TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

zmndyeqm Archive

View 2 posts and 223 comments by zmndyeqm on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yeah but still nothing to do with contemporary Eastern Europe. And Muslims don't actually do exactly as Muhammad did in practice, even if they say they do. This is why vast majority of Muslim women marry in adulthood and not childhood despite all the pedo talk.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 09:40 PM
1

You family is an anecdote, and even if your family is Muslim and you despise them, that doesn't mean you'd get to call Muslims cockroaches. That kind of dehumanizing language is straight from the Nazi cookbook. You don't have to be a German to be a Nazi. If you're doing this because of your negative personal experience, I hope this will be a wake up call for you, because there is a difference between criticizing a religion and dehumanizing large groups of people en masse. A lot of Nazis didn't r…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 09:37 PM
2

Lots of Christians also think gays should be castrated because "god hates gays". But believing in backwards shit because of religion is only bad when Muslims brown people do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 10:12 AM
1

Cause you only hate pedos if they're Muslim brown.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 09:58 AM
1

Why should women lower their expectations instead of men stepping up to them? For short term dates and ONS, no reason. But for LTR, because women's expectations of men are useless. Men "stepping up" means getting fit, wearing better clothes, getting haircuts, etc. None of these things makes him a better person, or better at LTR (boyfriend, husband, father) It just makes him waste his time and money on a bunch of useless shit. If women could hold other more relevant values, it would make their ow…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 09:01 AM
6

Well, duh. If they didn't have any problems they wouldn't be looking for a solution online.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 08:39 AM
1

classical literature that emphasizes men wanting to “deflower” young girls That's cause before the invention of condoms virgin basically meant "doesn't have kids".
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 08:18 AM
1

They could fuck up democracy Last time I checked it was Nazis like you whose growth fucked up democracy. But please, keep projecting.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 08:10 AM
0

Yes cause Christians are all pure hearted. No white guy has ever been pedo. If you wanna be racist just be fucking racist. We're all anonymous here, no need to pretend like you care about anything other than their skin color.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 08:06 AM
1

He lived one thousand and four hundred years ago. Kinda disingenuous to compare that to contemporary Eastern Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 08:03 AM
2

Misandry. Feminists don't like the word though. According to feminist dogma misandry can't exist because patriarchy exists and that automatically makes every man's life better than all women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 06:45 AM
2

I don't see what refusing a philosophy based on sex has to do with gender. It's more like a refusal of hedonistic approach to life.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 06:41 AM
2

Straight guys think a guy is good looking if he has an effeminate face but is a guy. In reality girls like masculine guys who to other guys look really ugly.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 06:24 AM
0

No. Uglier guys just get smarter because they have to use their head more to succeed. You're observing the symptoms not the cause.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 06:21 AM
3

Women hunt for orbiters the same way guys hunt for fuckbuddies.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 06:13 AM
1

But the blues pretend it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 05:59 AM
6

This. Dating websites and apps are a business, they don't have the best interest of their users at heart, they're made to make money. And if you stop using them, they stop making money. So instead they're fine tuned to make you addicted. To keep you feeling your soulmate is just one more message away, but never actually connecting you to someone who you could get on with.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/19 05:55 AM
1

Women are different and want different things.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/19 06:11 AM
1

Because MGTOW guys who are not obsessed with women don't frequent the subreddit and are busy with their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/19 06:08 AM
1

He could accidentally gasp have sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/19 07:57 PM
1

Not if you tell them not to do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/02/19 07:56 PM
2

This discussion is way too PPD even for me.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:54 AM
1

lol
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:38 AM
1

I mean, I was replying to a comment that literally said: As a girl who was into older guys, it was because they weren't boring and knew how to fuck.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:31 AM
-2

No you don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:10 AM
2

OP is not 50, he's 33. But even at 50 yeah, there are girls who are into that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:09 AM
1

He can learn how to fuck using prostitutes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:09 AM
0

He can just lie about his experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/02/19 12:03 AM
1

Or girls who are into older guys.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/19 11:44 PM
5

In your opinion, what is a "real man"? A man who exists in the real world and is not imaginary. I'm speaking of "real man" in the context of when people say things like "I want a real man" Oh, in that case, the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/19 11:02 PM
1

Nice find
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/19 05:59 AM
14

This. Don't tell anyone you don't like sluts. Act like you're super open to dating everyone, then whenever you meet a slut you don't want to date either don't approach her, or if your friends are setting you up with one just tell them she wasn't your type or you don't see a future with her or other nondescript answer. This way you can be red while also getting all the benefits of everyone thinking you're blue. You get the best of both worlds.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/19 05:08 AM
2

It's "affects", not "effects".
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/19 05:01 AM
4

Nothing. It's an excuse. Like the government saying "We can neither confirm nor deny allegations regarding X". It means they don't want to tell you what's up.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 11:04 PM
1

Cool.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 09:02 PM
1

I think we're going in circles here so let's end the discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 07:14 PM
1

If thinking that makes you happy then by all means keep believing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 04:31 PM
1

Yes. This was my Point #3.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 04:15 PM
0

Part two, hobbies and looksmaxing don't build confidence. You seem to have misunderstood. My point was the opposite of this, that hobbies and looksmaxing builds confidence. Part three, fake it till you make it works if your hot. This seems to be a misunderstanding as well. My point was that fake it till you make it works for everyone, but it's not honest. For bluepills who care about honesty, that can be relevant which is why I included it. Blue pill Q: You mention in passing that other things m…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 04:09 PM
1

Well I separated my questions for bluepill and redpill, so you can refer to those depending on your pill. If you're nopill you can read my last edit: Anyway, a more accurate title would've been "Work on your confidence" is bad advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 03:44 PM
1

im so sick of you reddittards who clearly don't know shit about a topic still feeling like you should dive in and start arguing and accuse people of making things up and start demanding sources and proof just because it blows away your dumb assumption and because you've never heard of it in your many years of being a redditscholar. lol this isn't pseudoscience you moron it's a huge field of research. there are so many peer-reviewed scientific studies and articles that there is a whole journal ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:58 PM
1

gj
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:49 PM
1

Making it is working sufficiently well. Those are direct synonyms. They're not. Faking it sufficiently well means that you convince others you have high confidence while in your mind you are still insecure. It's being good at acting, not being confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:49 PM
1

The issue I have with this analogy is that "getting in shape" works the same for everyone. Human's biology when it comes to weight is well understood, and that allows people to give generic advice such as "Eat less calories than you use" and that will make everyone lose weight, no exceptions. The same can not be said about confidence. To tell someone how to become confident you need to know them well, know their history, understand where their sources of insecurity comes from, etc. This usually …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:47 PM
1

That was the conclusion of the previous points, which you took out of context. Anything can appear to mean something else if you take it out of context. In addition, right under that sentence I had written this: Edit for clarity: My assertion isn't that "Ugly men can't be confident". Which makes it obvious you didn't read the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:42 PM
1

I'm saying they don't matter to anyone but the person holding them. Yes, which I agreed to 2 posts ago, here: What you're essentially arguing is that genuine confidence does not matter, which was the point I was making in the post. So I guess we are in agreement.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:41 PM
1

No. You can guess the outcome of an action from your previous experiences, or from other evidence. Guessing the outcome of an action is the most important part of decision making process.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:39 PM
1

Psychology, Psychiatry, Cognitive Behavioural Therapy are all real things that have real impact on these types of things. Yes, but what you're suggesting is overriding human's innate learning process. If that's possible I would like to see some scientific evidence on it. Habits are hard to break but they are breakable. Habits are not learned through trial and error, so they don't follow the same learning rules. Also look up Fixed Mindset vs Growth Mindset. I have studied that. It's not really re…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:38 PM
1

I'd argue it's not specific enough to be useful. Nevertheless, thanks for discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:26 PM
1

Thanks for discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:25 PM
1

The post wasn't about me, but thanks for suggestion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:24 PM
1

I clarified the post title as much as I could and if you want to ignore it there's not much else I can do.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/02/19 02:24 PM
1

OK. This goes back to Point #2 in my post, that you have to do other things because confidence can not be built by itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 03:04 AM
1

Yeah I know it's attractive, didn't claim that it wasn't.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 03:03 AM
1

you can absolutely alter your mindset This is something I'm not convinced of. It sounds like pseudoscience to me. Do you have any evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:44 AM
1

In other words, "work on your confidence" is such a generic advice you might as well say "be more attractive". Without specifics it's useless advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:35 AM
1

You mean confidence in something like driving skills turns into confidence about whether a girl will or will not reject you?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:32 AM
1

Those are good points but I'm talking specifically about confidence in dating. Like how confident a guy is when approaching a girl. When people say confidence is attractive, they're talking about this particular form of confidence. The type of general confidence you're talking about is not immediately observable and you can only find out about it after you've gotten to know the guy for a while, and your level of attraction has already been established.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:30 AM
1

I agree. However, that perception of how other people look at you is informed by your prior experiences, and those experiences are affected by looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:26 AM
1

I'm talking specifically about confidence in dating. Confidence in other areas does not necessarily translate to confidence in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:25 AM
1

These sound like pseudoscience. Do you have any evidence to support any of these claims? If people could just deliberately "rewire their brains" then no one would ever feel sad or feel any other negative emotions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:23 AM
1

Why tell someone to be nice, if they aren’t really nice? That's why we tell people to put themselves in the other's shoes and try to see the other perspective, or tell them to be open to other people etc. We don't tell an asshole "remain being an asshole, but act nice". I guess it's the difference between affably evil or nice.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:19 AM
1

So you're essentially rejecting the existence of mindsets? People are just actions and have no thoughts in their heads? Not sure where you're trying to get with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:16 AM
1

I file these under looks.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:15 AM
1

People who generally find interactions pleasant in and of themselves usually build confidence naturally and don't really need advice. People who seek advice are likely to be introverted and therefore not interested in making chitchat by itself and have some kind of goal they want to achieve from approaching, and that's when confidence becomes relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:13 AM
1

My point was to give them specific advice that can make things better for them instead of just saying "somehow" acquire confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/02/19 02:10 AM
1

View Point #2.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:58 PM
1

uhh, ok.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:57 PM
1

without specifics of what the person is unconfident about, it sets them in the right direction. Except it doesn't. If that was the case, they wouldn't need your advice in the first place. Something I've observed is that "be more confident" is "advice" that people give when they don't want to bother learning about the details of the person's life and give actual specific advice. And that is also part of the reason it's bad advice. Like I said, at best it's irrelevant and at worst it's damaging
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:57 PM
1

Can you elaborate? Which part didn't connect? I can maybe provide more explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:53 PM
1

How does it result in lower confidence if you’re not tying self-worth to the outcome? Self-worth and confidence in dating are linked, but they are not the same thing. I discussed this more here. It’s nearly impossible to recreate the same approach conditions over and over outside of a lab environment, there are an infinite number of variables to consider. Soo.... no you can’t really use that as an absolute basis to say you’ll fail the next time. Dating is unpredictable. This is correct in the lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:52 PM
1

Confidence is more attractive in males than in females as far as I have been lead to believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:44 PM
1

Except a rejection won’t cause physical harm or injury. In fact there are more people that end up in car crashes than there are people that end up completely alone Yes, that's why it was a comparison, not an equation. yet you have more fear for the latter than the former? I'm just discussing this. My own life is an anecdote.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:43 PM
1

Yes, they might not have 100% confidence. But usually when it comes to human actions, having a higher than 50% confidence is enough to convince someone to go through with it. When it comes to dating, 50% is still too high, but people measure their success compared to other people. So it's not that "50% of girls will say Yes to me", it's more that "I'm less likely than average to be rejected."
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:41 PM
3

good work.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:38 PM
1

what about acting confident is dishonest? Acting in itself is dishonest isn't it? If it was honest it wouldn't be "acting". Acting confident is dishonest because through your actions, you're lying about "being" confident. For LTR, that's not really a huge red flag, because confidence becomes irrelevant once an LTR gets going, so whether it was real or acted won't matter. But my issue is that it's effectively encouraging people to be dishonest. Even if this particular kind of dishonesty is not da…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:38 PM
1

Playing the numbers game is working on confidence. I disagree. Playing the numbers game can in fact result in lower confidence, through repeated rejections. It's a completely different approach than "acquire confidence". In fact, it's the opposite approach. It's the "throw caution to the wind" approach.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:29 PM
2

Yes, confidence can either come from personal experiences, or from an evidence that suggests success is probable. In your driving example, you don't have past success rate with driving, but the fact that most people don't have problem with it suggests that you can do it as well. A more apt comparison would be to consider how you would feel if you had attempted driving several times in the past but it resulted in crashes and serious injury repeatedly.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:28 PM
1

Yeah ok. Have a nice day.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:04 PM
1

Dishonesty is problematic in LTR. If we're not talking about LTR it's irrelevant. When I made my post I wanted to make my points from a sort of a nopill worldview so I put points in there both in regards to redpill and bluepill. Since people didn't seem to react positively about that I added separate arguments for redpill and bluepill at the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:04 PM
1

No. I wanted my views challenged on my points and my conclusion. But since you're refusing to read either of them then I guess I don't really want anything from you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:01 PM
1

So you seem to be in agreement with me that working on confidence is bad advice. A better advice seems to be to play the numbers game even if you have low confidence, which seems to be what you're implying.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:58 PM
2

I’ve known plenty of ugly men that slay because they were confident and very masculine. Not really disproving any of my points. Read the post not just the title. A common factor is they faced significant challenges/hardship, failed , and survived to fight another day. Almost everyone goes through significant hardship in their lives. And again, not really relevant to any of my points. Your line of argument and discussion in this thread smacks of someone who is young , has little experience in the…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:57 PM
1

I'm just discussing confidence in general. My personal experiences are irrelevant to the discussion.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:54 PM
1

So this is what I was disagreeing with, to which you didn’t bother to actually debate my answer. Ok then. Because you didn't follow on my previous points, took the conclusion out of context, and ignored the keyword "functionally". What about actual good looking guys with no confidence, and hence they ain’t getting laid? A person with good looks is very unlikely to have had more negative experiences in dating than positive. It's possible but not very probable. If you’re not good at it, act it out…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:53 PM
1

Yes, but they are edge cases. And it's still in line with my observation that "get confidence" is bad advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:49 PM
1

I agree-with-you.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:48 PM
1

Then why do you care about confidence so much? I don't care about it so much. I'm discussing it because it's given as advice and I think it's bad advice. I'm asking someone to challenge me on that view. There are way too much neurotic hot women out there I discussed that point here
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:47 PM
1

Read the post, not just the title. I added extra clarification at the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:44 PM
1

Irrelevant to the discussion. Check my extra clarification I added at the end of the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:43 PM
1

You're confident in your ability to build confidence. Sounds paradoxical. Everyone "overcomes" their failures unless their failure resulted in death, in which case they don't.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:41 PM
1

Everyone knows they'll be okay, therefore everyone is always confident to the max, and that means "work on your confidence" is still bad advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:40 PM
1

Or maybe you're the one who has an incorrect belief of what confidence is, and that's why it's difficult for you to get it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:39 PM
1

kinetics and pheromones are "immaterial"? That's news to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:38 PM
1

no u
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:37 PM
1

abundance mentality Abundance mentality is not the same as confidence. Abundance mentality can be achieved if there is real abundance, but confidence is knowing success is probable even if there is no abundance. For instance, a person with good looks does not have to be worried about the abundance of other opportunities, because he knows he won't be rejected in the first place. Abundance of other opportunities is irrelevant to him. I think abundance mentality is good advice for people who have a…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:37 PM
1

What about it? It doesn't seem relevant to my post. Check the extra clarity I added at the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:33 PM
1

Just be irrational. Best advice. Good luck.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:32 PM
2

Uhh, yes it is. Confidence: A belief or conviction that an outcome will be favorable. Belief in the certainty of something.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:31 PM
-1

Yeah you're ignoring my points. None of this challenges any of my views. Maybe actually read the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:29 PM
1

You know you'll be fine even if some woman rejects you. This is not confidence. Everyone knows they will be "fine" after rejection. Rejection doesn't kill you, and everyone knows this. Confidence is knowing you will not be rejected in the first place, so you're not worrying about it at all. Not thinking "I will be rejected, but it's ok. Rejection won't kill me."
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:28 PM
1

Because assertiveness can come from confidence, but not vice versa. I'm discussing confidence because it is often given as advice. Your belief seems to be that "confidence doesn't matter", which is in fact in agreement with my points.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:26 PM
1

Not addressing my points.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:18 PM
1

Not really addressing my points.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:18 PM
1

What does "overcoming failures" mean? No one dies from being rejected, so in that sense, everyone knows they will "overcome" their failure, and therefore everyone would be always confident with that line of thinking, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:17 PM
1

And confidence comes from either good looks or dishonesty.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:15 PM
1

This might be somewhat relevant, but besides some edge cases where someone with low success-rate might not realize their own bad success-rate due to extreme neurotic thinking, it's mostly irrelevant in practice. Most people have a warped sense of reality, but that warped sense of reality is not so out of touch that a ugly person might think they're very attractive or vice versa.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:13 PM
1

Real confidence comes from high success rate, and high success rate comes from either looks or faking it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:09 PM
1

Being hot and succeeding a lot can improve confidence but so can being totally irrational. You can't ask a rational person to just be irrational, the same way you can't ask an ugly person to just be pretty. Therefore it makes the advice obsolete anyway. You can call it "prioritizing dishonesty," I call it "getting laid." Yes, point 3 is in response to people who use "work on self-confidence" as advice for LTR. It's irrelevant for ONS. Also another of my observation, that might be irrelevant to y…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:07 PM
1

Rather, you're refusing to read the post to actually see what my points are in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:02 PM
1

Confidence can come from good looks, but to act like that is the one and only factor is incredibly naive. I did not claim such a thing. Read the post not just the title.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:01 PM
1

Confidence can be worked on. Not directly though That was my point. You're not really working on confidence when you get hobbies. You're working on hobbies. Confidence is a side effect that may or may not occur from working on hobbies, but it's not what you're working on.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:00 PM
2

You ignored the point I was making. Check out my extra clarification at the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:58 PM
2

That's not confidence. Confidence is knowing you won't be rejected.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:57 PM
1

Confident is what you look like when you are assertive. Confidence means nothing by itself. Assertiveness can't be faked since it is based on actions, if you do it then it's real. Confidence and assertiveness are not equal. Assertiveness is a set of actions and therefore can not be faked. Confidence is a state of mind that is not observable by others, and therefore it can be faked. Indeed, one of the ways to fake confidence is to act assertive. All this really has nothing to do with looks. What …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:56 PM
-2

That's not what he did. He worked on all these other stuff. I got fed up with online dating and decided I would meet people in real life. It was hard. I got rejected. I was awkward sometimes. But I kept meeting people in real life like it was a mission. I would briefly talk to the cashier about the weather, talk to guy looking at shoes, talk to the grandmother buying yogurt "is that strawberry yogurt any good?", I talked to attractive women too. But not like, I am going to get her number, no, it…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:51 PM
1

Some people are born confident Needs citation. what you do is what you are. The issue with dishonesty is that what a dishonest person does will not remain consistent. Similarly, if you dress and move and act a certain way, it's not "fake". No your dress might not be fake, but your confidence is. What you're essentially arguing is that genuine confidence does not matter, which was the point I was making in the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:50 PM
1

This was my point yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:46 PM
2

We know for a fact that personality is at least partially genetic. Personality and the other things you said do play some part, but looks play the primary part. The same actions are perceived differently depending on looks, and personality only affects actions. This is what "fake it till you make it" really means - pretend to be confident until you achieve enough success to actually build up your real confidence. My point was that if faking it is working sufficiently well, actually making it bec…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:45 PM
1

Thanks for the discussion everyone!
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:17 AM
-1

It seems disingenuous to say it isn't the same thing after the fact; when in fact, it seems like it is your entire argument? My argument was that they're "functionally" the same, I didn't change it I just clarified it further. Yes, it is a combination of a lot of factors, looks can be included, but I argue that it is more likely to be experience that boosts confidence the most. And experience in turn is affected by looks. Disagree entirely, see my first post. I was not confident until I learned …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:14 AM
1

many forms of pleasure I've never personally experienced any "forms" of pleasure. Pleasure is just pleasure. There's different intensities of it but not really different "forms". Regardless, I'm not really hedonistic, I was just considering if "don't be nice" is a good advice in even hedonistic worldview.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 04:08 AM
0

Thanks. However I clarified in my edit that my assertion wasn't that "Ugly men can't be confident".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:59 AM
2

I agree with everything you're saying, just not in the frame you're presenting it. Your worldview seems to hinge on the view that additional pleasure is only possible through forfeiting being nice. While I do agree that there is pleasure to be had there, I'm not convinced it's exclusively the only way to acquire pleasure. In other words, in my view you can get the same amount of pleasure while being nice, than you can without being nice, if you know where to look. As an example, drugs are victim…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:50 AM
1

I think the thing Bill Gates is famous for stealing is QDOS. It's what essentially jump-started his company. He didn't really "steal" it though, he just bought it cheaply from its original programmer and then sold it at several times the cost to IBM.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:45 AM
2

Morality is complex, and I think it's possible to approach it in a balanced and responsible way Yeah I agree with that, just doing the closest match to nicest thing in the short term is not really a morality, it seems to me to rather be the path of least social resistance. But the thing is, that is exactly the kind of thing humans are biologically programmed to do. So if your pursuit of pleasure has some naturally uncomfortable trade-off, isn't it a better idea to find other sources of pleasure …
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:40 AM
1

now I'm stuck between a mental rock and a mental hard place. Do what you want cause a pirate is free. There's no right or wrong way to live, everyone dies at the end and once you're dead you won't remember how you lived so it won't matter anyway. Just do whatever you feel like, man.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:33 AM
1

absent a religious motive for being nice Being nice is primarily a biological function of humans due to them being naturally social creatures. The religion part came later. wondering how many pleasurable experiences you may be missing out Sex is not the only pleasurable thing. If he's uncomfortable with his niceness being a trade-off for this particular pleasure, wouldn't a better advice be to seek pleasure in other areas of life where that kind of trade-off is not enforced? You get one life, an…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:29 AM
1

In my personal experience they don't, which is why I made this post in the first place. I assumed there are people who have good intentions but don't realize something like "just be more confident" is not meaningful advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:22 AM
1

?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:16 AM
1

If this is what you were trying to say why didn't you just say it in the first place? I did, in the original post. I then clarified it further in an edit. Losers always lose, and winners always win. lol ok bro have a nice day.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:15 AM
1

I think the "problem" is not bringing up confidence achieves the same thing, and working on those "specific recommendations" is going to end up affecting their confidence positively even if you don't specifically specify that they're doing it "to work on their confidence." On the other hand, "work on confidence" is bad because it's usually used to avoid those specific recommendations, because they might seem shallow, or the advice giver don't want to bother giving specific advice to that person,…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:13 AM
2

i suppose you may be correct, but they've always seem closely linked to me. They are definitely linked. Someone who views himself as low value is more likely to believe that others also see him as low value. However, just because they are linked does not mean they are the same thing. they would be willing to take more risks in learning the ropes and would be more resilient to the difficulties/failures involved in the learning process. I agree, but again, you are ignoring the looks part. It is po…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:06 AM
1

Personality is often broken into statistically-identified factors called the Big Five, which are openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (or emotional stability). These components are generally stable over time, and about half of the variance appears to be attributable to a person's genetics rather than the effects of one's environment. Lucas, R.; Baird, B. (2004). "Extraversion and Emotional Reactivity". Journal of Personality and Social Psycholog…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 03:02 AM
1

just not very specific in terms of how to do it. But that undermines the whole "advice" aspect of it, doesn't it? It's like saying "Be more successful at dating". Yes, but how?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:58 AM
1

In science we assume everything is wrong unless proven otherwise. As such, unless something is proven to be genetic, it is assumed not to be. Define naturally. Not artificially. Without deliberate change. my original destruction of your views I laughed. Please try to stay on topic Here's the topic: Working on confidence is bad advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:56 AM
1

why isn't a man who projects confidence but doesn't actually possess it "confident in practice"? He is confident "in practice", the proof of that is that women perceive him as confident. In practice, it doesn't matter if your confidence is genuine or not, only whether you're perceived as confident. My point was that since genuine confidence can not be worked on by itself, the "work on your confidence" is bad advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:52 AM
3

I agree with all those, but confidence when it comes to dating is not exactly the same thing as general self-esteem, although there are parallels. Confidence in dating is strictly the belief that you are more likely to be successful with getting women, or at least, your chances are better than the average guy. It is possible for someone who have general high self-esteem to feel insecure about dating, and vice versa. So regarding things such as how your parents treat you, I think they have more o…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:48 AM
1

Well, arguments don't necessarily have to be peer reviewed studies. Can you explain how can a man with low success rate, "genuinely" believe his chances of success is high? Sounds quite paradoxical to me. The only explanation I can come up where that would be the case is if someone hypnotized him into believing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:43 AM
3

Personality traits are partly genetic but also partly due to environment. Nevertheless, since my final assertion at the end of the post is "Work on your confidence is bad advice", it seems to me you are in agreement with my assertions. Correct me if I'm wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:38 AM
1

I don't think there is any "confidence" genes. I'm not a biologist so if you have any actual info on this, correct me if I'm wrong. I'm just saying genetics can affect your experiences, and your experiences can in turn affect your level of confidence. Ergo, attractive people are more likely to be naturally confident.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:36 AM
2

This is a CMV. I don't care what you do in your private life. Since you have failed to put forward any arguments so far I'm going to assume you're just trolling.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:33 AM
1

I think confidence absolutely comes natural to a lot of people. Are you implying it's genetic?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:32 AM
1

I'm saying that genuine confidence exists and it's within the realm of possibility that an unattractive man can possess it. Well that's the point I'm not convinced about. Care to bring a more convincing argument other than "because I say so"? If I have a counterfeit $100 bill in my pocket that I believe to be real, am I prioritizing fake money? "In practice", yes. Which is why I used the term: "in practice".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:30 AM
1

I mean, that's why I use the word "physical attractiveness" instead of "pretty" or "handsome", but people still use it as shorthand for "has pretty face".
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:28 AM
3

No, that's just called having balls. Confidence is an honest belief, in your own mind, that you are more likely to succeed than fail. That usually comes from either having a history of high success rate, or otherwise having some kind of evidence that convinced you that you are more likely to succeed that fail. In fact, having balls is the opposite of confidence. You require balls when you believe the chances of failure is high but want to do it anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:26 AM
8

This is a CMV, you're not really addressing any of my points.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:23 AM
2

How did you conclude their confidence is genuine, do you have a mind reading device?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:22 AM
3

Someone already said this, and my reply was that it doesn't address my points. Read the actual post not just the title.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:21 AM
2

Not that I care to challenge this claim but you have absolutely no proof of this. And yet you are challenging it. I'd say most people do not think confidence is genetic, so if you want to assert that it is the burden of proof is on you. I was pretty much the same incredible narcissist etc. etc. Your personal life story is an anecdote. I didn't write this about you. The point I'm trying to make on #1 is that attractive men are more likely to be confident, and you haven't challenged that. More bal…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:20 AM
1

You're misrepresenting my words, I did not claim such a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:09 AM
1

You're still not responding to my assertions though. Yeah "fake it till you make it" might generate some fake confidence and if some chick is into that, she might get some good sex out of it, but it still doesn't change the fact that it's just really bad advice due to point #2. who cares if its "dishonest". You personally might not care if you only want sex, but I've heard people give "work on your confidence" as advice for LTR and those are the situations where that becomes relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 02:07 AM
0

You're not really discussing any of the points I've made. Your assertion can be covered by my third point.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/19 01:39 AM
1

Everything everyone does is to minimize hurt. Otherwise we'd all just accidentally get ourselves killed without noticing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/19 11:00 PM
10

No amount of money would suffice. Money can always be earned, manhood can't.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/19 10:58 PM
1

https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/aiftg0/paying_for_something_others_got_for_free_but_what/
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 10:34 AM
1

people over the age of 30 now will be fine. video games videogames have been mainstream since 1982. So more like people over 40.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 10:04 AM
1

Just because you're not cut out to solve complicated abstract math problems doesn't shouldn't disqualify you from marrying a partner and having a family. It doesn't. But also people are disqualified for less.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 10:02 AM
4

This comment brought to you by technology.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 10:00 AM
2

It worked for pirates.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 09:59 AM
0

lol wtf is this post Men already value women. Well women already value men. By that logic outnumbering women will also improve gender relations.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 05:16 AM
1

It's biological. The way sex works is that males have to optimize for quantity, females have to optimize for quality. When a female has high quantity instead of quality it just feels iffy and wrong. In other words, men don't like female sluts for the same reason women don't like male virgins.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 04:53 AM
2

What should men be? Rich.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/19 04:47 AM
12

Well you didn't put stuff like "confident", "forthcoming", and "having game" in there, so I assume you're fine with approaching men yourself instead of waiting for some "good man" to go out of his way to find you. In which case stop whining about "men you know" and go meet new men that fit your criteria and ask them out.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 05:50 PM
1

Yeah it probs won't happen during your lifetime. That is unless they cure aging before you die, in which case it will definitely happen during your lifetime. (Provided you don't die in accidents/murders/suicide/etc.) I'm not worried about seeing that as competition anytime soon. No need to be threatened. The chick droids will also be better than women in every way.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 05:36 PM
1

They do much more complicated tasks already bro. I get it, you think you can just program some movement combinations in it No, a programmer doesn't sit down and program the AI. The AI learns by looking at people doing it. The programmer just programs the learning mechanism, the actual movements is something the AI learns by itself. That's how self-driving cars work.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 05:24 PM
1

In before you tell me some android is going to eat pussy better than me, good luck to it. Yes. Not only that, they will be better than you at everything, from accounting to engineering to sex. And they will look perfect and have perfect personalities. The humans are the horse, androids are the car. Who goes around with a horse these days? Cars are just better in every way. Androids likewise will eventually be better than humans at everything.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 05:03 PM
3

My argument was to not bring up your personal experience as an argument. The 80/20 "nonsense" is something people usually base on their personal experience. You also bring up your personal experience, it just becomes your word against his. If you wanna actually argue against it, then have some sort of argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 04:59 PM
1

People use exceptions to the rule to dismiss the rule, for some reason. That's what I had a problem with. I'm not an awalt, good for you princess but we're not talking about you, unless you're getting offended for women because it's you after all. wut
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 04:21 PM
1

You seem to have completely missed the point of my posts. It's not that I'm trying to prove the post you initially replied to is correct, I'm just saying your personal experience doesn't make it wrong. Your personal experience is not an argument, it's just an anecdote.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:57 PM
1

Dude, they do the thing OP suggested, no human will ever bother with another human again. It'll be like going around with horses instead of cars.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:54 PM
1

I didn't say it's one sided.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:44 PM
4

Nor are the guys I know with hot wives. Nor are people you see on the street. Nor are they what? Statistically significant? Indeed, a bunch of people you know are not statistically significant. get off the internet Says the guy on the internet. I did win the lottery, but not in my wifes looks but her personality. Looks are easy. I don't remember suggesting your wife lacks personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:25 PM
1

And that makes it less true?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:20 PM
1

They still can't get bananas and vanilla right. They can't now. Doesn't mean it's outside the realm of possibility as you were suggesting in your initial post.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:18 PM
2

No they just mass produce chemicals that smells the same way.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:09 PM
5

You are not statistically significant enough to matter. You are an anecdote. You having success with women does not change the realities of dating the same way a lottery winner does not change the realities of poverty.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 03:00 PM
1

Not sure what that had to do with my post.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 02:43 PM
1

Androids that could think, evolve Economy crashes, WW3, Nukes go off, everyone dies.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 02:02 PM
1

They can't make an android smell like a woman for example. But they can. I also wouldn't enjoy sleeping with somebody that can't really enjoy it back. But they can.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 02:00 PM
1

There is a spectrum, and a a fundamentalist girl/boy who won't kiss until his/her wedding is technically available. But the numbers lean heavily on the casual side. The fundamentalists are ridiculously rare. So overall, things have regressed in general when it comes to dating. Although I'm not saying fundamentalism is good. That's kind of a religious thing. I was more talking about human values such as loyalty, compatibility, and love VS animalistic values such as looks and social status.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 01:45 PM
2

When I was younger, I always thought feminism was such a good thing because now that women can have their own job and their own life, they will marry men for love and the world becomes a better place in general. But in practice all it did was make women become the same as men. For example, before men cheated and women were loyal. I thought feminism would make men loyal, but instead it made women cheat more. I thought feminism would let men choose women based on merit instead of looks, but instea…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 01:21 PM
3

Internet was perfect when everybody were anonymous and you were told to not share anything that identifies you on the 'net. Nobody cared about your looks or your gender or your race or your nationality or your political affiliation. You could debate free of all that. Facebook and other "new internet" changed all that and now it's just real life but when you whisper anything everyone in the world hears it.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 12:45 PM
1

He clarified 404 error as "does not compute", which suggests it isn't an HTTP response. It may be OP's own error reporting system, in which "does not compute" is error #404.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 12:32 PM
3

Feminism doesn't mean anything. Anyone with any kinds of beliefs can call themselves a feminist. There is no central feminism authority that issues feminist certifications.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 12:28 PM
5

Heretic! Haven't you heard? Women are sexless beings and dating is a meritocracy! Non-believers will be burnt at stake.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 12:21 PM
1

I don't think the point is to make them change their ways or shame them into behaving in a certain way. The point is to call them out on their bullshit. Hypocrites know they're hypocrites, and calling them hypocrites won't stop them from being hypocrites. However, it will inform others of their hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/01/19 12:16 PM
1

Why do you believe these things about women? 90% of my post was about men. The only bit about women was that they find men who confess to having emotions wimpy. Specifically, what led to this place? I've confessed to having emotions to women and called a wimp because of it. I've also seen it happen countless time both IRL to my friends and online it is pretty prevalent. Perhaps you've been living under a rock if you haven't experienced this. I made wrote this because you seemed genuinely curious…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/01/19 10:36 PM
1

I genuinely fancy men who rescue ducklings from sewers and show tenderness towards the weak and helpless. I don't see that being disputed anywhere. Joining voluntary efforts and having causes are pros, not cons. Taking care of things is a strength, not a weakness. However, there is a huge problem. And this problem creates the situations you're describing. You see, men are not supposed to have emotions. Women find men who have emotions wimpy. Women want men to do the things one would do if they h…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/19 07:26 PM
3

Brad Pitt's character, Tyler Durden, did not actually exists. He and the narrator were extreme sides of the same character. Therefore nothing any of them said actually reflected reality. The reality was more likely the midpoint between Tyler and Narrator's views. Tyler thought they were pissed, Narrator thought they were sad and broken. The reality I think the audience is supposed to infer from this is that these were guys who did not understand how to express their emotions, be it sadness, ange…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/19 06:52 PM
7

Just like Fight Club, they’re now very pissed off about it. ffs stop misrepresenting FC. No one in FC was "pissed". Everyone were stoic. Even when they were beating the crap out of each other they were stoic. That was the point, that men weren't allowed to show any emotions so they had to "offload" their bottled emotions via violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/19 06:27 PM
3

Somebody else already said this, but the term "toxic masculinity" originally meant aspects of masculinity that is hurtful towards the men themselves. It was toxic in the sense of "toxic relationships". A toxic relationship doesn't mean relationships are bad. It means in some relationships, the people in the relationship hurt each other instead of supporting each other. Likewise, "toxic masculinity" meant that in some friendships, male friends hurt each other instead of supporting each other. Exa…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/01/19 10:17 AM
1

We won't measure it fairly. Well I guess that's where our differences lie. I believe one can overcome their internal biases, it seems you don't. I didn't bring up natural disasters. Your OP was about blame assigned by feminists/RPillers. I was working in that context. My OP is that assigning blame is counter-productive in general. That's why I had three separate examples, only one of which was related to dating. But yes, I brought this up because it can also be specifically applied to dating and…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/19 02:47 AM
2

By assuming you are at fault Or you can just not assume and assess the situation and act accordingly. That way you're acting efficiently at all time instead of just "the majority" of times. There's no need to "approximate" the level of blame when you can just measure it. Nevertheless, my argument wasn't about what the "appropriate level of blame" is. It's about placing blame and fault being counter-productive in the first place. You have yet to actually make an argument about why placing fault i…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/19 02:24 AM
2

otherwise information doesn't do shit I don't really agree. they'll have to learn through personal experience This is what happens for a lot of people because some parents believe that's the only way kids will learn, so they don't attempt to educate their children on avoiding toxic relationships. There are also people who lack parental figures for various reasons who will have to learn by trial and error. When it comes to government, I don't personally see anything done on this front. The govern…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/01/19 12:46 AM
2

simply cut them out of your life. It might be that someone might not have the control required to cut toxic people from their life. For instance, some children might be stuck with immature parents. I get the feeling that you're taking the amount of control you have over your own life, and extending that to everyone else, assuming everyone must have equal control as you regardless of their situation, which isn't necessarily true.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 11:53 PM
1

An infinitely intelligent person could simulate the universe And a god could just snap his fingers and make anything happen. But no one is a god and no one is an infinitely intelligent person so if you go and tell someone who's having trouble in their life to "just be infinitely intelligent bruh", that would indeed be ridiculously bad advice. A better advice is to teach the person an efficient way to make do with what he has in life, with his limited intelligence, knowledge, and control.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 11:49 PM
2

People aren't random number generators. This particular person was using a random number generator to decide whether he should punch people in the face. In all seriousness though, I don't think basing your theory around an event that has a likelihood on par with being hit by a meteorite is very sound. That was just a random example. I didn't base my theory on it. You're missing my point, which is that there is an objective amount control one has on a situation irrespective of his particular view…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 11:33 PM
3

I think the society does attempt to advise women on productive mate choice. It's just that it sometimes falls on deaf ears. It might be worthwhile to explore what society can do to educate women on mate choice more robustly in order to better equip them in avoiding toxic relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 11:14 PM
1

In my post I noted: I'm not "equating" these three and saying they cause the same amount of distress, merely that they do cause an amount of distress which could be prevented I was not equating the harm of "old boy's club" hiring styles with the harm of being rejected in a romantic relationship. I was merely asserting that they both cause some amount of harm. Since the harm of romantic rejection is arguably less than the harm of job rejection (though it really depends on context, I'm generalizin…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 11:07 PM
2

Fault isn't used in situations with natural disasters at all. No one says it's the hurricane's fault. No, but some people might feel that they had done something to "deserve" the hurricane, such as committing sins. But the reality is a hurricane is a natural disaster and it wasn't their fault. If you blame the other person in your relationships, it keeps you from focusing on what you could have done to fix the problem. Maybe there objectively wasn't anything that could've been done. This line of…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:56 PM
1

I think my problem with your argument is that you have an absolutist view of fault. Most people assume fault within themselves and try to make changes. When that fails they could wrongfully assume fault with the situation If you read what I wrote in my post: trying to carve out an "either/or" world where every issue is either 100% self inflicted or 100% other people's fault is counter-productive My argument is that there is no need to either "assume fault within themselves", or "assume fault wit…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:45 PM
2

I see what you mean. My argument was that since 'fault' has negative connotations and humans are not naturally rational beings, specially when they are in an emotional state, bringing up 'fault' does not contribute to the discussion, and therefore is best avoided. You can give them advice without attempting to specify a place of fault and they will be more receptive to that advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:25 PM
2

You just contradicted yourself. If you do believe that fault is irrelevant to the equation, why are you insistent on placing the fault somewhere? You could just not assume any fault at all since it's irrelevant anyway. Imo this has to be realized to motivate someone to change as much as possible. What stops them from being motivated without the placement of fault? Which of these are more motivating? Wear better clothing. It's your fault. Wear better clothing. I don't see anyone being more recept…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:16 PM
1

when things like that happen, I file them under the 2% rule and move on. ah so you don't always maintain an internal locus of control. You just do it 98% of the times. This is important to keep in mind because when you tell someone to always blame themselves, they might take it as 100%, which is not productive. I think you should also consider that the risks in your everyday life is not necessarily the same as any other person's risk. For someone who lives in a more riskier part of town, that na…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:12 PM
1

He wasn't likely, but he did it anyway.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:04 PM
1

I don't see the logical connection. Feeling at fault for things you have no control over is not productive. What good does it to assume fault for things such as accidents and natural disasters?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 10:02 PM
4

Fault or lack there of is irrelevant to the whole equation. This was the gist of my argument, to stop focusing on the fault and instead focus on empathy and possibly improvement.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 09:56 PM
2

you're the only person who is truly in control of whether your life improves or not I think this is a variation of just world fallacy. The reality is that other people in your life can, have an incentive to, and oftentimes do, attempt to prevent you from achieving success in various areas of life and therefore the self can not be "the only" one in control. However, understanding the amount of control you do have and try to maximize its effects on your life can be very helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 09:51 PM
8

The official psychological term for this phenomenon is called the locus of control. I did not know this. Thanks for the link. Personally I think it's best to always try and maintain an internal locus of control, for better or worse. [...] Generally, it's easier to change yourself than to change others. This is true for many cases and generally good practical advice however there is a problem: Outside of your own personal feelings of control, there is an objective source of control in each action…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/01/19 09:35 PM
10

Not sure how helpful this is for you, but I've been to therapy and one of the most useful advice I've ever gotten is to not make plans about goals you don't have direct control over. So for instance, don't ask "how can i get a decent date one day", because that's not directly under your control. No advice will ever be able to guarantee that you will indeed get a decent date at some point. But things that other people said like "continue education", "lift" etc. those are the sorts of goals that y…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/19 01:17 AM
14

Why do you think women love men who are sociopaths? Your post doesn't show "women" love men who are sociopaths. It shows there exist "some" women that do. Others have explained why this could happen from a psychological perspective, but it can also be explained statistically: These particular sociopaths become famous and are known by millions of people. Even if they are so undesirable that only one in a million would want to be with them, that would still mean there are at least several individu…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 09:14 PM
6

This does not add anything you hadn't stated before, and doesn't explain the need to single out gamers. You could've just said dirty stinky people are yellow flags.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 08:48 PM
5

So why did you feel the need to single out gamers? You could've just said I don't like smelly people. This implies you believe all gamers don't care about themselves and their house, which is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:58 PM
10

Women are more attracted to men who show they make good fathers Women are physically attracted to men who would make good fathers biologically, as in guys who have better genes. When a man is holding a baby a women is more likely to say he is handsome. Needs citation. How do you know this? Did you make an experiment?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:49 PM
7

It's not bettering you physically There are videogames that do. Such as VR and motion controlled games. And the ones that don't are no different than any other non-physical hobbies such as watching films or reading books. socially Some games do, such as multiplayer games. And the ones that are solitary are again no different than any other solitary hobbies such as watching films or reading books. professionally, financially It is possible to earn money from gaming, such as via pro gaming, twitch…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:30 PM
6

The premise of the post needs some actual statistics to back it up rather than just anecdotes.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:21 PM
5

Would you feel the same way about the "I'm a photographer!!! I live to take pictures!" person if they were just as involved in their hobby?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:02 PM
8

an hour of video games after work a couple times a week is fine. [...] But as an engrossing and consuming hobby in which you invest significant time and energy [...] not good for you You still haven't formed any actual argument. You're just saying this is fine and that isn't. What makes you the authority on what people should spend their time on and how much? And what is it exactly that makes videogames "not good for you"? Do you have any actual reasoning or you just feel like they're bad?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 07:00 PM
3

it's nonsense. They did scientific studies on it. If you're going to dismiss scientific studies at least try to form an argument about rather just stating it's false. Reading comic books does not. An online message board does not. Watchin Netflix doesnt. Those all seem arbitrary. What exactly prevents comic books, message boards, or netflix from capability of "improving your mind"?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 06:56 PM
8

I'd rather have them in a woman than on a game controller. You can of course have your own personal preferences. And of course you don't have to choose between one or the other, it's perfectly possible to do both. (Though maybe not simultaneously) Nevertheless, none of that is evidence that videogames are "bad" as you put it. You just reiterated that you don't personally like them.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 06:49 PM
2

No. One guy who seems alpha to one person might seem beta to someone else. It's all subjective.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 06:43 PM
14

This is a substitute for real success you'd feel if you kicked ass at the gym Why is gym "real" success but getting good at videogames is not? Seems arbitrary to me. Almost like you just don't like videogames and want to judge people based on their hobbies. Computer hobbies in general are bad, actually. So hobbyist programmers are red flags?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/19 06:34 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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