenuous, it is precisely the fragile thing that every TRPer fears will be quickly tossed aside by hypergamy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 02:02 AM
1

I have always said hypergamy gives you "husband blinders", I have no opinion on "wife goggles" I think we mean the same things, but using different... etic terms for them. I meant what you mean by "husband blinders." i still think it's silly. "Attraction" to women does not mean "the most conventionally objective good-looking man according to women in general". I certainly didn't mean that, and would submit no one could really construe my comment as meaning that.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 02:00 AM
1

If you are rationally characterizing your husband as the most attractive man you have ever been with, good for you. I wish you well. However, I suspect this is simply not true. You, specifically, have been a case study and fervent supporter of "wife googles" on thsi sub. I find this notion that the man you commit to becomes more attractive to you irrational, unreal, and exceedingly fragile. I would never want to be the object of this sort of attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 12:46 AM
1

I find that really problematic because attraction has many dimensions. Viewing it as purely visual is perhaps not accurate to how many people experience it. To be sure, I did not suggest that these men were only physically more/less attractive. Nothing I said is meant to suggest we arent talking about the "total package." Except... Its not settling if the person provides a stable relationship prospect but is just (initially) slightly less physically attractive than someone who offers no stable r…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/17 12:43 AM
1

I'm saying it doesn't always happen that way. I'd simply say it's more common for it not to happen that she has alphas. You've hit upon it right there. You have no statistics to back this statement up (which is OK -- how could you?), so your experience is as valid as mine. I have found over the course of my life (probably longer than yours, but I can't be sure) the exact opposite. I.e., Every married man I know married the most attractive woman he has ever been with, None of the women whose hist…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/17 09:32 AM
5

The authors of the study provide an answer based on their analysis: "Americans with steady partners are both fewer in number and have sex less often." Fewer LTR (married and otherwise) couples: Women see no advantage to pairing off early and have abundant opportunity to have sex with the limited number of men they really want to have sex with. Within LTR's, women don't like the idea of having to have sex with that guy all the time (this is relative statement, and is not be taken literally; I fee…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/17 03:20 PM
5

It's a fascinating world you live in. "Average" guys get plenty of sex: Perhaps not all they want, but an amount any reasonable person would consider a good amount. So, concomitantly, there's a fair amount of women that participate in this sex with them. But, you don't have sex with "average" guys. There exist women more attractive than you (I, admittedly, presume). Others are married or in LTR's, so they don't do this. So, who are these women? Some unpaired fraction of the all the women less at…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/17 09:15 PM
4

Tinder wouldn't be so popular among men in the first place if this wasn't true. Insane. Tinder is "popular" among men for the same reason Dillinger said he robbed banks -- "That's where the keep the money (women)." If you swipe for like an hour a day at least you'll get laid a few times a month easy assuming you're not super ugly or literally autistic. Most men (and I know you'd like to just scream "omega" at me, but I've got a full panoply of male friends across the attractiveness spectrum -- b…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/17 09:04 PM
7

"Average guys have ... all gotten laid a few dozen times from tinder " This is the most outrageously ridiculous thing I have ever seen on this sub. (and, yes, I understand the gravity of that statement). You cannot possibly really believe this.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/17 08:56 PM
2

This is succinctly and clearly put. The study cited in OP specifically referenced only LTR.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/17 06:31 PM
1

Do you mean what are their emotions, or do you just not know the difference between effect and affect?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 09:24 PM
1

Yes, but they still labor under the misapprehension that the green stuff will buy them sexual attraction. If they did not believe that, their motivation for those long hours and hard work would crash.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 03:00 PM
1

You don't think there's any reason a guy would want to improve their lifestyle other than sex? I do not think the calculus of the abject horror of most jobs versus the relative value of anything other than sex is a tradeoff that makes sense for most men. Through most of recent human history, that calculus has been clear: Success at that job would translate to some measure of sexual success, be it ever so small. That was enough of a carrot. Doesn't compute anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/17 01:50 PM
4

But I am saying from a woman's standpoint that most successful women don't want an unemployed Chad. This, of course, makes sense. But, the majority of women will fuck an unemployed Chad. With gusto. Jobs suck and are soul crushing and annoying. Agreed. I made this very point earlier. If Chad is the only one that is gonna get his dick wet with real enthusiasm, why would a man put up with this deal? Just for kids? For most men, that's not worth it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 11:28 PM
1

That was for you: I like your theory that Kemal here has a fucked-up keyboard. Although, I do think Occam's Razor suggests he's just an illiterate weirdo.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 11:20 PM
2

So, you're basically saying that OP's premise is 100% correct, but his position on what to do about it is wrong/unfair/unjust. Fair enough, but... The problem is that in both these fantasies of social engineering, solidarity is required by one gender or the other. All men would have to take OP's advice and just fuck off all the time, or all women would have to adopt your strategy of only giving up it up for the provisioning. Neither will obtain, admittedly, but the former has a hell of a lot bet…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 11:18 PM
1

That's a great theory, but backspace does fucking exist, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 11:12 PM
2

This is a remarkably mercenary attitude. Have fun with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 11:07 PM
7

If women (a) were sexually attracted to men with stable jobs (rather than just rating them highly for LTRs and/or claiming their "youthful tastes" have been refined over time -- an obvious and pernicious lie), or (b) found not having a stable job a disqualifying trait, no one would "rage". All a lot of men can do to attract a woman (i.e. get their dick wet) is be a provider. If a stable job is all I have to offer, so be it. All I ask is that the arrangement is understood and clear to both partie…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 10:24 PM
2

The fact that I can't do this is the primary reason I have never had (nor will have) children. My genotype has lots of problems, ranging from the merely problematic (I am, empirically, not physically attractive) to the sublime (I have serious health issues that are wholly genetic). It does not need to propagate! I would feel remarkable guilt bringing a child into this world with health-related defects. For that matter, I would hate to condemn a male child of mine to a life of unrequited wishing …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 07:33 PM
12

Almost every man that has ever lived has hated his job/task. To think otherwise is millennial fantasy. Unless your career is in some way a "calling" to some higher purpose (and, as far as the trappings of that might go, even then), then, yes, the only reason to do anything beyond having a place to sleep and enough food in your belly to live is to get your dick wet.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/17 05:36 PM
2

Interestingly, every response here from someone I assume to be female (save the one from /u/darla10) disagrees with OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 11:13 PM
1

Not everyone is into cute curvy blondes (but a lot of men are!) Yeah, a lot are. Like human ones are...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 01:15 AM
1

Most women - nearly ALL women - are attractive enough. A woman doesn't have to be a supermodel or have a perfect body. This. A lot of women are plenty attractive enough for essentially all men. Men don't look for better, they just look for more and/or different.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/17 01:04 AM
25

So, that's not hypergamy. You're arguing, rather, that those stats disprove a Pareto distribution (80-20) for casual sex. Even that ain't true: How many hookups did each woman have? How many did each man have? 80-20 means that everyone having casual sex gets some, but 80% of the sex is being had by 20% of the men. Equal rates of reported "I have hooked up at least once" have nothing to do with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/17 12:31 AM
16

Hypergamy doesn't seem to be a thing. Roughly equal numbers of men and women hook up. How exactly does the second thing follow from the first?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/17 12:18 AM
1

Darcel. Her name was Darcel...
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/17 08:52 PM
3

OP's flair doesn't check out.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/17 11:01 PM
1

Does the woman know I am not attracted to her? Does she know and is ok with it somehow? If so, I could do it. I would never be in a relationship with someone who only thought I was attracted to them, however. By the same token, I'd rather forgo all human contact period than be in a relationship with someone who was not attracted to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 07:42 PM
4

Do you want men to go to jail? Because, this is how men go to jail.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/17 02:14 AM
4

This is a great comment, and that flair: Damn!
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/17 02:03 PM
2

Agreed: In hindsight (and, dare I say, through a RP lens) it makes perfect sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/17 02:07 AM
5

Unless you're a virgin there are women out there less experienced than you. Sure, you're right. There should be a caveat to this: "If you think you are well-matched attractiveness-wise with a woman, she is never less experienced than you." This is also blatantly false. I personally have never found this to be false in my several decades on this planet. So, it's great advice for my younger self. To wit: It's a good thing you don't have a time machine. You'd give yourself awful advice. My life wou…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/17 02:05 AM
10

The things that make you popular with your male friends mean absolutely nothing to women. It is stupid to assume any woman is less experienced than you are. If you think a woman might be having sex with a guy, she is.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/17 10:41 PM
1

Holy shit! Every top level response is (a) a list of more than a couple of items and, (b) in a lot of cases, pretty trivial stuff (laziness and violent behavior notwithstanding). I mean, it's almost as if I need a guide to constantly remind me not to exhibit small foibles or make a single mistake in front of women at any time, lest they instantaneously lose all respect for me. But, that would be crazy...
/r/PurplePillDebate22/04/17 03:49 AM
5

Every single woman I have ever had sex with also had sex with at least one extremely hot man. The 4 I dated in college fucked a professional model in a storeroom. No, it's not as if average-looking guys never get laid, but they get laid far less than their female counterparts and they never fuck really hot women.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/17 02:37 AM
7

This rings true to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/17 11:07 PM
8

I don't know: I have been consistently and markedly shocked throughout my life at how much sex -- and with how many different partners -- essentially every woman I have ever known has had. Ugly women, plain women, pretty women, smart women, dumb women, rich women, poor women: They have all fucked a lot more than I would have assumed (and a lot more than I have).
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/17 11:06 PM
2

1) I knew/know several men who were DI athletes in revenue-generating sports. I've known men with triple digit n-counts in the space of 2 years! ... 4) I can honestly say that every single woman I have ever had sex with has also had sex with someone who could credibly be termed a Chad: tall, blonde, markedly handsome, super body, high social status, etc. Several of these women fucked these guys because they met them in a class or at work. They ended up fucking in the storeroom or the guys just r…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/17 10:06 PM
3

No, your girlfriend doesn't want to cheat on you with an alpha. However, she may (likely will) encounter a situation where she has to branch swing because her calculus of the situation demands it. To do otherwise would be in direct contradiction of what seems to be common sense to her. Furthermore, though men cheat (all the time, it is true), it probably has much more to do with them being unhappy or just a piece of shit. I.e. this is a very male view of cheating. For men, it is pretty inclusive…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/17 02:58 PM
2

I'd definitely go 2-9, and 7 is pretty much spot on.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/17 02:47 PM
1

She doesn't actually think the guy she's in a LTR with won a damn thing. She knows he's only Mr. Right-Now. That line is pablum to keep hooked betas happy.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/17 04:12 PM
2

Whew! It is hard to propose a gedanken experiment around the crowd on PPD! "How would they even enforce that?" "Well, I can't say anything about that, because I don't have that kind of money." I thing OP (who can correct me if I'm wrong) was trying to get to was: How would men and women prioritize things differently if sunk cost in a fling was really painful. My view: Men would be much more selective about their choices, and they would expand their criteria significantly beyond looks. Women woul…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/17 04:03 PM
2

from her perspective, the guy she feels she's going home to, has won If you really believe this, you're gonna have a bad time. This is the standard, nonsensical rejoinder used by women taking advantage of AF/BB.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/17 03:51 PM
1

You know the remedies; buy a Porsche, It pisses me off no end that this is the stereotype, as I have wanted a Porsche my whole life. Now that I can afford one, I am the quintessential mid-life crisis guy and feel compelled not to buy one.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/17 03:15 PM
3

Damnit! Thwarted...
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/17 06:37 PM
1

if she plays hard to get I expect her number to be lower This is the right answer. Not because it sets a number, per se, but it tells you what you need to know about her attitude towards you.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/17 10:41 PM
1

I do not think you will see many women here saying that last statement is accurate. Simultaneously, they will try to dispute female hypergamy, per se (/u/Atlas_B_Shruggin notwithstanding).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/17 01:14 AM
2

I'll be interested to see the PPD women's responses to the notion that: Women want sex with ... as many of them as possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/17 12:43 AM
1

There's a lot of "analysis" in this thread (more after my original comment, even) that goes something like: "I'm 8-9-10. It is what it is. sigh..." "I mean, I think I benefit from a halo effect, but I am not attractive enough to have men buy me things. I do have men obsess over me, though." "So, if that's the case, am I the Platonic ideal of attractive? What is the category of my attractiveness? Does it impact my ego and superego in the ways that I think it does?" ... and more scholastic questio…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/17 02:35 PM
3

I believe their estimations. I believe they are likely probably objectively (I know, I know, no such thing in this case) correct. There's just a strong selection bias: Those women who know they are attractive enough to influence every social interaction they ever have are the only ones answering (with a few exceptions). The amount of navel-gazing over the "nuances" of being attractive is off-putting.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 02:23 PM
2

This whole thread needs to be moved to /r/humblebrag.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 01:45 PM
1

It takes like, what, 10 seconds to realize it does not say that at all (even without the caveat regarding low and high). Geez. I actually find it surprising that you might find this especially controversial. It is such a common finding in my experience. A 7 woman has had much more opportunity to have sex than a man with a SMV of 7 (this narrow fact is commonly accepted on PPD). She can be selective -- quite selective, if she wishes; as selective as you want to imagine her to be -- and still easi…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 01:38 PM
1

Half + x? Yeah: the comparison to the guy should be done at the same age. A male 6 at 20 and a male 6 at 40 are gonna have different N's.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 03:43 AM
1

I do think this recipe breaks down at either extreme, low and high.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 03:31 AM
–

Average? WTF knows, as has been said. But, I have an algorithm (yeah, yeah -- the TRP sperg has an algorithm--go ahead and snark about that...): Give her a 1-10 rating. Take a guy with that same rating and get his count. Double it. There's your answer. Next TRPer thing to be blasted for (anecdote): This produces the correct answer for essentially all my friends whose N-count I have a good handle on. A 6 guy might have an N=3-4, while his match (HB6) on the distaff side has N=6-8.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/17 03:21 AM
1

I don't think there are as many of them as RP do, but we can agree to disagree on that. But I will never do that. I will never marry a man I am not extremely sexually attracted to. You think you are the norm in this. I think you are rara avis. Can I know who's right? Not absolutely, but every observation I make in real life (not on the internet) makes me think this is rare for women. The only thing I can say to men worried about this is to be as sure as you can that she is into you. But, we are …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/17 01:44 AM
1

Answer me this - why are you invested in this? What about an internet stranger's ability to have a sexual relationship with a man in a FWB situation without being ruined for relationships is so impossible for you to accept? This is a great question. I would first say that it's not (im)personal -- It's a concern over a bigger issue. But, you do put your finger on it: rope you into marriage and then spend the next 50 yrs of my life secretly dreaming about my FWBs D while i starfish for you. There'…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/17 11:19 PM
1

My comment was about how you intimated that real connection with someone involves more than animal attraction, and, therefore, you couldn't be alpha-widowed in this situation. I agree that deep-seated attraction is about more than just pure physical attraction, but physical attraction is necessary (just not sufficient)! The fact that you find your FWB unsuitable for a LTR does not mean that his wrecking of you couldn't impact a future LTR (even if you say you would never do that in any event). I…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/17 10:56 PM
7

Alpha-widowhood is not about "really wanting to BE with someone." It is about not being able to really BE with someone because a part of you has been taken. It doesn't matter so much what you would like the situation to be with a future LTR. It's that you will compare them to Mr. Fuckme. And, they will be able to tell (even if you don't tell them, they'll be able to feel it if you are together long enough).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/17 10:43 PM
1

-- How easily, blithely, and without any reservation or compunction whatsoever, women can lie. And how good women are at lying. Women are exceedingly good liars. These are the ones that shocked me so, and I agree with them verbatim.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/17 02:49 AM
4

I think Mike Pence is a stinking piece of shit and an obvious sexist. I don't think this weird, evangelical social posturing is anything other than just that: posturing. That said: The man has spent a lot of his adult life in executive positions. If I were in a position where people directly reported to me, I would never meet alone with one of those people if they were a woman. Ever. Nor would I meet alone with a woman who might want something from me: job, deal, etc. Would that put women at som…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/17 10:38 PM
1

I don't know. I kinda agree: I also always think that the most virulent homophobes are closeted homosexuals.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/03/17 10:33 PM
9

And... here's where I decided this was a troll...
/r/PurplePillDebate25/03/17 06:22 PM
3

I have red flair because every measurement I make of the real world is consistent with RP notions. Every measurement I make of this particular question fits a random distribution wrt to gender. That's the truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/17 02:15 PM
9

I've always thought this was one of the weirder specific sexist notions. I don't find men, in general, to be much funnier than women, and there are several professional female comedians I find funny. I don't see how this is a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/17 02:02 PM
2

"An explanation for the lack of effect of the characteristics that were hypothesized to be of importance is that women are highly selective in mate choice (e.g., Regan, 1998) and might pursue a threshold strategy (e.g., Townsend, 1993; Townsend & Wasserman, 1998). Thus, a target with high physical attractiveness and social status might still not reach the threshold to become a desirable STM-partner. " I.e., none of the confederates was unambiguously Chad.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/17 12:08 AM
1

men could never relate to this Seriously? Like, when a man is used for their money? Or just to make someone else jealous? Yeah, totally unrelatable. And yet, neither of these common events should/would lead to a diminishment of confidence, per se. Or, at least, that is what I am repeatedly told by women on PPD -- that all it means is that that particular woman is bad. Right?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/17 08:00 PM
1

It removes confidence in her inherent worth? That doesn't make any sense. It might not contribute to that confidence, but you'd have to be very weak-minded indeed if that knowledge detracted from your self-image.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/17 07:31 PM
1

This analysis sounds pretty reasonable to me. There is some sort of disconnect (probably a meaningful and real one) between validation and obtaining self-esteem. I would, however, say about your #1: I think it does exhibit confidence. Being confident that you know the motivations, etc. of the people you are dealing with is real confidence. You might not like those motivations (NB In fact, this notion of not liking, but knowing, the Truth is TRP in a nutshell to me!!), but you understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/17 04:21 PM
2

I hope so. I read the OP 3 times before I could begin to parse it at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/03/17 04:14 PM
1

And, if all the women on here can speak to the same experience.... you really do need to pay attention. I really don't understand how, in this case, that the observed woman's point of view is more (or even remotely close) pertinent than the men doing the observing! That's not saying anything sexist: The genders could be reversed. You are attuned to being noticed when you are dressed and coifed. You are not when you are dressed down. The selection effect is obvious! Run the experiment -- dress li…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 10:43 PM
1

You didn't lose attraction, you say. Good for you. No praise is necessary for being a compassionate person. This wasn't meant as praise. It's just an exclamation that I wished you well because you have made a decision and acted on it. I do not hide what I'm saying, rather I speak very frankly. I did not assume anything less. Indeed, I thought you meant exactly what you said when you wrote: Most adult women are mature enough to understand... Why do women have to be 'mature' not to lose attraction…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 10:33 PM
3

Also, she only has the relative measurement of herself gussied up versus dressed down. That's not the question at hand here.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 06:45 AM
2

Agreed, that's a sensible course of action. If that always happened, no one would ever talk about Beta Bux ever again, because it would never obtain.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 06:44 AM
8

Nonsense. You are equating not being hit on constantly with being invisible. If you are, in fact, attractive, every single man you see (and many you don't) see you, in every detail. That's real attention. Just because you don't get the delight of rejecting doesn't mean you are invisible.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 06:42 AM
4

she has first hand experience of being rather invisible. but I really think she can tell better in this case. I'm sorry, but that makes no sense. You are equating not being obnoxiously hit on with being invisible. "Slumming it" does send a clear signal of not wanting to interact. Men are not as stupid as you would make us out to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 06:40 AM
1

she should walk away. Quickly. Too much risk that he's only after one thing. Agreed. If she weighs the pros and cons, and finds that the latter outweigh the former, she should ditch. But, women don't do that. They string along. PS My scare quotes were meant to indicate that I didn't think your expressed point was the onlypoint to be made.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/02/17 12:17 AM
2

I understand the "point" you are making. I just don't think being hedged against is a good way to start a relationship. If the situation is such that she feels she can manipulate it thus, I think the smart thing for the guy to do is walk away. Quickly.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 11:57 PM
3

Well, as I said, this makes a better topic for discussion. These: I would recommend that a woman wait longer when dating a redpiller because from my experience of redpillers posts' a lot of them are only after one thing. Or if the guy they're dating believes that a woman who gives up sex too early is not worth a relationship. Or if they're dating a guy who is known to kiss and tell. all mean that the posited woman is not attracted to the posited guy. Next. It is not worth the horseshit to get to…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 10:33 PM
7

OP question needs one more clause to spark a real RP-BP discussion: "If you make a man wait longer than you have made another man wait before having sex with him, do you respect him less?"
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 09:59 PM
6

I wish I had something else to contribute other than, "nuh-uh." Alas: that's all I've got. Undercover hot chick will always out-draw average woman dolled-up. Source: Have a penis and examine every woman I see, everywhere, every day.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 09:53 PM
2

I'm really not sure how you thought up your version of my post, but it's incorrect. It was your own words betraying what you really thought. Re-read the clauses I pointed out in the original comment. They are all hedging and explaining away feeling a loss of attraction. You didn't lose attraction, you say. Good for you. But, the way you framed that in those sentences makes it clear that you were fighting... your nature?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 06:47 PM
2

Vulnerability in a man is not a trait to be selected for. Why would it be? The primal purpose of the male in a family is protection. As I said, modernity certainly makes more than animals, but we are animals still. The implicit (only very thinly veiled) caveats in the OP make this clear: They are equivalent to, "OK, I know it's unattractive in my gut, but there are good reasons it shouldn't be unattractive, right? Right? Right..." <edited to correct mistake on my part>
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 04:48 PM
2

I think the whole tenor of the OP gives away the plot. changing ideas of gender norms, women are more accepting of seeing men cry... Most adult women are mature enough to understand... The majority of women probably don't lose any sexual attraction... even: a woman's attraction for her man would increase due to this show of trust... All these (at first gloss) positive statements actually connote the validity of the TRP trope: Women have an instinctual, primal dislike of any show of vulnerability…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/17 04:04 PM
1

Your hypothetical is interesting, but: But that sort of things happens all the time. It happens to most people that don't end up marrying their first partner, is nonsense. By dint of age, I know lots of married people. By accident of birth and other things, these pairs cover the socio-economic spectrum. In every case where I have know both partners for, say, more than 3 years before they were wed, the man has married the most attractive woman he has ever been with. The woman is never married to …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/17 06:28 PM
1

Why the hell would a woman suddenly start dating men she considers to be much lesser than the men she used to date.[?] You can certainly debate whether this is the most prevalent occurrence, and even discuss what precise conditions might lead inevitably to this, but dismissing it in this manner is ridiculous. Women settle for less attractive men for LTRs and marriage. These men are often "lesser" in many different ways. We could even have a reasonable discussion as to whether the woman's "tastes…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/17 04:05 PM
2

If you are able to communicate with different people in a lot of technical settings, you can almost write your own ticket.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/02/17 02:29 AM
1

I did, but this response seemed to backtrack on the whole "I'm wiser now" notion. But, OK: We all live and learn. Good on you.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 11:22 PM
1

Something like that. You got the idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 11:21 PM
4

What's the over/under on how many replies will be a slight variation on, "Well, I've had casual sex and it was with a man who wasn't in the top 20%! I mean, he was attractive, but he wasn't really rich. Well, he was kinda rich, but he did this sucking his teeth thing..."?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:44 PM
1

Well it wasn't intended to be that way. Well, how could he possibly know that? It's a startlingly cliche no-win question. It's a question a sit-com episode could revolve around. It's the frigging Kobayashi Maru! Can you put yourself in his position for one second and think about how you would react? If you can honestly say that you can and you don't see he was backed into a corner (as far as he could possibly know), I don't think you are capable of empathy in any real sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:41 PM
2

So, I'm in a profession where it is assumed by most people that the practitioners are smart. Like, really smart. Like, this profession is often used as a synonym for really smart. Some of the most successful people I know in this profession are of (what I believe to be, anyway) average intelligence. Doggedness, good concentration skills, and the ability to just do until whatever it is is done seem to be the primary predictors of success. I do admit that I am making an a posteriori observation he…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 10:33 PM
2

That 'wife goggles'- a concept I see confirmed in post after post on PPD- means that every word about how great I am that comes out of my wife's mouth is a delusion, if it isn't an outright lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/17 06:35 PM
4

What "mistake" do you think she might have made? Is it somehow damaging herself by jumping into the sack too early? Or, is it that she has decreased her "bargaining power" somehow in past relationships and has now learned to keep her powder dry? Something else? Personally, I don't necessarily believe she has damaged herself by having sex right away in the past. But if she's now using it as a bargaining chip, (a) that's something I feel pretty justified getting angry about and (b) it means her at…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/17 03:09 AM
3

Tits FTW. Tits sell everything. Everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/17 06:04 AM
2

TIL that the physical preferences of most PPD men are as seemingly out-of-the-ordinary as the preferences espoused by the women of PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/17 05:26 AM
1

All I'm doing is reading what was written. I can comprehend what I read, seemingly unlike you.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/17 11:29 AM
1

Where do you get a count under 5? He's saying she was a prolific slut -- lots and lots of sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/17 04:04 AM
1

She had a very high n-count is what I understood from his comment?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/17 01:52 AM
2

who knows? I don't particularly care. Well, that's exactly the point of the OP, isn't it?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/17 02:32 AM
5

It's not really saying "not your taste." What it is really saying is not good enough for you. You are making a clear, unambiguous value judgement. You must feel you have good reason to make that judgement, and, therefore would be unsurprised if another woman made the same determination, ie she wouldn't fuck them either. So who would? Just women far less attractive than you, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 08:55 PM
8

Understood. But, this is a frustratingly common dodge: "Well, I wouldn't fuck them, but some woman would."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 08:37 PM
11

Yeah because they mistakenly think they're average. You know, in a lot of cases, I can't really argue with that. But, I am also firmly convinced of what I might call the other side of that coin. Namely: women think the "average" guy can get laid because they only ever actually see some fraction of the top end of the distribution of men as sexual beings at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/17 06:51 PM
1

Most of the 3-4 woman and 8-10 man pairings I have direct knowledge of involved ugly women working or otherwise being thrown together with very attractive men. The men exerted no effort: They fucked the girl in the storeroom or got a bj after work. Most women encounter very attractive men at some point in their lives. They very often have sex with them if they spend more than 100 hours with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 08:52 PM
1

Save for "cutting a CD," I've done all these things and many more unique and interesting things. They all mean exactly Jack and shit to women. I could call my life well-lived right now, except for the fact that I've only had sex with 5 women in my 40-something years. It matters.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/17 05:49 AM
3

Jim Kirk?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/17 06:52 PM
1

Duty sex isn't a bad thing unless it unenthusiastic/unwanted/starfishy Do you mean, like, ostentatiously unenthusiastic? Like, open resentment? Duty sex is -- by definition -- unenthusiastic. It is a bad thing. Period. No lie: I would much rather have no sex if all I can get it duty sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/17 06:38 PM
2

<sigh> Yeah, it's not like it's a show about fucking or anything...
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 05:15 AM
2

Obviously every one on the show is attractive From http://adashofdata.com/2015/02/18/the-data-behind-the-bachelor-the-bachelorette/ "...the Bachelor is 6’1″ on average, which is a whole 3 inches above the national male average of 5’10”" It's not that you are fixated on a particular Bachelor. It's that, as a class (a remarkably homogeneous class!), they are 180 degrees from what you say you find attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 04:42 AM
2

Look, I wouldn't dream of criticizing your enjoyment of the show, or even your... "meta-enjoyment" of Unreal. But, it is not credible for you to say that you watch it only "ironically." In particular, such fandom (and, again, more power to you -- I love some campy shit myself) requires that the viewer have some sort of ability to identify with and appreciate the "characters." You view the Bachelors as viable mates. If you did not, you would not derive such visceral pleasure from the show.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 04:31 AM
3

Does this picture (and your comment below) really square with your obvious fandom for The Bachelor? (I can deal with any response that doesn't include something along the lines of, "I watch it ironically. 'cause, you know, bullshit.)
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/17 04:14 AM
1

Not for nothing, but I think Saturday Night Live just did your post, Twilight Zone "Eye of the Beholder"-style.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/01/17 05:58 AM
5

You deserve a lot of credit for bringing up the topic by citing an actual paper and being intellectually honest here. Bravo!
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/17 11:08 PM
1

the whole "appealing to and shaping their emotional state is the way to get laid" bullshit Ya know, you can read "appealing to and shaping their emotional state" as (a) manipulation or (b) just making people feel good. To be fair, I do mean mostly the former, but (a) and (b) do cover pretty much exactly how to get laid. that this belief system is somehow the norm outside The "belief system" is just a set of observations (i.e. it's pretty crappy as a belief system). What is ridiculous is to think…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/17 01:50 AM
1

Chad does not read TRP on Reddit (nor does he consume these ideas online anywhere else), and I don't think it likely that he's here on PPD very often either. But... If "being TRP" is having figuratively swallowed that pill that allows you to see sexual strategies between the sexes as they really are, I suspect he's a "natural TRPer" most of the time. He's seen women's hypergamy in action. He knows that appealing to and shaping their emotional state is the way to get laid. He does not trust them.…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/17 12:13 AM
1

That's a good question. I honestly don't know. At least I would feel as if I had actually beat out other suitors in that case. For an LTR, that might be more important.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 08:33 PM
1

Most people end up pretty looks-matched for an LTR. Agreed. So, the 5 girl I (as a 5 man)LTR'ed had sex with more than one 8-10 guy before. I am the apotheosis of a consolation prize.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 07:28 PM
1

This is the correct answer. 80-20 holds for all men this way. I really do find it unbelievable that people dispute this at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 07:25 PM
2

Dead bedroom type scenarios have ranged from like 1-15% tops according to the stats I've seen. I think that it is easy to imagine that dead bedrooms are severely under-reported by men, as it does connote a hit to one's machismo. Would you have a lot of sympathy for women who complained their husbands don't spend enough money on them yet get all of their needs taken care of and more, or aren't attentive to her emotional needs despite being attentive pretty regularly and routinely? This is not an …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 05:21 AM
2

We're talking about levels of sexual activity far less than 2-3+ times per week That'd be a godsend in most of these guys' eyes. Also, I am getting to the age where many of these men have children who are already in college, removing that as a source of distraction/stress. But, what does it matter if it were that? The question was satisfaction, not about whether one had a... really fair complaint ??
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 03:15 AM
2

I highly doubt it's anywhere close to 70%. What are you basing this on? As I said, I base this on the direct reports of the O(25-30) married and otherwise LTR'ed men to whom I am close enough to have discussed this. It is a common complaint -- 70% is a number I am confident in. I will say that it's possible my friends are an outlier population, but I don't have any reason to think so. They span urban dwellers, rural dwellers, upper class, middle class, lower class, white, African American, profe…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 02:52 AM
2

My first instinct is to say that I'm sorry that I wasn't more specific, but upon short reflection, I think you are parsing my comment unfairly and not in good faith. What I, of course, meant was that these men are not getting near the amount of sex they want. Probably not even 2/3 of the volume they would want. I honestly do not think this is a controversial statement.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/17 02:21 AM
2

They are not getting sex. That's pretty much it. The LTR'ed men paired with women who never found them attractive in the first place. This is because (a) that's all they could get, and (b) the women were willing to overlook their lack of attraction in order to pair up.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 11:36 PM
2

I am absolutely referring to both populations, and I think the separate groups have satisfaction levels roughly equal to the mean (ie paired-up men and single men are each made up of about 70% dissatisfied men).
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 07:46 PM
4

I don't think most men are satisfied at all with their sex lives. I admit that I know (well) far fewer single men than I did when I was younger, but I'm confident that >70% of the men I know well enough to establish their level of satisfaction are distinctly unsatisfied. Moreover, I think civilization would come to a screeching halt if a vast majority of men were satisfied in this sense. What would be the purpose of life then?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/17 05:52 PM
1

Boys who grew up with sisters in the 70s and 80s were taught to treat girls with kid gloves, to defer and supplicate to them that girls are wonderful that girls never ever do anything wrong that girls never lie that in a dispute between a boy and a girl, the girl is always right and the boy is always wrong that you must give the girl whatever she wants, when she wants it Can 100% confirm all of these. My sister and I are pretty close in age, and she was wrapped in cotton wool throughout our chil…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/01/17 09:08 PM
2

You da real MVP...
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/16 05:43 PM
4

I'm packing like 5 inches and have heard the same shit. It seems to be less about the physical measurement and more about how she feels about you. So much this.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/16 05:41 PM
5

Most girls are more experienced than you think. I was gonna make up a sentence, but this one is awfully good.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/16 05:34 PM
3

Yep: can't stand the fuckers.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/16 04:03 PM
1

You think women are? Yes. That's insane. Yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 11:09 PM
1

I'm sorry, but that post facto explanation doesn't fly: You are now "digging yourself into a hole" here by declaring mayo "gross." Since you can't eat it in abundance anymore because it's empty fat calories, it has to be declared "gross?" This is precisely the kind of Sour Grapes-like rationalization that leads men directly to TRP. Other things do change over time: Older women cannot attract arbitrarily attractive men. It happens. Convincing oneself that this unfortunate state of affairs isn't b…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 11:04 PM
2

But men aren't tortured if they see another woman who is better looking than their mate. Now, of course, men cheat (people cheat), but the cheating is not driven by a need to be with the best looking woman they see. If they were driven by that, they could be classified as hypergamous.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 11:00 PM
2

i also used to love mayo on my sandwiches and could eat basically whatever i wanted without thinking about my waistline (ah, those were the days). things change over time; why is this so hard for some people to understand? How can you not see that this is precisely the heart of the argument? It's "what I really want" vs. "what I must do to be `healthy.'"
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 09:36 PM
2

...and the more beautiful the better. This one clause betrays that the OP thinks men think like women (to turn the tables a bit). To put a fine point to it: This statement just is not true in any real sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 09:34 PM
1

18
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/16 07:00 PM
6

who says a sensible car is dull? Well, you did, in the next sentence: ...even though I could afford a luxury car now. You can try to do some semantic gymnastics, but that is precisely what this means. "Luxury car" = "alpha bucks" is a pretty obvious metaphor. The point is as bobo616 said: "Mature tastes," are not visceral, and they never will be. More to the point, they are a lie, but no woman trying to rationalize BB will ever admit that, often even to themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/12/16 08:19 PM
3

I guess I meant women he regularly interacts with, but you thought passers-by? In any event, if you think your husband has options if he so deigned, you are subject to dread.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/16 04:35 PM
3

Do you believe that there are women he encounters every day who want to have sex with him (regardless if he wants to have sex with them)? Are any of these women attractive?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/16 04:21 PM
1

Though I can't find a link to the episode, I'll bet you $10000 he did not blow his chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/16 02:08 AM
2

If she just flat-out told me about it, sure, I'd be amenable to an LTR. If she lied about it, I would drop her like a hot potato. If she lied/hid the fact, that means it mattered.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/16 04:42 AM
1

They still only want to really fuck the 8, 9, or 10. This is a succinct statement of the 80-20 rule. I'm just restating it. And asserting that the referenced study (i.e. the WFU-involved one) doesn't have anything to do with the 80-20 rule at all, neither supporting nor refuting it.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/16 02:28 AM
2

Not talking about the OKCupid study here. Talking about the referenced WFU-involved paper.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:22 PM
2

Indeed. I think this hypothesis is what should be tested. It, at least, seems consistent with the studies in the OP and common experience by so many people here.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:18 PM
1

what this study shows is that the GUY wants to fuck that 8, 9 or 10 It patently and obviously does not show this. All it shows it that guys tend to agree what a 5 is , what 8 is, ... etc. That's all.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:14 PM
1

No, because, as I said, the paper doesn't speak to that at all. But, it also doesn't speak to it, at all. What I mean is that the 80-20 rule is just about this -- women only really want 8+'s. Showing variability in what women find attractive overall isn't speaking to the 80-20 in any real sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:12 PM
1

The press release was written by PR folks for WFU. The paper is behind a paywall, AFAIK.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:12 PM
1

I agree. I only point out the absence of evidence allows for a lot of room.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 10:11 PM
2

Lots of people will pick apart lots about this post, but I'll just concentrate on the Wake Forest press release about variation in attraction. Here's the abstract from the paper that is being written about: In this article the authors illustrate how revealed preferences (i.e., preferences inferred through an individual’s differential attraction to multiple targets) can be used to investigate the nature of mate preferences. The authors describe how revealed preferences can be estimated and how th…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 07:58 PM
5

Do you have a credible source for that assertion?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/16 02:24 PM
1

I went and found the thread. There's not a lot more information to be gleaned from the comments, but there is some. Specifically, the OP notes that she didn't even see the guy when he said it, as her "head was down." I speculate (freely admit it is nothing more) that this pair of people approached each other from far across a factory floor and that she markedly and deliberately put "her head down" as they passed one another. Especially given that a factory floor is such a wide open communal spac…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/16 06:48 PM
7

men's libidos go down sharply as they age I'm a mid-40's guy, and it is crazy to suggest that most (that's what is implied here) or even a meaningful fraction of mid-40's men have libidos that are satisfied by "weekly." I have many mid-40's male friends, and I will bet you any amount of money that they would all say this is not enough sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/16 01:57 AM
5

Agreed. I read the title and literally said out loud, "Holy fucking shit! What is wrong with people?"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/16 01:06 AM
3

I don't think it's that men don't get oneitis very often. But your comment about your getting older rings true to me. When I was a young man, I pined over a handful of women like crazy. I wrote long, pleading letters to some of them. I sat and listened to maudlin love songs, thinking of them the whole time. I romanticized almost everything about them. It seemed to me, at the time, to be my "natural state." The notion that I would do that now is completely alien to me. I guess I can't really sepa…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/16 02:43 AM
2

To be sincerely, deeply, and authentically desired by more than one woman (per year, let's say).
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/16 12:02 AM
3

OK, so I'm a fucking nerd, 'cause I LOL'ed! BTW, I bet Erdös would fuck the shit out of a herd of math groupies! Then he'd write a paper with them...
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/16 10:06 PM
6

It's pretty easy to find the paper referred to in the linked article. The authors "inductively" formed the bins for the responses after they got the responses to the open-ended questions. So, "incompatibility" and "grew apart" cover a lot of ground (i.e. a lot of excuses). Perhaps most interestingly, there is another bin: "Loss of love and affection" - 6.5% of men and 3.1% of women responded with that reason. So, (a) loss of affection is a small component of divorce reasons and (b) men care abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/16 06:27 PM
0

Growing up can also mean just looking at your past like "how silly and irresponsible, I wouldn't do that again" not necessarily with shame. That is a distinction without a difference. Being silly and irresponsible is worthy of shame. To claim otherwise is...well, silly and irresponsible.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 04:54 AM
1

Ironically, apparently TRP wants women to be chumps but not men. I don't think it is ironic, but, yes, that's probably correct. TRP is designed for men, after all. If TRP has a huge problem with waiting to see if he's legit, then TRP is a bigger moralizer than I am. No moralizing is implied: Just the reality of the attraction or lack thereof. If she is waiting to "see if he's legit," she's not really attracted. Next. Either way, a partner is getting screwed, so I'm not sure what the point is bet…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 03:19 AM
2

This can't possibly be true, can it. Nobody is that stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 03:13 AM
1

would you agree with me that being a plate is generally bad for women (assuming they want to be attractive to him and it's not just about sex)? If the woman is looking to maximize her return on investment, then, yeah, being a plate is not a great deal for her. Nevertheless, many women will take that deal for a high SMV man. but now she wants an LTR -- similarly justifiable for her to not have sex with him the first night? Nope. It's almost the exact opposite, in fact. If her level of attraction …
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 02:48 AM
2

Yes, I think we agree in the main. I do think there is a base level of investment where this becomes true, though: If he just happened to be in a situation in the past where, e.g., shacking up quick was expedient because he didn't have a place to live, then maybe some thought should be given. But, if he's been a let's-be-exclusive-and-I'll-take-you-vacation guy in the past, and he's not with you, he'll never be that attracted to you. I understand and appreciate the arguments about the difference…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 01:58 AM
1

Of course there are layers of subtlety in any particular interaction. I tried (and failed) to convey that by using the word, "now." "Now" can mean a lot of things to different people. But, the list of indicators in the OP are pretty specific, and pretty indicative of a man who is willing to commit significant resources, time, and effort to a single woman. If that guy has committed in these ways in the past, any woman should be suspicious if he won't do it with them. Even if he had a particularly…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/16 01:50 AM
2

Say he was burned by this strategy in the past. Say he has grown up and has started to value his money/time/attention/commitment more (or he just has less of it to give). Say he’s being more careful because that’s the more sensible thing to do. Say even his values changed and he doesn’t carelessly toss around his commitment like he used to... Yes to all of these, but, also yes to the fact that he's just not that into you. Never will be. If he has a history of LTR'ing-up women and you can't get c…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/16 10:17 PM
3

That we are just lucky to find several unicorns or that TRPs just attract certain types of women that fit together with the character TRPs try to portray? It's pretty easy to cruise through life with the working assumption that the earth is flat. Occam's Razor demands you pay attention to all data. In this case, you can't live an unexamined life, nor can you ignore the actions of women around you while only listening to what they say. If you do either of these, you can go ahead assume NAWALT, bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 09:25 PM
3

The fact that they attract women with superficial differences, but the same core personalities shows that the selection bias does exist. That's just a dodge, and it shows nothing of the sort. Indeed, Occam's Razor suggests that these traits are fundamental, i.e. in the absence of evidence that these differences are merely "superficial," the "core personalities" must be endemic to all women.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 09:10 PM
1

You can't say that the berth of women this applies to is "wide and deep" immediately after describing a particularly specific group of women. I don't understand this comment. I did not do this.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 09:07 PM
3

The OP implied that one can (or, at least, should be able to) discern which women are going to reinforce their previous biases. That a man oughta be able to tell that he's gonna have a bad time because the woman he is attracting is a shallow slut. Furthermore, the OP contends that not having this level of discernment is what leads to over-generalization (i.e. AWALT). The OP accepts the measurements (i.e. experience) of RPers, but claims that these measurements are victim to a strong selection bi…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 03:34 PM
5

Being educated and accomplished doesn't mean you can't be a shallow slut. In the same way being a poor working class women doesn't mean you are a shallow slut. Fair enough. But, the OP implied that the women being referred to were, in fact, "dumb." That was what I was attempting to address: Women don't have to be dumb to be susceptible to TRP techniques. You said it yourself. The women in that group have 2 options. Small weak beta nerdy guys. Or muscular douche. Most women will take the latter. …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 03:23 PM
3

This response is supposed to be sarcasm designed to ridicule the original statement. However, since (1) it picks out only one of the litany of things that was mentioned, and (2) draws imaginary conclusions from that one statement, it's not very good sarcasm. The thing that "proves they're ALL cheating, back-stabbing whores," is that, given the right conditions, they're all cheating back-stabbing whores.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 03:07 PM
6

This notion that TRP advice leads directly to a strong sampling bias that just reinforces AWALT is something that gets trotted out every couple of weeks on PPD. The part of this that is easy to agree with is that the most cartoonish tales of AWALT behaviors come from interactions with a group of women that could only be described as "shallow and bitchy." Almost by definition. But, educated 6-7.5's with careers and other accomplishments are the population that really proves AWALT true. They insis…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/10/16 02:50 PM
1

Agreed. Maybe untrue, but maybe true. So, then I can't see what someone having referred to him as creepy (only a bouncer's statement is in evidence) brings to this argument. If a woman had to remove my dick from her mouth to say, "You're creepy," I contend that statement has no meaning.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/10/16 01:07 AM
1

I'm confused. Do we believe he had sex with 260 (or 150?) women or not?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/16 06:30 PM
2

To clarify, I say "respect", but I'm asking about the minimum sense of not viewing them inherently in a disparaging way I guess I have to split the baby and say yes and no. I never think a woman is inherently less intelligent because of her gender, nor do I assume her credentials were obtained through less rigorous means. I think they have agency of their own. I would never make the mistake of underestimating them if I were placed into competition (e.g. professionally) with them because of their…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/16 10:33 PM
2

So much stupid shit. Tons. Gobs... But, why was (is?) it stupid shit? OP had some great examples: stealing your fathers booze, getting drunk with your friends, stealing his car, sitting on top of it while you let a bro try to drive and then crash it and wonder how you even survived? Or being a loud mouthed asshole and getting into unnecessary fights and then stealing some street signs on the way home and getting into trouble with the police? Sitting in a shopping cart and getting pushed down a h…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/16 10:22 PM
4

Regardless of what you think about the impact of n-count, I do not think it is an obscure or little-thought-about subject. It is a common topic in US sitcoms! This is certainly not an endorsement of its value as a topic worthy of serious research or not, but it does mean that thinking/talking/asking/wondering about it in context of a relationship is so common that it can be trope that transcends age, class, regional differences, even language. That means "people" -- where that word means modern …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/16 09:48 PM
1

Great granny FTW!
/r/PurplePillDebate18/10/16 05:31 PM
2

This doesn't make sense - what is the difference between how one feels and what one feels? She might feel like he is a fucktoy. Or she might feel he is "marriage material." Or she might feel he is a "safe" FWB, etc. In all these cases, she likes him just fine. Or not. What she feels is that he fills a role. How she feels might be anything from love to hate. Also are you implying that what men want from sex is somehow different? Surely you mean "in general," right? Clearly, men and women often ha…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/16 01:11 AM
5

Are you blaming this problem solely on women? Fascinating assumption. No: Of course, some men don't care enough to even question their performance. However, that wasn't quite the tenor of the post, I think. The real problem is that what a woman wants from a man during sex is wholly dependent on what she feels about that man (not how she feels, what she feels). Some guys don't have to worry about it: she always feels lust. Some guys don't care: In that case, it's roulette what she might experienc…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/10/16 12:58 AM
17

I mean, why don't all these guys just "get it"? Amirite? Women lie -- through omission and direct statement -- about what they like.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/16 09:11 PM
3

Hot guys focus a lot more on body (tits/ass) and prefer thicker/softer women (>20 bmi but not overweight). They're also more forgiving of facial flaws if the women has a great body. Apparently, I'm a hot guy!
/r/PurplePillDebate16/10/16 03:24 AM
2

If you're turned down for sex and keep asking, that is begging. This is essentially correct. You're done. There are only 2 answers: no and FUCK YES!
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/16 02:47 AM
1

Married. Many years now (>12). Red. Are you dating up/down? Up. Even now, way up. She thought she was hitting the wall at 27 (she wasn't, but was convinced nobody would want her for what was a silly reason). I had carried a torch for years, so, she was happy to marry me then. The seven-year-itch was a big wake-up call: Made it through without her leaving me, but there was never a question about her true level of attraction to me after that. Are you happy with current situation? Truly ambivalent.…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/16 01:29 AM
5

The top 20% of males are 9's and 10's. By definition. You do have to be a 9 to be a top 20% male.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 02:08 AM
2

Indeed. Top males already do a lot of grooming. But, seriously, does anyone actually believe they would be 5's without said grooming? Of course not. That's silly. However, the grooming is already "baked in" to their appearance. A 5 can make himself a sideshow-mirror version of a 9 with good grooming. He cannot make himself a 9.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 01:08 AM
2

Do the male 9's and 10's of the world spend some measure of time grooming themselves?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 01:00 AM
9

It is unclear to me if OP understands the concept of "top 20%," as, like, a mathematical entity... If you are really not too far below average looking to begin with it is, in fact, impossible to become "top 20%" with any amount of grooming, etc. The notion that you could do that seems comical to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/16 12:54 AM
1

Lots and lots of studies have been carried out to determine the average number of partners for men and women. Most PPD denizens have seen these, along with the arguments that men lie up and women lie down. Quantitative error bars are even sometimes offered in these analyses. So, let's start with the notion that Average Man and Average Woman have roughly equal partner counts. But... they are average. The average partner counts determined through studies are for the whole population (or, the sampl…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/16 04:27 PM
8

I agree with this. Shy women are at a significant disadvantage in the workplace, as they have to be louder than a similarly qualified man to be taken seriously already. However, a shy woman can always be approached, and never need approach herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/10/16 10:55 PM
2

I think the question might be whether a woman needs/wants to avoid men who "practice" TRP "techniques," or do they want/need to avoid men who have "swallowed the Red Pill," i.e. men who consider women to fundamentally childish and disingenuous with respect to their relationships with men. If the former, then maybe some tests -- watching behavior, talking politics, etc. -- might be useful (not foolproof, but useful). But, I suspect that lots and lots of confident men who are successful with women…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 10:20 PM
3

I understand your sarcasm (and even agree with it, to an extent). But, you gotta realize that: If women had less self-esteem, surely more men could get laid! Is like, pretty much exactly true, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 10:13 PM
1

I understand, but that was not quite the argument you presented before. You think women consider their associations with men to be commitments worthy of moral and/or ethical protections, in and of themselves (i.e. irregardless of their effect on the participants)? If so, as was said before, I wish you every bit of luck with that belief.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 09:37 PM
-1

Hamstering here has a pretty precise definition. You might complain that any man here saying that this cheating scenario is a fait accompli is wrong-headed or silly, but that's not hamstering. They are not performing mental gymnastics to justify or dismiss out-of-hand the possibility of something. That's hamstering. Specifically, all the female respondents here claiming that (a) the notion of cheating on their perfect-in-every-single-way partners is preposterous on the face of it or (b) claiming…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 09:32 PM
1

So, is your sense of morality the only thing keeping you from raping someone?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 09:26 PM
1

AWALT. Some women would not do it in a given situation. But: All women will attempt to rationalize doing it. The responses to this thread already have the first spins of the hamster wheel in lots of places. Some women have a sense of loyalty strong enough to keep them from doing it in lots of situations. Some women are rational enough not to blow up their relationship in a lot of cases. BUT: There is a level of Chad-ness and a delta between that Chad-ness and their present LTR where all women wi…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/10/16 02:40 PM
2

So you endorse the idea that any man, upon learning that his wife previously engaged in sexual acts that he had always wanted to try with her (and has communicated this desire) but she categorically refused, should obtain a divorce? That's gonna be a lot of divorces.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/16 05:53 AM
2

a stable provider is automatically not attractive to women specifically because he's a stable provider No. That is, indeed, silly. But, the claim that women, upon maturation and careful consideration of youthful...indiscretions, find being a provider sexually attractive is equally ludicrous.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/09/16 05:48 AM
4

This sounds horrific. I am sorry it happened to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/09/16 03:35 PM
3

I tell you what: I know you have no reason to do this, but bear with me anyway for just a sec. If you did want to play a little game, just pick 3 of your female acquaintances who you think might have a healthy attraction to you. Close friends wouldn't be as good for this, but you pick your own sample. Ask them how many hours they think you spend in the gym in a given week. I will wager large amounts of imaginary money at least 2 out of the 3 will answer with something absurdly low (like 2 hours)…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/16 02:06 AM
4

Honest to God, I really can't believe you find this surprising. I knew not to tell women I lifted weights years before I ever read a word on TRP. Comment after comment after comment on this sub (including at least one on this post) verify this. Women want to believe that muscles are, e.g., made manifest by "playing sports."
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/16 01:37 AM
1

I can't shake the feeling that the OP had a different aim than what is being assumed in all these responses.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/16 01:34 AM
1

It's just that you're talking about two completely different kinds of things. One is completely unknowable without disclosure. The other is only unknowable to a fool.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/16 06:29 PM
4

I'm never going to be totally honest with future partners about my sexual history, because men are never going to be honest with me about their sexual intentions. Wow. Just, wow.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/09/16 05:05 PM
1

Someone suggested the transaction at these places is just that, a transaction, and that nobody is being lied to. Ya know, this is an interesting response. I see the point, but I kinda think they are lying to you. Therefore, I cannot stand to go to Hooters, Twin Peaks, or strip clubs: I am surrounded in my everyday life with women who lie to me -- especially in regard to my attractiveness and the attractiveness of other men. I don't need to pay for more of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/16 02:22 PM
2

3 -- All. Day. Long. Hot also provides you a safety net against the usual dangers of being abysmally stupid.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/16 04:38 AM
2

This is what happens when I'm on the phone: I think it actually means I agreed with 99% of each word...
/r/PurplePillDebate17/09/16 04:11 AM
1

I agree almost 100% with every word of this post.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/16 04:43 AM
1

Nope, I assume nothing of the sort. And, women marry men they are not attracted to all the time. Saying it is not so doesn't make it reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/16 09:56 PM
3

I have also never met a man who said he was a Libertarian or an atheist who was not an insufferable bore. Conspiracy theorists are almost always men and they are either boring pseudo intellectuals or socially inept. Indeed. This is hard to argue against.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/16 02:12 AM
1

You can do something about sexual attraction, you can't turn back time and uncheat. You know, I agree with your attempt to frame the difference this way, but I really do think you have it completely backwards: Once a woman decides a man is undesirable, he is forever undesirable. On the other hand, plenty of people -- both men and women -- overcome infidelity in a marriage. I believe it happens literally every day.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/09/16 12:21 AM
1

That is a really easy choice. The latter ruins a marriage faster, more completely, and more irrevocably than the former.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 08:34 PM
1

Indeed, but that did not change the fact that they still find their wives sexually attractive. Only a woman would think this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 06:54 PM
1

Absolutely. Of course, your question suggests that you believe this is a common occurrence, at least as common as the obverse (ie a woman marrying a man she finds not sexually attractive). It would be silly to claim this never happens, but the relative rates are orders of magnitude apart. If you really believe men relationship-up women they do not find physically attractive with any real regularity, you must be very young.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 05:33 PM
3

I am loathe to say what another person might or might not "deserve." Glass houses and stones and all that. Nevertheless, you are asking for RP opinions, so... I would hope and wish the best for any woman who wanted to find a loyal and honest man. I have only one caveat to my good wishes: She must be honest as well. But, I don't mean so much about the particulars of her past, e.g. number of partners, sexual escapades undertaken, etc. Rather, what she must be honest about in order to deserve a loy…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/16 12:38 AM
8

See this is part of the problem. You shame men for not being able to find a partner, calling to question their maturity and social aptitude. Their natural 'fitness' comes into question, and they feel like something is inherently wrong with them. Rather than being a problem here, that was the intent of the OP and many of the subsequent comments.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/09/16 02:41 PM
2

for fuck's sake be interesting Being an asshole, a douchebro, a drug dealer, or a gangbanger is a straightforward way to be interesting. Are these the only ways? No, but they are pretty foolproof. So, what's the downside? Well, if being an asshole, a douchebro, a drug dealer, or a gangbanger was a disqualifying trait to a woman, a man wouldn't want to adopt that. But, being a complete shitstain of a human being is not a disqualifying trait to most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/09/16 05:56 PM
2

Thanks for calling the analogy creative. And, I do wonder if cuckold fetishists might have some sense of this reality. I suspect not, actually. I suspect they just want to be dominated and/or humiliated. Not my cup of tea, but to each his/her own.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/16 04:04 AM
2

This is a creative analogy, and I really like it. But... It's not as if a woman "shops" the buffet to determine her favorite food, on which she will subsist for the rest of her life (that is a popular... excuse? And, the gist of your analogy). No, rather: She eats steak and lobster and caviar first. Screw the rice and potatoes and carrots! But, finally, she needs to pick a food to live on for the rest of her life, but it has to be affordable. Those wonderfully rich foods are far too expensive to…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/16 02:53 AM
2

<scroll<scroll<scroll>... Holy shit! /u/skinnysweaty said something I agree with! <scroll> Crap, Pem already noted it.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/16 12:09 AM
1

You're not too great at designing experiments.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/16 01:15 AM
2

The analogy is fun, but incomplete. Superstitions/conspiracy theories/etc. are never reliable because, as you say, they attribute causal influence to nonsense a posteriori. I suggest making predictions from an AWALT framework and testing them. That is the precise definition of science.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/16 12:12 AM
2

I once heard someone say, "The great thing is, even if you don't believe in evolution, evolution believes in you." The thing is, AWALT allows one to make predictions that can be tested. If the hypotheses are confirmed, it's a good theory (by definition). If not, then something is wrong. I have a theory that the sun will rise tomorrow because the earth spins on its axis. Let's see if I'm right. PS I'm assuming autocorrect got you, or you are spilling some serious stuff I can't understand.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 11:30 PM
1

Useful if you want to maximize protecting yourself? Yeah, maybe so. Useful if you want to really understand what is going on inside the head of the man you are dealing with? No.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 10:55 PM
1

I was just wondering if my cooperation based, no spanking attitude was too feminine for reds. I think it assumes too much rational agency for a child. Children can't reason like adults - their brains haven't finished growing. So, I would say that the emphasis TRP puts on "human nature" means that children are like women (see what I did there?): They act emotionally and need to be shocked into correct, rational action. It would be a feminine mindset (and, yes, here I mean feminine=wrong) to assum…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 09:29 PM
2

One of the things that makes AWALT a useful heuristic is its startling universality: Young women, old women, beautiful women, ugly women, smart women, dumb women, educated women... you get the idea. ALL of them are hypergamous by nature and react to dread. Some have the ability (desire?) to not act on their hypergamous nature, the same as many men have the ability to suppress their aggressive natures when it benefits them. It is true that some women are more neurotic and smarter than others, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 09:24 PM
1

and I was pretty cool with that. I can see how that might make one's world more... orderly. However, it ain't reality. You obviously understand that, however. However, most men are not devoid of superego -- we can function just fine in all situations with women, despite our inner monologues.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 09:14 PM
1

I would say that I resent women not so much because they don't see me (but, to be honest, it probably matters more than I'd like to admit). Rather, it's that I hear lies all the time that -- if taken at face value -- would suggest to a rational person that I should not be invisible to them. That is what makes me a misogynist: As a gender, I assume all women lie all the time because they can't seem to tell the truth about what is attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 09:00 PM
1

Well, full marks for self-awareness. I am sorry this troubles you to this extent.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:59 PM
1

I think that teaching cooperation and conflict resolution is very useful. Agreed, but 2 things: 1) There is a threshold beyond which cooperation cannot be used, and that should be taught. I admit, I can't imagine what a child could do to cross such a threshold, without external interference (e.g. the cops) being invoked anyway. 2) I don't really see how corporal punishment of a child has anything to do with conflict resolution. The relationship between parent and child cannot be anything like a …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:43 PM
1

I hate the thought of random men seeing me in a sexual manner. That's a strong statement. I believe you, but why? Do you mean you hate the thought that some men somehow "plan" ways they would/should/could become sexual with you? Or, is it something else? Does "random" mean all? (I think it should -- if any man sees you as a sexual being, then it is overwhelmingly likely that essentially all men see you as a sexual being.)
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:33 PM
1

A lot of men in this thread got that confused. Agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:28 PM
12

80/20 is not about 80% of men never getting laid or getting a girlfriend. 80% of the sex women engage in is with roughly 20% of the male population. Not the same thing at all. PS Nice flair. Also true.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:25 PM
1

Totally laughed at this. I'm such a f'ing butthead...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/08/16 08:22 PM
1

Would you fuck any of the three?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/16 05:18 PM
6

sex can be contextual to women, i.e., it can mean very little in certain encounters and very much in others. Are you sure that is what is really being argued? This particular definition of contextual should be obvious to anyone who has ever been in a relationship and had sex otherwise. (Yes, I know some denizens of this sub might not fit into this demographic, but please don't generalize all TRPers as virginal neckbeards.) In the OP, I thought you meant that sex can be influenced -- often strong…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/16 03:47 AM
1

Given the choice, heterosexual men would overwhelmingly prefer to have sex with celebrities like Taylor Swift, Emma Watson or Beyoncé, rather than with unaccomplished, random women of similar objective attractiveness. I'm sure you could find one man who expressed this preference, but I am willing to bet you can't find 2 in a span of six months, no matter how hard you try. The notion is ridiculous. No man (devoid of a fetish) thinks this way. Ever. Indeed, the opposite (non-famous hotties) is far…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/16 03:25 PM
3

TIL all PPD women are smarter than their SO's. This is honestly a selection effect I did not expect.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/16 04:56 AM
1

Do you really not understand the difference? Of course men are just as superficial. Hell, I'll go ahead and say more so. The point is that it's not about letting good-looking guys get away with anything. It's about labeling not-so-good-looking guys with the title "creep," suggesting deviance and disgust (for, often, benign behavior). Men might laugh in the face of an ugly woman trying to approach them, but they won't act like she was obviously gonna make a coat out of their skin, given a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/16 01:42 PM
6

Christ. I find the whole set of comments on this post incredibly depressing. The arguments (discussions) all seem to boil down to (a) women set the rules of the game, (b) this strategy makes rational sense to women because of what they experience re: what men reward, and (c) lots of men are fucking stupid enough to reward this behavior. Playing goddamn mind games like this cannot be a healthy way to start a relationship. I would also guess that precisley this -- being made to wait by some girl t…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/16 01:32 PM
1

That all makes sense, as far as it goes. Some dude might even set the lure just to meet girls, right? This would be blatant social engineering, and certainly extracurricular to the game. It is something I could get behind condemning (though, not too strongly). But, that's not at all what she's deriding. She's complaining that nerds are out doing this (or, at least, taking advantage of the Pokemon Go! situation), making the "odds" bad by making the "goods" bad. She does not complain directly abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/16 01:21 AM
1

I totally agree with this interpretation. She may as well have been twisting a movie villian mustache at the end, watching her retarded foot licker putter around his mother's house working for her. Who the hell didn't see that?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/16 12:39 AM
1

You're telling me if you cropped out his body in those pictures, and just looked at a side-by-side comparison of his old and new face, you wouldn't see much of a difference? Some of the difference would come from lifting (jawline, etc.). Also, difference doesn't necessarily mean far more attractive (to my original point: were they really grotesque before, facially? I think that's unlikely). But, what about the opposite problem, if you will: what if you cropped out their heads? Isn't it clear whi…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/16 02:57 PM
1

I understand. I guess I am really taking issue with your definition of a makeover. That was my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/16 02:49 PM
1

He also got a better haircut, got his teeth fixed, started dressing better and grew flattering facial hair. And, none of those things actually made a real difference. Lifting did.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/16 03:43 AM
1

Yeah, I can see that. But, his improvement had little to do with things I would classify as a "makeover." Not to be too TRP'y about it, but he lifted. That's what improved him.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/16 01:32 AM
6

I'm not going to disagree with any of this. What I do disagree with is "women are children", "women lie", ... I think you might have to accept "women lie," if you want to agree with the bulk of the first point. Women lie about what is attractive. For lots of reasons. For protection? Sure. To avoid confrontation? OK. But, they lie a lot about what is attractive. In particular, they lie about why and how much a given man is unattractive. But, their emotions do not lie, ultimately.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/16 09:56 PM
1

It seems implicit in the OP and in some of the responses here that some sort of cliche, rom-com, the-girl-gets-hot-immediately-upon-taking-off-her-glasses is expected for men? The OP says, in fact: They look amazing now. And they were ugly AF before. Like legit trolls. I honestly think some of them went out of their way to look gross. Is that just an off-hand comment, or does it have a kernel of truth? I guess I really do think men see past... trappings? I do not mean -- at all -- that men aren'…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/16 09:51 PM
10

This was a startlingly effective troll.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/16 02:41 AM
2

I am saying they are incorrectly understanding why this behavior is effective. Given your working of definition of "asshole" (expressed above), I think you are giving people (men or women) a lot of ability to disentangle the motivations of others from their actions. If I neg a woman, she will pattern match from previous experience and get a little tingly, 'cause that what the sociopath from her past did. I could just be "up front--but nice--about my sexual intentions" in my interactions with her…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/16 10:50 PM
3

OK, your definition here seems to be a lot about negging or being a try-hard? I doubt the more sociopathic examples you cite in your OP are parsing and/or trying to structure their own behavior this way. Do you think they do? They're just being themselves, aren't they?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/16 10:31 PM
5

Are you using "asshole" to mean sociopaths? Only? Only men whose fearlessness puts them at a relative disadvantage in most of life? I really am having a hard time what population you are using "asshole" to describe, precisely.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/16 10:19 PM
1

Yeah, and PPD in particular is -- I have learned -- an even more specific demographic.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/16 08:26 PM
1

Though the OP has said they'll do a follow-up with stats: I count about 31 responses right now, with 5 saying they dated/had sex with a college athlete (or pro, which does connote the former). That's ~16%. Latest stats I find on the interwebs say that, between NCAA and NAIA, there are <500,000 college athletes (men and women) in the US. Another search suggests that, in 2015, ~20 million college students enrolled in the US. That's a athlete rate (of both sexes!) of ~2.5%. Several responses noted …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/16 04:53 PM
2

Will I be the only "Solid Liberal" who is 100% confident that hypergamy is the core of all female human sexual strategy and that alpha traits always win?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/16 02:54 AM
1

I agree. Some of the issues were poorly represented as binary choices.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/16 02:51 AM
1

Before "taking the red pill" were you at all successful with women? No. I know I am unattractive. How often would women approach you in a club, bar or social event? Never How often would you have one night stands or have any sex at all? Serial monogamist through college and after. Always with women who I "wore down" over time. If you were a constant failure in this regard, was frustration with this the primary driver for you to adopt red pill ideals? Absolutely. Did your views on society change …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/16 09:05 PM
3

How exactly did the economists determine that: Women are much more willing to split up because – unlike men – they typically do not fear losing custody of the children. ? Was it simply their (very typical economist) reasoning that: Children are the most important asset in a marriage, ? This is not so much science as it is another, somewhat more freeing way of establishing "truth," i.e. making shit up.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/16 03:57 AM
1

I just meant I couldn't care less what they do research wise. Gotcha. I misunderstood. Makes sense. because tenure can take longer than 5 years to obtain This is dangerously incorrect. I invite you to ask any tenured (or tenure track) faculty member you know if this is accurate. For better or worse, you will be told that the tenure clock starts when you're hired and the alarm goes off at 5 years (especially at any university with 500+-sized classes). Unfortunately for women, most big universitie…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/16 08:07 PM
2

I know this gets posted a lot, but #1 (at the end, paradoxically) in this article: http://www.cracked.com/article_19785_5-ways-modern-men-are-trained-to-hate-women_p2.html?wa_ibsrc=fanpage is 100% accurate and unassailably true.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/16 05:25 PM
1

a young, attractive, well dressed woman that probably just got her PhD <5 years ago instructing a 500 person class. Not even being successful research wise. The PhD <5 years ago is important in this fantasy, because someone not "successful research wise" would not be lecturing to a 500 person class at PhD+6: They would have been declined tenure. Of course, they could be adjunct slave labor, but who would consider that successful?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/16 05:15 PM
1

I guess I am struck by the degree to which I don't care or don't think very much about a lot of these list items (i.e. I don't think a lot of them are things that AWALT is often invoked to explain). I am, however, happy to provide answers for a handful. Most divorces are initiated by women. I mean, lots of people think lots of different things about why this might be true, but it's a measurable fact, no? Like, IIRC, 70%? Most women are not attracted to their husbands. Certainly 51%. Maybe 67%. I…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/16 02:57 AM
3

I agree. I firmly believe racist's fatigue at using dog whistles is the primary (only?) reason Trump is the presumptive GOP nominee. Curiously, it seems to me that there is a parallel with Obama: Trump's supporters seem to assume that he is as (more?) racist as they are because he won't use code words (as Lee Atwater famously suggested years ago). In the same way, Obama's most fervent 2008 supporters didn't really listen to a lot of his policy proposals, they just thought, "Hope and change! Yeah…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/16 09:30 PM
1

And this article about common male fantasies, You might be best served to read the article and try to understand what is reported in the table. It is a table of the open-ended responses provided by the men in the study, but it is not a catalog of every one of those responses. Rather, it is a binned set of those responses, grouped under "titles" that describe the response. The complete catalog would require (assuming all the men provided at least one response (the journal article is behind a pay …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/16 09:11 PM
1

I'm sorry, but I simply do not agree with your statement here. Specifically, men do not say (as a matter of course) that they are into nurses or tomboys. Rather, they say they like hot nurses and tomboys. You can trot out lots of anecdotal evidence to the contrary, I'm sure, but that's the reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/16 04:57 PM
1

I think that ugly men are still men. Just like I consider very old men, severely disabled, ED sufferers, etc to be men. But no, they are not my ideal mates. It is very telling (i.e. I think it proves my point) that you immediately listed these asymptotic examples. You didn't say, e.g., "I consider the plain-looking gawky dude that is often at <name public place you frequent> to be a man." Instead, you went extreme. Nothing wrong with that, but it does say something. When a man doesn't explicitly…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/16 02:02 AM
4

So, I get why you might say that, but... I do not think for a second that women are being dishonest when they say they like kindness. I don't even think they are deluding themselves (who doesn't like kindness?). It has been mentioned elsewhere that liking =/= attraction. I don't expect that /u/cookiebootz or /u/shoup88 would necessarily accept that as given, however obviously true I think it is, so it probably doesn't matter much. So, what do I mean? The point is that women don't specify physica…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/05/16 01:34 AM
6

Because it's not just a qualifier. It's central to the cognitive dissonance that women promote. "I like green aliens best." "You have literally never picked a green alien. Ever." "Oh. I meant that if I could find a green alien that made the 'poof' sound, I would pick it." <gobsmacked>
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/16 05:57 PM
7

Does every statement about other attractive traits need to include this qualifier? This doesn't get said enough, so I will be explicit: Yes. It does. If it didn't need to be included every time, TRP would likely not exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/16 03:28 PM
2

just because he's a farmer and you're Eva Gabor. Green Acres reference FTW! (also, I feel we have both now dated ourselves...)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/16 09:07 PM
2

I understand your point, but I might suggest that among less-well-off folks that "considerable resources" is relative. I.e., if you are a poor woman, a man with a job has resources. Conversely, I know lots of working class couples (no HS diploma, no year-round job, never a full-time job) where the male is distinctly and unambiguously more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/16 02:01 AM
0

Also, this comment: https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/4goes6/bp_can_you_please_provide_some_images_of_what_you/d2jq2p8 is pertinent, I think.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/16 01:10 AM
6

When was the last time you saw a very attractive woman with a physically unattractive man where you weren't more than 80% sure the guy had considerable resources? I really can't remember a the last time I did. On the other hand, I see pretty homely women paired with men who are objectively better looking than me almost every day. That's not saying a ton, but these are women I would not pursue. Ever.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/16 01:04 AM
0

Your explanation, while understandable, is a little too involved and "just-so" to be completely true. You really want to claim that pure physical attractiveness doesn't trigger an immediate response? You don't have to believe in every bit of evo psych to think that humans find certain things immediately and viscerally attractive. "Nopes" come much faster if the lizard brain gets tripped than if they have to wait for your conscious mind to build a catalog. So, we could go down an infinite stream …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/16 12:53 AM
0

No, I think you are misunderstanding me. I am agreeing with your clarification at the 80% or so level. I get it that you are saying that women are attempting to evaluate a combination of raw physical attractiveness, attitude, priorities, etc. when they look at a man. Indeed, that is precisely the calculus to which I am referring. But, that is not - I believe - the intent of the OP. Let me try to explain: You seem to suggest that men look at women and think either: a) "MAKE FUCK!" or, b) "meh". (…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/16 10:03 PM
0

They must be in the gym all the time! Which is good for them if that's what makes them happy, but bad for me if I am their girlfriend. This response is (one big reason, anyway) why this kind of post (which happens about once every few months) is never very useful. This calculus is already "baked in" to the responses from the distaff side of PPD on this subject.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/16 04:47 PM
1

N=6, 40's
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/16 04:37 PM
1

I don't think a guy pondering this for a while is all that compelling of a reason to believe it. Oh, agreed. It is not compelling at all. What would be compelling would be being able to predict behavior in women based on the model I suggested. But, as I suggested, that would be hard, because the thinking and forecasting are all tied up in the decision making, making this internal dialogue (unsurprisingly) difficult to discern. So, maybe it's all just words... But maybe it is consistent with lots…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/16 02:30 PM
4

It's the land of 6's who think they're 9's. This. Tinder is like BizzarroWorld in DC>
/r/TheRedPill21/03/16 02:59 AM
1

roger on both.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/16 05:40 PM
16

It depends somewhat on the local environment, but, generally, God yes! They are astoundingly picky most of the time. I would love to hear if anyone on this sub has ever had a second date with a single woman over 30 without kids in Washington, DC. I would be amazed to learn that such a creature exists.
/r/TheRedPill20/03/16 05:31 PM
1

^ This guy gets it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/16 12:23 AM
2

I think the more holistic view women take about sex and relationship (an idea that I do not think is particularly controversial here) is more likely to explain why preselection in the eyes of a women viz. men is not "moar is better." Specifically, I do think women can and do find men who have had many tens of partners arousing and attractive (from that trait alone). But, their inner dialogues immediately start playing a long game, and they quickly assume the guy is a "player," and a poor bet for…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/16 12:21 AM
1

Almost every answer here (from bloopers anyway) seems to suggest that either the OP didn't have a well-posed question or says that league can only be determined individually and empirically (ie risk rejection a lot and keep track). Both or either of these may be true, but I swear the tone sounds a lot like, "You don't get to ask that," or, "Why don't you just get it?"
/r/PurplePillDebate17/03/16 03:10 PM
2

I don't know if magnanimity is the apotheosis of alphaness or not. But, I think that magnanimity has some advantages as an aspirational ideal for those of us who know we don't have true sociopathic tendencies (which would make being an alpha easier). Mostly because magnanimity can directly lead to a deep-seated and profound level of IDGAF. I see a lot of (I presume young) TRPers decrying any sort of social chivalry. Come on! Social (i.e. showy but not ostentatious) chivalry - doors, etc. - exhib…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/03/16 12:50 AM
16

There are lots of good women out there: Women who are capable of love and devotion. But, AWALT. There is always a threshold of relative attraction beyond which hypergamy will demand change. That threshold can be moved around by (a) making your attractiveness greater with respect to other men and (b) the woman having a more or less ethical view of relationships. But, it cannot go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/16 10:41 PM
2

Done. Anxious to hear results. NB - "waive," not "wave".
/r/PurplePillDebate13/03/16 03:32 PM
1

Since the only thing that drove me to TRP was lies told to me by and about women and their desire, a lack of awareness of either of the situations posed in the OP (fake orgasms or cheating) are like my worst nightmare. Either would be soul-torturing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/03/16 04:49 PM
10

Yep. Women claim (perhaps rightfully) that their opportunity cost for casual sex is too high because they are likely not to have an orgasm. But, there are also a lot of women out there who are fleshlights surrounded by a bag of meat when you get down to business. Sometimes, washing the sheets ain't worth the trouble.
/r/TheRedPill08/03/16 11:07 PM
1

You can call my observation anecdata all you like, but I can't see how anybody could reasonably think it pathological. If you married a woman significantly less attractive than your previous GF's, well... OK. You seem to think all 18 yo's are intrinsically hotter than 28 yo's? This is a very TRP view (which I don't share). But, in any event, it is not what I was arguing - normalize over age any way you want. If the 28 yo was hotter at 18, fine. But, no man I know would marry a woman who is signi…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 10:48 PM
4

In another thread recently, I posited the other side of this coin in some ways. Specifically: You encounter a man who presents as wonderfully confident when he speaks to you. He is playful, at ease, fun, and witty. This and his physical gifts make him wildly attractive. He's a "natural." I suspect, much of the time, the internal monologue going on inside this guy's head is, "Stupid bitch. I wonder what I can get the idiot to do next." So, I think the question is when is "confident banter" not th…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 10:42 PM
1

Same for men. The 18 year old girlfriend they had when they were the same age is "less hot" than the 28 year old woman that they marry. I do not know - nor have I ever known - a single man for which this is true. Every married man I know (with only 1-2 very marginal exceptions) is married to the best looking woman they have ever had sex with.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 10:27 PM
1

sure. Why not? Because men who are 9's don't commit.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 10:26 PM
1

Can a woman who is a 6 get a commitment from a man who is a 9? That's what is meant by arbitrarily attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 02:46 PM
2

I see women married to men who are markedly less attractive than men those same women dated/fucked earlier in their lives. Is there a floor for these men when it comes to attractiveness? Of course. But they are all significantly less attractive than previous paramours.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 02:45 PM
3

OK. With that response, I am convinced you're just trolling.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 04:53 AM
3

If you're attractive, then you can get an attractive man to commit to you. This statement is roughly equivalent to saying, "If you're human, you can get a human to commit to you." Devoid of information as it is, it is true. But, how about this statement: "If you're an attractive woman, then you can get an arbitrarily attractive man to commit to you."? I hope (really, I do) that you cannot agree with this statement, right? I also really hope that the next step in this ladder of understanding is o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/03/16 01:43 AM
1

Holy sheet! I am almost exactly one order of magnitude less interesting that you!
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/16 10:28 PM
4

83!? I'm not nearly that interesting. I think being a socialist should subtract points.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/16 07:22 PM
9

Aw man: it's everywhere! It's in the aether! Why don't you just "get it?"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/16 03:59 PM
2

When she said that she was turned off by you asking, she was helping you out. She hopes you can read her body language/tone/etc, and the situation, well enough to know some turning on is being asked for. I think one of us is missing a key piece of understanding about this story. Of course, I do think my assumption is the correct one right now. Specifically, you seem to think that the situation with the young women was not completely and totally ended by her comment regarding being turned off by …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/16 04:36 PM
1

I'm sorry, but I really do not believe you. Admittedly, one of the reasons (but not the primary reason) I do not believe you is the needless, backhanded ad hominen attack implied in your reply.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/16 05:36 AM
5

I've never actually met a woman like that. How many do you know, personally? I find this hard to believe. I wouldn't try to argue that most women are like that (even though I do believe they are, but arguing thus would only lead to a spiral of prove-it's), but you really have never met a woman who has the referred-to level of pickiness, despite their rather marked plainness? I can tell you that my sister is one of these women. She is moderately attractive, but only gets involved (in any way) wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/16 11:05 PM
1

This is the answer to the OP's original question (if there was one). Concisely and clearly stated.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/02/16 03:40 PM
1

I apologize: your OP is deleted, so I misremembered. You are in an LTR, though, correct? This is someone you trust, but not as much as Markus? (Please don't say, "differently" - that is utter horseshit.)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 07:07 PM
1

Huzzah!
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 07:05 PM
1

None of this mini-rant has anything to do with your (now deleted) OP. So, you are engaged to a man who you say is the equal of your boy Markus in technique and far superior in other ways. Yet, you cannot "fully let go" with him? This bodes ill for your marriage, but good luck nevertheless.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 07:04 PM
3

Please show where I have insulted someone in here. Very well... But it is typical, considering it comes from a RedPiller. Well. If this isn't TRP in a nutshell again. You guys prefer racism than respect. Also, it shows the great arguing skills of many RPers. These are nothing more than insults. None of these contribute to nor advance your argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 03:17 PM
1

I relaxed and let him do it, ... and definitely not a CF. In my relationship I'm much more deferent than anything else, ... are at direct odds with one another and cannot both be true. I don't mean control freak as an insult, per se, just a description. However, claiming you're not a control freak - in the face of evidence to the contrary - is not causative, but is indicative, of being a control freak.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 02:58 PM
1

I relaxed and let him do it, and was quite forceful with him while he was doing it (shoving his face into me etc). He did it a lot and I came 90% of the time. Why weren't the alphas before and after him able to do that? It wasn't about particular skill or talent, they all did the same thing? Isn't the obvious conclusion that you're a control freak? Yet, with men you consider your superior, you are unable to relinquish control. You are only able to "relax" when you can can - for lack of a better …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/16 05:25 AM
3

OK. I'll buy that - I suggested and you affirmed a sensitivity to such traits. You obviously have encountered these men "in the wild," and I assume (though you can tell me differently) that you've known women who were attracted to them. Were all these women "damaged"? Stupid?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 01:19 AM
5

That women are predominantly attracted to a cluster of traits that are most often - indeed, almost exclusively - exhibited by sociopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 01:15 AM
5

Yeah. I can understand how that seems wrong to you. Hell, it seems wrong to me. But, that's why - to some extent - TRP is called "The Red Pill." It's a bitter truth to swallow, one that by many measures just shouldn't be so. It offends so many modern sensibilities. But, it is objective reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 01:09 AM
4

All these "narcissistic/sociopathic" strategies to pick up women only work with women who have psychological issues and a sick desire to be validated. They don't work with women with a healthy self esteem. Though being a sociopath might preclude a healthy, long-term relationship, there is a lot of research that says that sociopathic behavior actually attracts accomplished, intelligent, and secure women more effectively than it does insecure, etc. women. Indeed, this would be consistent with, for…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 01:06 AM
4

Well, there is a prevalent theory of alpha-ness that says that being alpha is, essentially, being a narcissistic sociopath. Why is that? Because it works! Indeed, there are lots of analyses that say being a narcissistic sociopath brings success in many different endeavors, from business to academia and, yes, getting women. I posit that all "natural" alphas are sociopaths. The rest of us have to be sheep in wolves' clothing...
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 12:58 AM
4

Reading the comments and the OP's responses, I don't think the OP means "socially awkward," per se. Maybe a version of asocial, but... The notion that you've met, many alpha males, who have sex with many women and who I particularly find creepy and troublesome suggests that you are just hyper-attuned to sociopathy. Do these alpha males scare you? Disgust you? What is that makes them creepy and troublesome? By your own admission, many women do not find them creepy and troublesome.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/16 12:43 AM
2

I know I could just indicate it with an upvote, but this is an excellent comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 10:29 PM
3

but they need to face it, they did it to themselves. But, I don't understand: My analogy left some things unsaid (I thought they were evident, but apparently not). I'm assuming you need a job to survive. To get a job, you have to be something you're not. If you do not pretend to some degree, you will starve to death. So, what exactly have you done to yourself? Survived?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 03:57 AM
4

I don't have much argument with the content of this comment. You seem to suggest, however, that a terper is irrational in this upset. How so? If you were forced to present as a man - dress, speech, identity, etc. - in order to get and keep a job, might you be salty about that too?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/02/16 03:52 AM
2

The 2 minutes I spent reading this comment have brightened my whole day. Gracias.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 06:20 PM
1

nobody develops muscle without working out This. This is painfully self-evident. You can claim otherwise all you want, but it's like crying out about Bigfoot or UFO's: any attempt to verify otherwise will lead to failure.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 04:08 AM
3

Crossfit: Just like Fight Club, but with Rules 1 & 2 the complete opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/16 04:02 AM
0

I'm not sure I equate risk-taking behavior with the kind of poor impulse control that was being discussed in the earlier post. The risk-taking behavior requires agency, it seems to me. The sort of lack of impulse control exhibited by a certain kind of promiscuous woman is actually typified by a lack of agency. To be specific: Most (>70%) of the women I have had sex with had sex with me after a drink or two and I was there. They just kinda said, "Yeah, I'd like to fuck right now." They did precis…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/02/16 09:59 PM
3

Every single one of the things mentioned in the comments on this post makes perfect sense to me, and I can't believe anybody even needs to enumerate/specify that they dislike those things (e.g. smelly, thieving, etc.) Except this one. Big-ass trucks are a lot of fun.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 03:44 AM
1

As has been said, women think men like skinny women. Skinny women do not trip the "must fuck!" part of the male hindbrain. Also, those older women in the Viagra commercials - that is a female ideation of what a man who would take Viagra wants.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 03:28 AM
1

True story: Alexis Texas is hot as fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/16 03:26 AM
3

No. Alpha traits are phenotypic manifestations of genetic traits that will help offspring thrive in a "state of nature." (i.e. a life that is "red in tooth and fang," "the wild") The ability to reason efficiently and effectively has long been a beneficial trait for humans. Rationalization is not alpha, because that is just a way to defeat cognitive dissonance.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 10:30 PM
1

I think he might mean that they are idiots who also happen to be rather emotional. This would match my experience as well: those who claim to have high emotional intelligence are very stupid, but quite emotional.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/16 02:21 PM
2

That sort-of-bordering-on-weird look that is somewhere between extreme ectomorph and full-blown Marfan's. Get it?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 06:27 PM
1

I'm heterosexual.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 06:26 PM
1

The point is that they are a caricature. car·i·ca·ture: a picture, description, or imitation of a person or thing in which certain striking characteristics are exaggerated in order to create a comic or grotesque effect. They are a caricature? Yeah, OK, fine. They can only be a caricature if they represent an entire class, i.e. that they are an exaggerated version of a stereotype. This can only be if the type they are a caricature of is so uniform as to be caricatured.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 04:36 PM
1

Again, this was about disfigurement, not illness. Though the illness here is causative of the disfigurement, that was not the question. Needing to care for a spouse and/or watch them die is a different discussion. As for the study: It's junk science. Despite your assumption, I read the entire post, and the linked paper. Importantly: It is not known whether the illness prompted the breakup or whether the couples in the study who divorced were already experiencing marital problems before the diagn…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 04:24 PM
1

You indicated you wouldn't leave her because you're a man, and she would leave you because she's a woman. Yes. This is what I indicated and this is what I mean.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 04:09 PM
1

Successful businesses are pretty good at discerning preferences. They have to be, and they tend to have data on same. So, have you ever been to a Hooters? At shift change? The tall girl, the skinny girl, the fat girl, the short girl, the goth girl, and the Uma Thurman girl get relieved by the really short girl, the manic pixie girl, the weird girl, the freckled girl, the disproportionately-large-ass girl, and the blonde. This is a company that trades in the basest, plainest modern beauty standar…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 04:06 PM
1

Edit: Oh look. Not one person in a long term relationship has posted! I have been married for approximately 2 decades. Is that not long-term enough?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 03:17 PM
0

So... 1 - Reading comprehension, much? Did you read the link you posted, or just the title? It was not a "study" - it was a set of anecdotes. They say so in the post. Well, TRP gets told all the time that anecdotes aren't important... Oh. No. Wait... 2 - The OP was about disfigurement and sexual availability, not illness. If you do not consider these different from illness, I am at a loss. 3 - I was asked a question in the OP. I answered (in a way) - If my wife had a double mastectomy and was se…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 03:16 PM
3

It's all the right-wing-nuttery that a lot of TRPers think derives from "traditional gender roles." One, I don't give a shit about traditional gender roles - I do not think they kept AWALT tendencies in check or completely suppressed them. Even if they did, so what? They were still there. And, women had a shittier existence with those roles in place. I do not want women to have a shittier existence. I just want me to have a less-shitty existence. Second, one doesn't follow from the other in any …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 03:31 AM
1

the boys lacrosse team had better looking athletes than the other sports This is obviously true. being on the girls team helped me gain access to them. I get that. It might have even sped things along. But, you would have been "found" by the same guys even if you'd kept on playing yugioh. Or even Magic! Well, maybe not Magic...
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 03:15 AM
1

i meant from the woman's perspective Got it. I still think the woman retains the ability to be the "chooser" regardless of her social circle, though. i use to play yugioh cards in 7th grade until puberty hit and i realized the guys i was playing with were all pimply faced, out of shape losers. so i dropped the habit and joined the lacrosse team. Did that seem to help? I would have never looked to a girl's sports team to find attractive girls when I was in school, but YMMV. I did actively cultiva…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 03:07 AM
1

I get it, but... To torture this metaphor a little (and let's turn the calendar back a few years to the height of the recent oil boom; this wouldn't work as well today) - Though you might find the most oil executive jobs in Houston or Calgary, they are paying bank in North Dakota and Wyoming! And, since you can always get on a plane, WTF not go to these places where the competition is less and the money is just as good?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 02:55 AM
1

1) can he have the cheerleader? Maybe, maybe not. 2) variety 3) not the most laudable reason, but: shy girls might be very grateful to get attention. ... I could prolly go on...
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 02:30 AM
-1

Yes. Absolutely. Would dump her immediately. After all, I need to have my needs met, and, though I might love her, I can't ignore the rest of the world is out there and... Oh. No. Wait...sorry. I got confused. I just realized I'm a man, not a woman. That stuff I said - yeah, never mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 02:29 AM
1

This is not a bad guess for a second-(or higher)order effect. But, I would claim that men are really good at finding attractive women, no matter where they might try to hide - we are always looking at every woman. The Hollywood trope of the "wallflower nerd girl who is really beautiful beneath all the plain and glasses" is horseshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 02:24 AM
1

Indeed. TIL that, in fact, NAWALT. Some women are real-live sociopaths.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 01:55 AM
1

This is lovely.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/16 01:52 AM
3

You're obviously presenting very extreme beta traits. I agree with this, to an extent. The things she listed perfectly describes what TRP would call a beta male. I disagree strongly with this. Rather, the things she listed are what a woman who has failed to get commitment from some alpha male would describe as beta traits because they are the things she wanted from said alpha. They are only beta inasmuch as they are what she found lacking in the alpha.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 03:45 AM
3

So, not a criminal or schizophrenic or anti-social. OK. That seems reasonable. So, how about actual beta traits? Are you sexually attracted to men who: * defer to your preference in every situation, * beg for your attention, * sublimate their own well-being for yours, * exhibit no aggression ever, even when confronted with danger, * have markedly un-masculine physical traits, ?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 01:28 AM
2

The simpler solution is that women are sexually attracted to both good genetic quality and good provider qualities, because both of these improve her offspring's chance of survival. Isn't this almost obvious? Indeed. This exemplar is typically referred to as "Alpha Bucks" in TRP parlance. It is the male version of a Unicorn. It is an obvious preference. But, I'm interested in what you mean precisely by: I am actually sexually attracted to beta men. Honest to God I am. This is the only type of ma…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/16 12:32 AM
2

If the man in question is "happy" with the resulting sex life? Sure it can work. If the man in NOT satisfied with the resulting sex life? It can be living hell. bingo
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 11:52 PM
1

so why did you swipe right? I'm 100% sure he answered that in the OP.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 11:39 PM
1

I doubt I am younger than you, though I could be (I am older than 40). The distributions I know of are fairly "flat" in the sense you mean, but always have at least one outlier. It is the universiality of that one fact that amazes me.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 11:29 PM
2

Granted, the ugly ones may not be shagging hot guys, but they're still shagging... There is undoubtedly a large variation in how much sex single women are having. But, I have always found that if they are shagging, then a hot guy has been shagged. Even ugly girls fuck hot guys. Maybe only one or a handful of them, but the distribution always includes them.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 10:32 PM
1

I guess the best bet is to snag a woman that has never been with a guy as hot as you, although I have no clue how any man could really know that. The amazing thing is how absolutely rare this is. If you think you are well-matched attractiveness-wise to your current partner, you probably have an idea of (a) how many previous partners she might have had and (b) how attractive they were. You assume that her attractiveness level, matched to your own, means that you have somehow the same sort of expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 10:29 PM
9

There is a large body of research that says, pretty unambiguously, that people do lie ( a lot) on anonymous surveys. Formulate as neutral a Google search as you wish to prove to yourself this body of work exists. You will have to decide for yourself if it is accurate or not, but many people have considered it an important and not-crazy question for what it's now a long time. People lie on anonymous surveys. A lot. All the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 05:50 PM
4

It's not like... my girlfriends were constantly gettin it on with the upper quarter of men... It's that 20% of men are getting 80% of the casual sex. I'm getting the feeling from your reply that you have some girlfriends who like them some casual sex. You imply that some good chunk of the guys they hook up with are about as attractive as they are. Specifically: Some are a little higher, some are a little lower, but all in all it all averages out. So, are "some" a "little higher?" Or, are 1-2 sig…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/16 06:07 AM
7

He may not be as alpha as the bad boys she used to have sex with, but she knew that those bad boys aren't relationship material. ... For casual sex she only cares about his looks and sex skills because nothing else matters, but for relationships personality and compatibility are more important. But even though she doesn't go for bad boys anymore she can still go for a guy that turns her on. This makes exactly zero sense. It is a restatement of Sandberg's advice to young women(so recently reviewe…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/16 02:13 PM
3

Not every man thinks the way you do. Undoubtedly true. Nevertheless, I would take my chances asking 100 random men if they agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/16 12:31 AM
3

Setting aside the preposterous strawman implied in the OP, along with the perfectly reasonable notion inherent in same that 20-year-olds might not have enough life experience yet to make sweeping generalizations regarding life, the Universe, and everything, how does fact that most grown men are not strictly virgins have anything to do with most of TRP? There is a lie told to all men about the sexual marketplace. It is not that they will forever be virgins. It is that that girl they're about to f…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/16 12:26 AM
1

Thank you for confirming my suspicion. You and every other guy I meet. Maybe it's complimentary to borderline ugly girls, but to any average girl, all guys would be interested, pretty much. So, desire by "all guys" is of no intrinsic value to any woman other than "borderline ugly girls." It is not enough to be desired - that is cheap. This is the ultimate disconnect referenced in the OP. Sexual attraction is of absolutely no intrinsic value to a woman. It is, ultimately, the only thing that has …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/16 12:12 AM
2

Standards of what? I can lower whatever I want, and, yet, without Viagra, my dick is not gonna get hard for a woman I don't desire.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/16 12:00 AM
3

This is ridiculous adolescent behavior. It is silly social anxiety played out. To cite it as evidence of a "pretty well known fact" is equally silly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 11:45 PM
1

Animals actually are less than you. Women are not. Sure. Humans are not animals. Nevertheless, my point remains: Me making this determination - and, furthermore, acting on it - does not necessarily lead to harm to the animals. It can be contemporaneous, but it is not causal.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 11:43 PM
3

Or that he's a guy with a boner. This comment, it seems to me, is at the heart of some of this whole discussion. Apparently, some women take male attention as validation. These women are often viewed as damaged in some way, or, at least, somewhat pitiable. This distaste has a strange corollary, however, and it is one I had not really considered until the last couple of posts on PPD. The upshot seems to be an attitude that having sex with a woman does not connote a conscious, specific statement o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 11:32 PM
1

I treat animals like they are less than me. This does them no harm whatsoever. I am not equating women to animals, but the attitude/motivation - however wrong you might think it is - causes no harm.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 11:12 PM
12

I'm slightly amazed that the... uh... physiological liberties in the OP took this long to draw a response. "Shitting blood" is the other bit of poetic license...
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 05:58 PM
5

So, as others have already observed, yes, sex is of vital, almost all-consuming importance to almost all men. It just is. But, this argument that you need xxx to live but don't need sex to live is a little recursive. You need some food and water and shelter to merely survive, but to do incrementally better than just subsistence in these is not required. Unless you want to have sex. Then you need more. Pick any argument in this vein, and, unless you have a true calling in your life (i.e. somethin…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 04:18 AM
3

I would hope this is not a terribly controversial position. Most people agree that they do not wish to cause severe harm to others. I would counter that the OP is not suggesting severe harm to another: He goes full anger mode, starts treating women like they are less than him, starts acting cocky and arrogant, and is basically just a selfish asshole where women are concerned. The direct implication here is that women are attracted to this behavior. Although the word "asshole" connotes a certain …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/16 01:13 AM
1

Well Sex at Dawn is a synthesis based on discrete observations by real scientists... So, I haven't read it yet, so all I can offer is a blatant ad hominen attack (i.e. I can't argue the book, but the next statement is still absolutely true): If the first thing you mention in your bio is your TED talk, you are not a real scientist. And, you likely never will be.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/16 01:24 AM
1

I think your analysis is pretty unassailable, cuddle.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/16 04:21 PM
21

I want to be equal to the strong, confident, sexy guy I'm with, because it makes me feel special. This sentence is one of the most Red Pill things I have ever read on this sub.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/16 05:16 AM
1

At least she told me to my face.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/02/16 12:49 AM
0

++ for the chivalry. Why the fuck not? Not for nothing: the chick just sounds like a drunk to me.
/r/TheRedPill03/02/16 11:43 PM
4

Married roughly 2 decades. Love her, respect her, she is far from less intellectually capable than me. I cannot imagine an immediate reason we would divorce. She is the picture of devoted to me, both publicly and privately. AWALT, however: She settled for me (has told me so). She settled for me because I would take her when she thought she was damaged (she wasn't). She has curled her lip at me before and said, "Why can't you just be a man?" I know if she had any reasonable opportunity to obtain …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 10:29 PM
3

But, what if those outward expressions weren't made? I strongly suspect most men that are "good with women," especially those who are not super physically attractive, are pretty much misogynists, but they never make it this plain to women they are with.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 05:33 PM
3

men who are "good with women" see behaviors lovelorn betas NEVER see. Because the betas are blind to them or because those behaviors never manifest with them? Or, both (which is my bet)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 05:30 PM
3

We have fun together but marriage does take work. Mostly the work of not blaming your spouse for everything little thing that goes wrong. This is smart. Thank you for explaining what "marriage is work," really means (or should really mean).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 05:22 AM
0

(1) What makes you think that was actually true? (2) Was this in high school (see my earlier caveat)?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 04:51 AM
-1

the cheerleader will always have more suitors than the wallflower. This is simply not true. One - "always" is a lot. Two - men (not high school boys) don't give a shit about a woman's confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 04:40 AM
1

Despite the comments here claiming the opposite, confidence is an utterly subjective and elusive notion. It is so squishy a concept as to border on complete woo-woo: What will be construed as confidence to one women, will be repulsive to another. You just defined it. Well done. This borders on nonsensical. It's one of those annoying fucking sayings your aunt posts on Facebook. More to the point, I think, is what is someone who is claimed to be sexy via their confidence level confident of? Are th…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/02/16 03:31 AM
2

All these women are above average.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/02/16 05:24 PM
3

That's why those type of guys pretend that women hate them. The truth is women don't even know they're there. Nailed it.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 10:43 PM
7

Hard to believe someone hasn't said this yet: Fuck no. Have you ever been around a 14-year-old girl? A more vile creature has never existed.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 05:46 PM
1

Yes. Clearer, but I would say convoluted. So, you're saying his having engaged in "duty head" (say that 3 times fast...) with every previous partner is more believable and likely than the notion that he's just not that into you?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 05:33 PM
2

I think this response is not unreasonable. I would say this in a similar vein: it seems to me that 1 bad time doing (for argument's same, I'll pick this) anal is not a good reason not to try one more time with someone you claim to be really attracted to. Alternately, if you've done it, say, 5 times before, then your argument about not liking it seems far more suspect (ie it's a lie and you are not attracted). There is some number in there - I do not know what it is exactly, but say 3 times - whe…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:22 PM
2

I can't quite parse your answer to my question, but you are missing a "like" between to and eat, right? If not, I'm really confused.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/16 04:15 PM
2

You misunderstood my tone (which, admittedly, is hard to convey via text). I was not incredulous in the least, and I was actually agreeing I was making shit up. By "making shit up" I mean that I was not being scientific in the least. But, I am forming (and applying) a heuristic theory of modern sexual relations between the sexes. Of course I can't read women's minds, but I don't have to for my theory to be falsifiable. Although I didn't develop the theory scientifically, I can test it scientific…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 11:11 PM
1

That's a reasonable question. But, you've elided away the essential point. Assume just the kind of sexual relationship you outline. Then add the fact that the woman knows the guy has eaten out every previous partner. Do you consider a question regarding attraction paranoid now? How small a fraction of previous pairings must have included cunnilingus to make it paranoid?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 07:00 PM
1

Let's say I have gone down on dozens of women, but I refuse to do it with my current partner. Though the Universe is full of unique circumstances, Occam's Razor demands that my explanation of, "My sexual interests have changed over time," is nothing more or less than a trite excuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 06:42 PM
0

There are lots of reasonable excuses. FTFY I think my partner's free choice to be with me is all the evidence I need that he loves me. Sure. That is reasonable. But, he does not have free choice to be with anyone he wants. That requires someone else's agency as well. Just because he loves you does not mean you are his first choice.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 06:31 PM
2

Like a man who'll do an MFM threesome with a FWB but not his GF? The MFM is kinda fraught and includes other people, so I will leave it alone. You can call me a coward if you wish, but there it is. But, sure, I'll bite: Or a guy who tried pegging with one girl but won't with his current girl? Indeed: If a man who has tried pegging before won't do it with a new partner, he does not find that new partner as attractive as the old one.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 05:31 PM
4

I will never understand the reasoning that leads one to be contented with not having a thing as long as no one else gets it either. That is the logic of a five-year-old, not a grown-ass adult. I can't really disagree with this, but the issue is really two separate issues, one that this comment speaks to and one that it doesn't. You are right: If you really want ABT (anal, buttplugs, and threesomes; just for example), anyone should find a partner who likes ABT too and get with them and STFU if th…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 05:26 PM
1

Although, "they dumb," is the correct answer, don't discount the impact of what I'll gauchely call, "pussy fatigue." If they are not so dumb, it is still a full-time job to go through and screen all the tail that gets thrown at a professional athlete. Literally - some NBA players pay someone to interview, sort, and vet "applicants" in any situation. There comes a point for these men where it's just not worth it anymore.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 03:59 PM
0

This is an excellent refutation of what could be described as Trumpism. I happen to believe that he his neither an idiot nor a "master Machiavellian puppeteer," but is a xenophobic, fascist performance artist. But, as someone said before, the IDGAF is fun to watch.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 03:50 PM
2

Maybe you're just making shit up. Yeah. That's likely. I am making shit up. I am making shit up based on observation after observation, and I am making shit up that can be falsified. So, I'll keep testing the theory and will let you know when I find a pathology.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 03:41 PM
3

What is mysterious or even interesting about this? These inexperienced young women just exhibited female solipsism without the "benefit" of a jaundiced, experienced eye. The women to which the OP refers knew (even when virgins) that they would rate and rank every man they would ever have sex with. Without prior experience, they assumed the OP would have a similarly rigid hierarchy into which they would be slotted. They wanted to know where they "stood." With experience, women realize that talkin…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/01/16 06:11 AM
4

I said "would be in evidence" on purpose. Hypergamy as used by TRP is just the attraction to someone of higher status. But, yes: a euphemism for poaching or attaining a higher status mate while still involved with a lower status mate. This tactic to carry out the strategy of hypergamy requires excuses. It requires the "hamster to run" - The outcome must be portrayed as a fait accompli, and agency on the part of the hypergamous woman is denied.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 02:59 PM
7

Hypergamy? No. It's just a bunch of dumbasses sending (what they think are) sexually-charged pics to women who spend lots of time producing and promulgating sexually-charged pictures of themselves on the Interwebs. Dumbasses (a) fail to discern between Instagram whores and real (i.e. professional) whores and their websites (pro tip: look for the disclaimer on a real whore's site) and (b) think that Instawhores are looking for sex rather than validation. Meh. Hypergamy would be in evidence if tho…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 02:44 PM
1

I am 3 at best... I've actually dated male model once,... This. Tinder is the most effective current tool to measure the Pareto distribution of the SMP. It is a miserable reality to come to grips with.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 01:45 PM
0

Anyone who thinks any particular sex act is tied to anything but mutual desire How exactly is the statement in the OP not about "mutual desire"? It seems to me that is exactly the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/16 01:07 PM
1

If you are not in high school, it does not make one bit of difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 11:21 PM
3

This is related to something I've been thinking about recently. I think you're saying that you have some standard techniques to ferret out whether a flirting guy is trying to use some learned form of game on you. Makes sense to me: if guys on the Interwebs can learn it, so can you. Here's my question, though: what if he isn't? He doesn't run rote game on you and seems like a great guy - attractive, engaging, etc. How do you know what his inner life is like? Obviously, I think, you don't. But, mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/16 05:04 PM
1

That's not what you said. You said no-biggie to you on the thing they had done before. I've had the same partner do a thing with me that no one else in their life has done with them They had explicitly turned someone else down for ThingA before, or you were just the first to do ThingA with them? If the latter, well, that has no bearing on this discussion. Someone has to be first. Maybe they'll turn down someone later who asks to do ThingA because they are less attracted to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 11:29 PM
1

I just commented recently how glad I was someone quoted a Cormac McCarthy work in a PPD thread. Now... fucking Lacan. I swear to God, if someone brings up Derrida or Irigaray I will go full-on Red-Stapler and burn the whole place down!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 11:24 PM
1

...but declined to do something else which she had previously done because she didn't like it or only did it because the previous partner really really really wanted it and it just wasn't a big deal for me. I understand the point you are trying to make, but the qualifications at the end of this sentence just sort of ruin your argument. Look, I'm not saying that Partner X who told you she only did ThingA with a previous partner because they "really really really wanted it" is lying, but... do you…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 11:12 PM
3

For some women this is indeed true, just not for any of the women I choose to associate with. Very well. However, it is Sandberg's advice to make this true for yourself if you are a young woman. You can say it's a bad idea, but that is what she is suggesting.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 11:01 PM
1

You can decide to define "attraction" as "how much someone is willing to do with a partner", but that's a pretty uselessly limited definition. I don't quite agree with this definition as stated, but, in general, I strongly disagree. I would say that definition of attraction is very useful indeed. It is unambiguous. It is clear. It is actionable. There is nothing in my comment that suggests any sort of linear (or monotonic period) scale for attraction. In fact, quite the contrary: I'm saying attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 10:40 PM
2

I think this whole comment is the answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 07:10 PM
1

Some people are Just Not Into It, and the idea that a sufficiently hot partner will change that is like saying every guy would go gay for a sufficiently attractive man. You know what? Some would! You are right. So, if I want to get me some hot man-on-man action from a male friend who does not present as gay, what should I do? Well, I think I should find out if he's ever fucked a guy in the ass before or sucked a dick. If he hasn't, well, I'm probably SOL. But, if he has... well, if he doesn't wa…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 04:07 AM
1

What's "or else?" There is no threat here. We're talking about 2 consenting adults who get to do whatever they want to do and don't have to do anything they don't want to do. Maybe she didn't like it, maybe she's changed her mind, maybe lots of things. Indeed: maybe lots of things. Maybe, if something was tried in the past with one other person then, maybe, if you do it with someone else your opinion will be different. Maybe not. But, categorical refusal is a statement of value. Period. It is a …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 03:58 AM
1

Your idea, but so unpleasant that you can never dream of trying it again because it was so vile? This sub will never, ever die...
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 03:24 AM
1

I agree with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 03:23 AM
4

I'm just very happy someone quoted Cormac McCarthy on PPD.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 02:05 AM
1

I understand. You profoundly hated it and found it painful and disturbing. Did you have any inkling it would be so unpleasant? Did you find it repugnant before you did it? You can tell me I'm wrong, but I suspect you did have an idea that you would hate it (I don't think you are wrong or crazy to think that, btw). However: You did it anyway. That's a pretty profound thing too.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/16 01:59 AM
1

I am not trying something I've tried and hated. If anal was an absolute deal breaker that is one thing I understand your reticence. I really do. But, which is it: You'd try it or not with him. You tried it with someone and you hated it. You chalk that up (seemingly) to being "super young." I'm sure being young was a factor, but how can you (and, importantly, he) know that was the only reason you did it? I am actually more sympathetic to the woman you has tried X (I'm tired and sick of using "ana…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 10:16 PM
3

Ya know, I don't want to do anal either (I'm a man). I do not see any appeal to sticking my dick in an asshole. But, if my girlfriend ever did anal with anyone else and refuses to do it with me, we're done. If she still hates it after one try (God, I hope she still hates it...), well and good and we never have to discuss it again. A priori refusal, however, is a direct comment on relative perceived worth if the act had been tried before.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 06:52 PM
1

In all honesty, an 80th percentile man is probably not all that noticeably more attractive than a 50th percentile man. This seems to be the part of your analysis that does not meet the ha-ha test to me. I would wager that 100 men would rank a population of 10 men into 50th and 80th percentiles the same way essentially 100% of the time. The top 20% of men is very easy to discern, IMHO.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/16 03:15 AM
1

Really? None of them?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/16 07:08 PM
1

This. No problem if after trying it with you at least once she has reasons not to do it again, but to refuse to try with you is a specific statement of your perceived worth. I have not desire whatsoever to put my dick in any asshole. However, if I find out a woman I am dating has had anal, you better believe we're gonna have anal once or it's over.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/16 03:53 PM
0

I'm really quite confused. I understand the OP's constant drumbeat of comments about the comments and the original post not being the issue. OK - but we are assuming the obvious fact that this was a troll post, right? That's what makes the comments seem hyperbolic (dramatically referred to as "toxic" by the OP), right?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/16 10:53 PM
2

Touche! Have an upvote.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 10:09 PM
1

and the conclusion is 4 pages long I am very happy indeed to be called an asshole if this observation is the standard against which I am measured.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 07:51 PM
7

It's a frigging social science paper. Read it like everyone who reads scientific papers as part of their livelihood reads papers, i.e., in order: read the abstract read the Conclusion read the last paragraph of the Intro read the section headings read how ever many of those sections you need to fill in your understanding It oughta take 7-8 minutes, tops.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 07:34 PM
14

I'm not going to read the paper. You are free to do what you wish, of course. But, maybe you'd be happier if you didn't post on a debate sub if this is something you feel OK saying without a hint of irony.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/16 07:29 PM
4

Some of these are stupid. Some are obvious. One common thread in the non-stupid ones is the core of a true double standard: Male sexuality is assumed to always be predatory and coercive, while female sexuality is assumed to be... well, comical unless it is directed toward a high-value man. How could you think a woman could be sexually attracted to anything less than the top 20%? But, a man could be attracted to a little girl? Assuming pedophilia is just an asymptotic expansion of normal male sex…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/16 08:48 PM
2

That's supposed to make it seem less absurd? Lawyer-speak (which was the heart of the "debate") is always absurd.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/16 07:29 PM
2

TIL a debate regarding whether or not a BJ is sex is not just an absurdist bit in a Kevin Smith movie.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/16 07:07 PM
5

Rules 1 & 2. Sorted.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/16 07:01 PM
6

Regarding the... I don't know... skepticism some folks always pull out about OKCupid: I have acquaintances who will send stupid shit news stories via email and FB. They get pointed to Snopes to disabuse then of the notion that Obama is genetically engineering packs of Muslim, gun-eating giant toads. They always respond the same way: "Snopes is a liberal front! It's owned by Soros!" For some people, it's always turtles all the way down...
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/16 04:42 PM
1

The tradition of men walking to the outside arose so that they would get hit with mud, water, etc. thrown from the road instead of the women. I always do it. I will always do it. You think such simple acts of chivalry are deleterious to your manhood? Grow. The. Fuck. Up.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/16 04:00 AM
1

will overwhelmingly likely not see charges filed. Something like 90% of actual rapes do not see charges filed. Roughly 50% of rape arrests lead to charges being filed. Do your own Google search.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 11:39 PM
4

she would have very little chance of having charges filed, let alone seeing a conviction. This I view as hopeful thinking. She would very likely move on to another mark with nothing coming of her threats. This is more likely, and has a good probability of happening. Nevertheless, completely ignoring the threat is preposterous. There are things one could do to render the chances of conviction low, but there are very simple and straightforward follow-ons to this gedanken experiment that could lead…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 11:19 PM
1

and prosecutors use that reason to prosecute their cases. No, I obviously don't understand that, and that is why I typed this clause.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 11:16 PM
9

I really do wonder if she got frustrated that her bizarrely-constructed, fake preselection gambit didn't seem to work the way she expected and she escalated to the batshit-crazy rape story. "I've got a disease, and he said the only cure is... being a bukkake target?"
/r/TheRedPill10/01/16 10:59 PM
1

Have an upvote for the gallows (almost literally) humor.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 08:04 PM
1

Well that ought to do it! Check Your flair always gets stuck in my head btw Well, you can call it another lonely day...
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 08:04 PM
7

Stating the facts as they are. Place yourself in the shoes of a LEO. Whose story makes the most sense here? That - despite what others would have you believe - is the the standard LEOs use to determine guilt or innocence, and prosecutors use that reason to prosecute their cases. Why do you think that over 50% of reported rapes never result in a conviction? So, you think that 50% of reported rapes are false accusations? That is what you are saying with the totality of this statement. In any event…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 07:10 PM
7

In no way is reporting the same as getting me convicted. Effectively, it is. In the situation as outlined, give me one reasonable action, item, piece of information, etc. that will prevent your conviction.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 07:03 PM
5

That the police have a complaint in hand is tacit in the story. What prevents you from being arrested or, for that matter, convicted? The answer is, "absolutely, positively nothing in the entire universe."
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 06:57 PM
10

Well, then you are a troll or a fool. What would possibly save you?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 06:54 PM
11

I'm a little confused by your response: I understand you to be saying that such a situation is a bit too contrived, and despite the occasional apocryphal story, something like this generally doesn't happen. So, OK, yes - this is a very contrived situation. But, such is the nature of debate: Accepting this premise (i.e. if this happened just as was stated), what course of action is reasonable? Given that very specific antecedent, you can't possibly be suggesting ignoring the threat, right?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 06:50 PM
1

Well, I sure ain't that mad! I have been training with weights for more than 30 years and I am (to be as precise it this allows) exactly a (D-E) 5.5 on this chart, which is a locus that seems to be faring pretty well here. However, the notion that this is a body type that a lot of women really like does not match my experience at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 05:27 PM
2

I've finally managed to figure this out re: the women on PPD. What I can't figure out is how much of it is visceral preference and how much of it is contrarianism.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 04:42 PM
2

"Innapropriate"? Worthy of trust from whom? Men trust men to do what men do. I trust women to do what women do: AWALT.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 04:16 PM
0

I understand what you are saying, but you're not quite correct. You can trust women: AWALT. You might not like that you have to keep that in mind, but it is consistent and completely predictable.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/16 03:55 PM
0

You should probably pay attention to the details of the next 3-4 Amber Alerts you hear. I think you might change your mind about the kidnapping thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 11:44 PM
1

There is an assumption that the bulk of single mothers are either (a) what you describe as those that : [did] it on purpose, or (b) divorce-raped someone. I do think that these two categories probably include >50% of single mothers (you can argue with my use of 'divorce-raped' if you want). In any event, once you reach a certain age as a man, if you do want to date someone your own age (something bloopers are always encouraging us to do), you quickly realize there are a lot of single mothers. As…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 11:22 PM
2

It also includes sulking. Ya know, it totally doesn't. Like, at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 08:52 PM
8

No. Soft dread in the context of a relationship is just a statement/indication that (a) I'm not dead and notice other women and (b) I'm not so unattractive that no other woman wants me.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 02:25 PM
4

All Redditors are liars...
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 01:59 PM
0

You seriously don't think there really is a contradiction there, do you? Women in a relationship with a man whose SMV is appreciating relative to theirs (NB The male doesn't have to have a rise in SMV, just not decline as fast for this to happen) will easily develop higher expectations of their requirements. This is no different from rich people insisting they are poor because they have to pay for private school for the kids, a mortgage on a house to keep up with the Joneses, and weekly spa trea…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/16 01:30 PM
2

No doubt is hard for women to keep body fat down. But, the amount of effort and time that went into the bodies of these men - though generally aided by genetics in many of the cases - is close to a 2nd full-time job. I mean that literally - a 40-hour week would not surprise me. I am also reminded of a conversation I had with a couple of gay flight attendants on a trans-Atlantic flight one time. They were sitting in the galley in one of the "down times." The one guy - i.e. the one with higher, bu…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 10:22 PM
1

...look like feet ... For some reason, I LOL'ed uproariously.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 09:13 PM
3

In fact a Zumba (cardio) / Pilates (resistance) combo with proper dieting can get most women in the shape they want. I'm pretty sure you are not saying this, but just to make it explicit: we're agreed however that the men in this collage do A LOT more than "some" cardio and "some" resistance, right? Most of these guys spend >15 hrs/week on the gym, and all spend >10.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 09:11 PM
1

I'm happy to say that I agree with your statement in broad stroke. I do think that there is a strong cultural push against women older than (pick a number) being attractive, fueled by lots of things. This cultural pressure can lead women to undertake other strategies as they age. Strategies that don't necessarily align with what they viscerally, really want. (cf. our parallel conversation on another thread).
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 02:38 AM
1

I do believe they exist. I don't believe they are objectively the same for every woman. I don't understand how both these things can be true. I did use the word universal. We could quibble over "every woman," I suppose, but to what end? I think women get over the temporary thrill of being with this kind of man and want more long term stability. It is not settling, but changing values and perspectives. We could also go down this rabbit hole with conjecture and counter conjecture, but I'm not sure…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 02:29 AM
1

There is a standard RP explanation that says one of the ways that older men can (and seemingly sometimes do) increase their attractiveness later in life is through an increased level of fitness, ie they lift. There is a claim that only youth makes women attractive, ie they hit the wall and decay. You are disputing that with exactly the same kind of argument RPers use to say that sexual market value can increase for a man with age. Some here on PPD have claimed that it is foolish to think that at…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/16 02:21 AM
3

This is a female solicitor? That combo could not straightforwardly say that the sky is blue. This is not powertalk. Ergo, troll.
/r/TheRedPill07/01/16 10:56 PM
1

A lot of women who are late bloomers or introverts and get into lifting/fitness in their late 20s/early 30s get BETTER looking as they get older. It has been repeatedly stated on this sub that this cannot occur for men, counter to conventional RP wisdom. Is this possible?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 10:28 PM
1

I think the whole idea of Chad is ridiculous. I'm very confused. Do you really think that more-or-less universally attractive men - handsome, tall, strong, fun, utterly non-self-conscious - don't exist? Or, do you not find those things attractive for some pathological reason?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 10:26 PM
1

A lazy 5 seems to be a loser. How about a lazy 6? A lazy 7? Do you have to be an 8 to be lazy? Higher?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/01/16 10:05 PM
1

This is a bit related to why I have decided to never have children. Most people I know or encounter are shocked that I don't have kids. But, the world does not need my genes to continue: I contribute to society, but the odds are that any offspring of mine would not. I could be wrong, but I am risk averse to something so serious.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 08:49 PM
2

Yeah. I'm all torn up about it. Why do you assume that I am obsessed with the idea that I am not the pinnacle of all things? Or crying about the fact that I'll never find the ideal woman? That would be a textbook example - no, the Platonic ideal of - hypergamy. Are you worried about these things for yourself? It seems you might be. No, all I care about is some reasonable level of happiness that is not built upon an outright lie. Not much to hang an unhealthy obsession on, huh?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 06:06 AM
1

God, I love that movie.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 01:51 AM
3

TIL PPD is full of assmen (and asswomen).
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 12:12 AM
1

I know this is supposed to wound me and make me feel ashamed, but, seriously: That is some combination of naiveté and arrogance. Why in the world would that not be something I thought about every single time? You either don't think it has ever happened to you or you don't care. If it's the former, I am secure in the notion that you are almost undoubtedly wrong. If it is the latter, please continue living your unexamined life - I wish you well. But, that is not for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/16 12:03 AM
1

You're assuming that I go out of my way to tell the people who compliment me that their words aren't welcomed. No, I am not. I have no reason to think that you are rude. I trust you when you say that you are civil. Furthermore, I believe you when you say that compliments your husband pays you are welcome and appreciated. That makes perfect sense. But, what is borderline sociopathic is saying that you find a normal, respectful compliment from some humans distasteful. "You look quite fetching toda…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 11:56 PM
2

I think not being settled for is the heart of RedPill.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 02:38 AM
5

If that was me I would just be forever alone. Not going to settle for someone who is only attracted to my money. This statement does not match your flair. even hideously overweight loser men find people who are attracted to them. Do they? Or, do they find people who settle for them?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/16 02:08 AM
1

I was trying to be cheeky with my spelling. I got it.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 09:52 PM
1

I apologise.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 09:11 PM
1

Yep. You're right. 2 things: (1) isn't the mean 2.0? (2) I think this is something I was thinking and didn't make clear: I think this is 2 Pareto-like distributions, one with a different shape parameter than the other. I was (for whatever reason) assuming a normal distribution for the women.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 09:08 PM
2

Mars, bitches!!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 07:57 PM
1

I do not think a 80/20 distribution with equal means and a higher male median is possible. I think this is because the Pareto distribution is log-normal - it would take 2 distributions to fit this. So, I think it is important to point out that this is fair evidence that people lie in surveys :)
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 07:55 PM
1

I don't think it "blows the whole thing up," but the idea that the Pareto distribution is a universal in an efficient market is a powerful RP idea. Some other distribution would be interesting (as you say, archwinger), but would it be somehow inevitable? I, personally, think it is true that male-female partnering follows a 80/20 Pareto distribution, but I really just wanted to establish the idea as possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/16 07:53 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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