TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

OliveBranch233 Archive

View 0 posts and 543 comments by OliveBranch233 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)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yes. I hold my moral principles because I believe the world they inspire will be explicitly to my benefit. A world with less harms, fewer prejudices, and broader social and economic freedoms is definitionally a reward.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/25 01:50 PM
1

no one is telling you how to behave do and be these things to expect any romantic success. You and I seem to have a fundamental disagreement about what it means to be confident, as opposed to merely acting confident. I don't mind acting, I do it all the time, but I'm not fond of the act being a constant expectation. The idea that it is expected that people either lie their ass off to get anywhere, or forgo their right to complain is something I consider objectionable.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 10:28 PM
1

Inability to see nuance, and making a simple topic complicated? I'm not even angry, I'm mostly just bone-tired at this point. Being polite to strangers, classmates, and coworkers hasn't made me "pleasant to be around." It's just made me "not a wet blanket." There's grey in that, one might even argue there's room for nuance. Being polite is measurably distinct from being charming by that metric.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 03:05 PM
1

I'm not entirely sure "simply being pleasant to be around," is as binary as "you're either pleasant to be around or an unpleasant person." That flattens human interaction all the way down to people you enjoy being around and people you would rather avoid. There's no accounting for the pedestrian social interactions of classmates or coworkers or strangers on the street, or apathy at large. The ability to project Confidence or Charm, I also think, is measurably distinct from Confidence or Charm as…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:54 PM
1

Lying is easy. I'm not fond of being told the only way to get anywhere is to do so ad nauseam.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:48 PM
1

Where are you finding 'socially incompetent' in anything I said?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:42 PM
1

There's a difference between a skill and an affectation. I don't mind developing skills, I do mind being told how to behave. Confidence and Charm are not skills, they're personality traits, and I don't like being told I have to lie about having them to get anywhere.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:41 PM
0

"Be charming and confident," Not to be exceptionally autistic, but I don't think it's good practice to lie to prospective partners, or even possible friends by adopting an insincere front. It's just draining. I'm not comfortable with being handed a script of basic human conduct, and getting told the only way to get anywhere is to adopt an array of personality traits that aren't natural to maintain. It's draining.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 05:52 AM
3

Knowing the game is rigged doesn't provide me a strong moral incentive to cheat for a chance at victory. Call me an idealist, but I hold on to hope that relationships can be built without manipulation.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:58 AM
3

I personally think gendered standards of conduct are shit whether it's Myron Gaines or Mila Kunis trying to determine the ideal social niche for another human being. Being told to do tricks for a scrap of human connection doesn't have much appeal to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:50 AM
2

The difference matters aesthetically, not mechanically. I also don't see the problem in expecting men to become more competent social engineers, but if the only means men have through which to mend the gap is subterfuge and masking, then I imagine the possible outcomes are fairly limited.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 04:31 AM
2

And I'm pointing out that that request is just asking for men to become better manipulators.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 02:55 AM
1

What makes it ridiculous? Are you not adopting a deliberate affect in order to solicit the most favorable response? A persuasive essay or call to action is only different from a sales pitch or a con in the sense that you're arguably trying to guide someone to better ends than your own self-fulfilment.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 12:06 AM
0

By definition, altering the delivery of a sentiment such that the listener is more amenable is an act of manipulation. Comms 101 doesn't care about the difference between honest and effective communication, so it makes sense that such a distinction wouldn't be relevant to the course.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 11:00 PM
1

Uncharitable? How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 05:50 PM
1

So the answer lies in manipulative framing as opposed to earnest disclosure. Neat. Lying is always helpful.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 05:39 PM
12

Some people don't have the luxury of ignoring what society thinks of them. It'll influence everything from their job prospects to their capacity to buy a home.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:04 PM
1

The choice is inherently suspicious.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:00 PM
1

Exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:56 PM
3

We've circled this drain at least thrice. There is not "only an upside" to lying. It just perpetuates the loop.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 04:33 AM
2

I do, frequently. The results vary.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 04:11 AM
1

He also has nothing to lose from a bit of investment-free ragebaiting. I've got no means or measure of homie's character, and absent either, I've got no reason to trust or distrust him.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 04:09 AM
1

And here I am, agreeing with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 04:06 AM
5

All the casual sex in the world wouldn't solve my loneliness either. Contrary to whatever narrative you've internalized, I'd feel better with a healthy social life and a community I consider trustworthy than a revolving door of apathetic fuckbuddies. The problem wouldn't be solved either way, but the bigger dent will be done with a systemic solution than an arbitrary amount of weightless sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:53 AM
3

If you're trying to dodge the topic, you get caught out for dodging, and get treated with suspicion. If you don't dodge the topic, you're treated with suspicion. Why is lying the route that does the minimum necessary damage?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:39 AM
3

I agree. It sucks that some people can work their entire lives and not earn enough to take a vacation, or pay for an emergency, or pay their way through the various resource gates between the average Joe and a lady of the night. Wages really haven't kept up with production.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:36 AM
3

"The inability to dress it up?" Are you advocating for a form of prosocial lying here?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 03:12 AM
3

Stigma is there to weed out the dangerous, but it hits too many others in the splash zone. In OP's case, or the case of others like him, and that's just a problem people have to navigate. I think it's fair to be vexed by the problem, especially if it continues to impede one's romantic pursuits.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:54 AM
4

As far as I'm concerned, I'd settle for a consistent d&d table, or a reliable support group, or a park that regularly gathers people I can build a meaningful sense of comeraderie with, but even the most intimate friendship cannot fulfill all social needs
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:51 AM
2

So you broadly see the outline of the catch-22. Lying buys time, but it doesn't scaffold the fundamental problems implicit in assumptions surrounding virginity. Being honest opens the floodgates on each of those assumptions, reducing someone's likelihood of losing their virginity in the first place. If being honest is a risk, and lying is a risk, then the problem seems to still be that people hold implicit assumptions about the character of older virgins that earnestly diminishes their odds of s…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:33 AM
2

I didn't say evasion wasn't allowed, I said it had consequences often indistinguishable from admitting to virginity in the first place.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:15 AM
2

Depends on the girl. If a random girl on the street said it, my answer would be leagues different than if one of my d&d buddies said it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 02:01 AM
4

Overshare? Are you still assuming that guys are just in the habit of offering the information that they've had no romantic or sexual partners in casual conversation? I thought we covered that already. I'm not in the habit of repeating myself, but I do think "I dont want to share-" is indistinguishable from a deflection. It's the same sort of argument as pleading the fifth to an accusation, and it elicits a similar response from interlocutors. These aren't conversations had with strangers, typica…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 01:48 AM
5

You mean, a stigma against the people who failed and lack the shamelessness to deflect from that failure.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 01:32 AM
0

Which men?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 01:03 AM
1

There's a difference between "responsible for," and "complicit in"
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 12:57 AM
5

A symptom other people will notice and react to, which perpetuates the stigma you understand?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 12:50 AM
4

There's a few intuitions baked into this scenario that don't pan out very well. I'm willing to bet OP isn't doing cold approaches, which means he's not just telling strangers he hasn't had a previous partner. It's prospective partners, people he's nominally had the chance to talk to and build a rapport with. Potential friends, who are at least known enough to raise these questions and react to OP being cagey and evasive.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 12:30 AM
7

Yes, it can be done, no that doesn't mean it's effective rhetoric for this situation. The idea that someone can just say "I don't want to talk about it," and not be met with the immediate social calculation for why someone would want to hide that is a delusion. It doesn't bear out in practice, especially in environments where the average person isn't especially mature around the subject of virginity, like a school, or club, or date.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 12:14 AM
11

The Tone of the message doesn't meaningfully change it's content. Framing singlehood as something noble or respectable doesn't erase the implicit stigma of incompetence that comes with virginity after a certain point.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 11:57 PM
1

No? The comment is up there.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/25 11:37 PM
-7

See this? This is what happens when you look at people as a mass of individuals as opposed to participants in a massive system. You're not engaging with the framework here, boss. You're not accounting for the ways in which Patriarchy as a system coerces behavior from men and women.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/25 11:22 PM
7

Fair enough. I'm happy for you and yours.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 09:51 PM
9

Do you know the difference between bringing it up and it being brought up?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 09:22 PM
11

Any problem that can be solved with money is definitionally a problem that disproportionately affects people who can't afford the solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 09:21 PM
10

Do you know the difference between an anecdote and qualitative evidence?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 09:19 PM
11

This
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 09:17 PM
1

You're waiting on a monolith of thought from a community that can't even decide if political lesbianism is praxis?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/25 07:01 PM
-9

This post would be significantly more useful if it integrated a feminist perception of what exactly the patriarchy is, as opposed to asserting that it somehow only concerns a few groups of feminists. If you don't have a shared understanding of how the system is organized, from the top down, by multiple interlocking systems of control, you are only ever going to be able to engage with the most flanderized version of feminist thought.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates30/10/25 04:36 PM
0

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:28 PM
1

Then why did you do it? You can't expect anyone who's engaging seriously with a post about how altruism doesn't exist to think you chose specifically to do something you get nothing out of. It would be contradictory.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:16 PM
2

What makes this post more trustworthy than any other voice in cyberspace?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:10 PM
4

What makes you more altruistic than any other voice in cyberspace?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:09 PM
1

You're not answering the question, boss. How does being more selective as an individual, increase your odds of success in a machine that doesn't communicate your selectivity to women who are already assuming that you're swiping as rapidly as everyone else? As someone who only swipes on people I'm interested in, it doesn't seem to be working any better than opening the floodgates to every possible option.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 02:21 PM
1

I wasn't disputing the likelihood of learning more about something by reading. I was disputing the likelihood of finding someone by wasting valuable swipe time lowering your rate of exposure by reading. This conversation was had elsewhere already, but you're not really navigating the dilemma here. Unless you can measurably confirm the odds of success are higher by being deliberate and intentional while droves of men in identical positions are effectively DDosing your best potential match, I don'…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 04:20 AM
1

Your moral intuitions about right and wrong aren't exactly common sense if they're not held in common with others. That's just your values inflating their worth. That's the 'common' in 'common sense', boss.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 03:02 AM
1

So it's beyond your imagination, but not an impossibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 02:35 AM
0

Common sense is a tool of nebulous utility at best. Two hundred years ago, it was common sense that black people just weren't human. Fifty years ago it was just common sense that gay people certainly had the right to be gay, but it would be stupid of them to push for marriage equality. Ten years ago it was common sense that rhetoric on the internet has no practical applications in modern politics. Why is today's common sense any better?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 02:33 AM
1

Almost never?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 01:36 AM
1

And how are you drawing this conclusion?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 01:11 AM
1

And you think the average guy wouldn't consider an irl date with everyone they swipe across?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 12:48 AM
0

How do you know that if you don't know the degree of difference between the two strategies?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:09 PM
0

How much more likely?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 10:39 PM
1

What's "genuine" in this context?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 10:29 PM
2

If you're looking for an antithesis to your claim, it would probably be something like: "a lot of people in the manosphere are not inherently antisocial monsters bemoaning their lack of slave women. I think there's praxis in trying to reach them."
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 12:00 AM
–

I know. And I'd love to dispute your claim at length, but I'm not entirely sure it's useful. "A lot of these idiots did it to themselves," okay and? What's the use in this conversation? Does it do anything for the people who didn't?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:54 PM
–

This reads like a screed of personal grievances against less-than-preferable personality traits than any kind of practical attempt to engage with the foundations of any given quality. What's the intended outcome here?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:39 PM
1

Do you think there's a distinction between a strong emotional motivation to believe something, and a conviction that such a thing is true? Because if so, I hope you recognize the enormity of trying to argue through someone else's strongly held principles in order to convince them of moral intuitions they may not even possess. I'm as big a fan of rhetorical refinement as anybody, but at the end of the day, even having a counter for every argument doesn't make an interlocutor more convincing than …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/25 10:10 PM
1

I was hoping that by disagreeing I could illustrate how useless your rhetorical strategy is here. You seem to be under the illusion that everyone's moral code will lead them directly to your opinion when they take the time to think about it, and I have circled that drain enough times to know that some people just don't share an understanding of what certain words mean. Exploitation, for example. You seem convinced that a normal life with a regular job isn't exploitative.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/10/25 12:54 PM
1

I don't really believe in objective morality, and I hold a healthy amount of cynicism towards the idea of holding onto values just because most people feel them to be true. Two hundred years ago most people thought it true that people like me were subhuman beasts of burden for someone else's plantation, after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:11 PM
1

Humanity knows sexual abuse is evil? Boss, the definition of "sexual abuse" has changed pretty dramatically as our understanding of morality has refined with the ages. That isn't something we Know, it's something we made up, and keep making up as we better understand how our actions harm others. What's the point of your question btw?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 07:44 PM
–

Asexual men exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/10/25 05:22 PM
1

And compared to many more they're unlucky. This isn't useful advice, doc. You may as well tell a kid to eat their vegetables because starving Africans wouldn't be so picky.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/25 12:02 PM
1

As much as the Jordan Peterson method might be fun, it might be more practical to actually take a position here. There's a compelling argument that people don't actually need freedom to live, and the idea that something as abstract as freedom from exploitation is inherently more valuable than something as distinct as sexual intimacy is a fascinating claim to make, and I'd love for your interlocutor to explain further.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/25 02:07 AM
1

You're, as always, free to not listen. By all means, live as you want, but does it seem prudent to tell other people that their pain is irrelevant because it doesn't meet your metric? Who do you intend to convince with that argument?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/10/25 01:26 AM
1

You misunderstood me. Just because not getting sex "should not" cause anybody pain, doesn't necessarily mean that not getting sex "does not" necessarily cause somebody pain. To look at anybody who is clearly experiencing duress, and tell them they're feeling the wrong thing about their situation, is an impractical strategy at best, and outright condescending at worst.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 08:15 PM
1

"Should not" is quite different from "does not"
/r/PurplePillDebate09/10/25 05:12 AM
1

'Just reframe your perception of an experience' is remarkably ineffective advice. You may as well have said "stop experiencing pain," boss.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/10/25 12:59 AM
1

No, because a flavorless life is it's own form of torture.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 10:06 PM
2

That wasnt me, your interlocutor was saying that it is possible to survive off basic nutritional needs being met, in much the same way as it is possible to survive without sex or intimacy. Flavor, or Sex, are similarly extraneous.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 07:24 AM
1

So some people need flavor in addition to nutrition, is what you're saying? Because it sounds like you've been arguing for the last leg of this convo that people don't need flavor to survive life.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 07:01 AM
1

Do people need flavor, or do they need nutrition?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/10/25 06:31 AM
1

Of course?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 07:32 PM
1

I think it's unfair to expect expertise from laymen. I do think giving them the just cause to tap out when they feel slightly inconvenienced isn't particularly helpful to anyone. Letting people recede into their insular self-preservation methods is generally poor praxis.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 06:05 PM
2

It seems a little insincere to take up ballroom dancing for the sake of finding a partner, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 05:47 PM
1

I agree with the idea that they shouldn't feel the need to make themselves miserable for the sake of others, but that's a pretty messy metric for how much help it's reasonable to expect from others. Where is the line between put-out and incapable? I think people should feel a measure of responsibility for the well being of the people around them, and I don't think misery is a useful metric for who gets to absolve themselves of that responsibility.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 05:45 PM
1

I think that detriment is a consequence of any social interaction, no? No matter what happens, you're going to have to burn energy to engage with others.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 05:34 PM
1

There's an element of personal responsibility, sure. I agree that people have a responsibility to themselves, to be the best they can be, but we're still a social species. To say we have no responsibility to support others when they're clearly struggling is something I consider to be very dangerous. There's nobody on the planet who can just look at their own thoughts and change them without assistance and community, and I think more people should be aware of how valuable they are in facilitating…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 05:17 PM
2

As someone who is alone, solitude is it's own form of pressure. At the very least, people who have toxic views didn't spawn into the universe with those views fully developed. I find more utility in assessing the origin point for those views and trying to detangle them from someone's lived experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 05:01 PM
1

What makes an insult insulting?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 03:42 PM
3

Isn't this something of a "no true scotsman" argument? The idea that only toxic women think this way paints a pretty significant chunk of dateable feminists as toxic
/r/PurplePillDebate04/10/25 03:24 PM
1

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 03:04 PM
1

Sure, that's possible. There could be any number of factors in my presentation that are uniquely flawed in such a way as to directly impact my capacity to meaningfully construct a sincere relationship with others. But my feelings towards "myself" are distinct from my feelings towards "women," and "people." The question was how I feel about women, not how I feel about my situation where women are concerned, no? I've already made peace with the board as far as men and coworkers and peers are conce…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 07:04 AM
3

I find these issues with men I talk to, absolutely. The difference is just in scale. Guys just think I'm terse and mechanical, while I've been accused of outright sociopathy by women in similar environments.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 06:31 AM
6

A, I'm a man B, I'm a Black Man, with all the associated cultural baggage associated with protecting even an ounce of malice C, I'm autistic, which makes my emotions already hard to read if I'm not careful
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 06:19 AM
3

Vexation. Pure, unadulterated Vexation. It seems impossible to meaningfully and earnestly communicate with most women in my life in a manner that will not be immediately construed as some form of threat or hostility, even when I preface my thoughts well in advance. Building relationships with them, even friendships, is a constant practice of artifice and formality that feels like I need to gaslight people into thinking I'm tolerable before I'm allowed even an ounce of earnest expression. I don't…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/10/25 06:09 AM
6

The best job in the world doesn't negate the fact that the job is mandatory. I can love a job and still hate the fact that I need money to live. The nature of the complaint doesn't change, even if the backdrop and context do. In that space, complaints are an exit valve for stress that cannot be leveraged into significant change.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/25 04:45 PM
5

Some changes can't be made. I can complain about a job all day every day, but I still need money to live.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/25 04:33 PM
1

Are humans perfectly rational?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/25 03:17 PM
7

Complaints are cathartic. Sometimes it just feels good to get some personal demons off one's chest.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/25 03:14 PM
3

How are you drawing this conclusion?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/09/25 03:11 PM
1

If ever there was a thought-terminating cliché in this subreddit-
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/25 03:59 PM
1

Then it sounds like there's a significant logistical flaw in an inability to navigate ambiguity. Counselors recognize that as a common obstacle when running client interventions.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 02:47 AM
1

Then this seems like a recruitment opportunity. If it is true that men are needed, and it is also true that men do not feel needed, then there is reason to believe that work can be done on that front
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 02:31 AM
2

Without scholarly literature on the means and motivations of the redpill, I don't really think anyone has the authority to describe exactly what it is. Different people from separate economic positions will describe it differently, much like different grifters have conflicting definitions of wokeness to mask a larger, and distinctly more specific cultural project. Besides, I'm not claiming that they're foils to each other, only that the arguments you're using to disparage one can, have, and will…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 12:35 AM
1

Are you looking anywhere? I can think of about three content creators who occupy exactly the lane I'm discussing, two club representatives attempting to do exactly what I'm describing, and one university program populated by men trying to so function as role models for their community. They may not have the pull or influence of a Tate or Rogan, but they do exist. What men do you know well enough to explain their disengagement?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 12:21 AM
2

Is scholarly literature what makes a philosophy?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 12:16 AM
1

You are remarkably determined not to hear me, I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 12:15 AM
1

Liberation is dependent on everyone's actions. Overcoming the fear of failure is something everyone has to do, and in the singular situation of men fearing the predatory perception often associated with men occupying positions of care & mentorship, that is a fear they will have to overcome. I don't agree that it needs to be overcome independently, by their own force of will, without any facilitation, but I agree that finding a point of engagement past that anxiety response is useful. What is not…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 08:48 PM
1

it's not the world's job to cross it for you It is society's obligation to itself and its future to make that gap as small as possible. Fear and isolation just make people easier to exploit. you are largely all just complaining online and blaming women for not sleeping with you Largely? This sounds like correlating exposure and scale to me, boss. The loudest voices on the internet are not the average guy struggling with insecurity. That motherfucker doesn't have friends to complain to, let alone…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 08:27 PM
1

I'm "essentially" saying that it's poor praxis to look at someone telling you why they're afraid to do something and telling them to do it anyway. Any practicing counselor, student of psychology, or clinically trained social worker will tell you that you can't brute force someone through that type of ambivalence. The mind doesn't cross that gap of its own accord in most cases, see the entire existence of cognitive dissonance. This isn't a matter of having different gendered scripts. It's a quest…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 08:07 PM
1

Hypocrisy is part of the game, boss. Weren't you the one talking about how people need to engage with the status quo as it is?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 07:42 PM
1

How hopeful are men that those issues will be resolved? There's a compelling argument that plenty of them successfully recuse themselves of the next census if they see no odds of success.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 07:37 PM
1

It feels like I said this hours ago, but "fearing the potential consequences of their intervention," is a valid concern, and worth helping people work through. Recognizing and accommodating a visible point of insecurity shouldn't be something guys should just be expected to thug out for the sake of fixing the rest of the world.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 07:20 PM
1

Making sure people have access to emergency food, being an active, empathetic participant in my relevant communities, attending clubs, assisting underclassmen in getting acclimated to university environments, and constantly checking on my friends to make sure they have an open line of communication where I'm concerned. More importantly, I'm showing up in ways that aren't determined by the way the word is, but by the way I believe the world should be. And I believe the world should be safer for g…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 07:11 PM
1

I'm not the one who needs help. At the very least, I've already placed my life support mask is on the topic of becoming a more fully-integrated human being. If you have a plan for fixing the people who are fully suffering that doesn't involve sitting on your hands and waiting for them to drag themselves onto your doorstep, I don't think shrugging and going "that's just how the world is," is sufficient. I can acknowledge what will happen while still advocating for improvements where they're neede…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 05:35 PM
1

I earnestly could care less about what society will do when discussing what i believe society should be doing. Providing examples of how society pressures men to maintain a level of emotional distance in order to maintain the associated privileges of patriarchy is a textbook discussion, and I'm not particularly interested in talking theory with a ghost in cyberspace. Your disregard for those pressures because I chose the wrong word is not a limitation I'm inclined to accommodate for the purposes…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 05:16 PM
1

Are you the type of interlocutor who claims that slavery doesn't matter anymore because it was 200 years ago? Or perhaps you're so fixated on the scale of the word "persecution" in your mind that you can't conceptualize a consistent and pervasive cultural pressure simply because it's not present in your lived experiences? Either way, you're doing something I find especially irritating, wherein you use your worldview as a shield against the experienced reality of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 05:04 PM
2

Again, I agree. Feminism is a far more complex school of thought than man-bad, woman-victim. There's layers, intricacies, and depending on whether or not you lean towards radfem schools of thought, intersectional feminist thought, or socialist feminism as your particular guiding anchor, some of the ideas brought up by first wave or dworkinite arguments just won't find ground in every individual feminist. It would be an incredibly stupid argument to claim that because there are points of conflict…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 03:55 PM
2

. . . So because there is a rationalization for every belief the redpill holds, they put no thought into their beliefs? Again, if someone said "All feminists talk about is how patriarchy harms women, they don't have any real thoughts in their belief system," you would call that laughable. I would call that laughable. How is this different?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 03:48 PM
1

I'm not asking you to justify that the redpill is misogynist. We agree on that. I'm asking you to justify the redpill as thoughtless. Why argue that it's not a coherent philosophy because of the divisions within it's schools of thought when those divisions are present in feminism as well?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 03:44 PM
1

Am I talking to a chat bot? Do you only respond in platitudes and thought-terminating clichés? Please, I'm genuinely begging you to substantiate any of your claims with a reasonable argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 03:21 PM
1

You do realize that rhetorical structure can and has been applied to feminism (backwards justification for hating men), and Christianity (backwards justification for hating heathens) as well, right? "This theoretical framework is only useful for oppressing my people," is not a useful argument to make, because everybody's making that argument. The redpill is absolutely complicit in harming women, but it is still a school of thought that has influence and impact that need to be accounted for compe…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:38 PM
1

Dating is expensive too lmao. The idea is that Dating allows a guy to continue to live in the dissonance of wanting "only sex," as they attempt to build a "meaningful interpersonal relationship." They don't have to confront the contrast, because part of Dating assumes both needs will be met if the process goes well
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:31 PM
2

You don't have a truth claim though. You have an experiential claim at best, and a personal narrative at worst. "A lot of men don't see the value in doing anything that won't have a grand impact" is a horrid take that any father with a healthy bond with their kids would scoff at on principle, let alone the raving masses of incels in this server who have been fairly forthright about just having reasonable odds of romantic success. The utility of "a lot of men arent willing to help young men becau…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:28 PM
1

I get the feeling you're not especially studied in male experiences. A man supporting another man is remarkably likely to face social consequences for being visibly or publicly intimate. That's part of the whole "save that weak shit for your wife," mechanism of patriarchy. Displays of compassion, empathy, 'softness,' are things that meaningfully reduce the average man's access to community specifically because those values are publicly maligned for men to display. The perception of softness is c…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:22 PM
5

Worth noting, feminism is a coherent philosophy, and also not a monolith. Christianity, broadly speaking, is a coherent series of religious values, and is broken down into hundreds of specialized sects and faiths in a very similar way. Coherence doesn't necessarily mean monolithic.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:17 PM
3

This sounds dangerously close to cementing a worldview from personal anecdote, which is common enough, I guess, but I don't really see a lot of utility in this narrative.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:11 PM
1

The improbability of a fear doesn't invalidated the fear itself. If men should take point on navigating male issues in society, it seems prudent to ensure an environment wherein navigating those issues isn't immediately met with the creeping dread of failure or persecution.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 02:07 PM
3

This take feels like it crawled out of the 1950s tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 01:39 PM
5

Ditto
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 01:39 PM
1

Because "simply sex" is a surface-level read, and sex workers can be prohibitively expensive to men who are living paycheck to paycheck.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 01:38 PM
1

That seems reason enough to help people navigate the insecurities associated with beginning that type of behavior, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 01:21 PM
2

As a fatherless, lonely man, I would argue there's a much larger conversation about society's obligations to itself than "men really need to look after other men." Ignoring the strange undercurrent of bioessentialism that asserts that "only men can solve this problem," I'm not particularly inclined to believe that men are consciously choosing to perpetuate that system unmotivated. The irrationality of their concerns doesn't make them invalid.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 01:06 PM
2

To that end, I'm doing more than my fair share of community engagement. I'm personally choosing to help people with my own volunteer work, but that's not something I'm inclined to impose on others by declaring their fears and anxieties as unreasonable. "Barely hit the needle," is a measurement that only those deciding for themselves whether or not to engage in community engagement can make. It's something approaching arrogance to make that claim in their stead.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 12:54 PM
3

A difference in scale, not in kind.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 11:54 AM
5

"Don't be a criminal, and there's no reason to fear the police"-ass argumentation
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 10:47 AM
3

Do you have a meaningful source for your claim that most men just don't care, or is that an anecdote with the exact same weight as the guys describing that they do care?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 10:45 AM
1

"Comparison is the thief of joy," is not advice I've found any more practical than "ignorance is bliss," because comprehension is something I value very highly.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 07:07 PM
1

I'm not particularly vulnerable to platitudes.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 07:03 PM
1

The value of statistics is context. Of the best relationships I've had, they were informed by a strong understanding of an individual's context, of which statistics were a useful means of conceptualizing when and where someone's life deviated from the qualitative averages. What people have in common is a statistic, as is what makes people different, and sorting through those is a practice I find deeply meaningful when comparing a friend to their family or community.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 06:19 PM
1

That sounds, with all the empathy I can reasonably muster, like a skill issue. If you can't hold the individual and the experiences that formed that individual in the same hand, I hesitate to believe you're putting any effort into seeing them at all. Adulthood taught me that people are their experiences, and that seeing a person requires understanding the world they come from as well as how they've chosen to navigate that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 05:47 PM
1

I'm not sure I agree with your intuition of treating people as a statistic is a fruitless way to go through life. I find myself far more empathetic and considerate of individuals when I recognize their individuality as a unique amalgamation of statistics. I can see people much more comprehensibly when the paths that result in their existence are percievable as opposed to veiled in my own willful ignorance of how they came to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 05:32 PM
1

Individual interactions do exist, that doesn't mean they exist in a vacuum, uninformed by the rest of the world's machinations. I find freedom in recognizing individuality as the unique tapestry that has resulted in any given person's position on the chain of cause and effect, but I'm not arrogant enough to assume that person exists independently of everything else around them. Nobody is that untethered.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 04:20 PM
1

This would apply, already, to every single person in existence Yes. Welcome to participating in a society, and being mindful of social norms & influences. Individuals exist, but it is the very height of hubris to assume any of them exist independently of the communal pressures imposed upon everyone. How they respond to those pressures may be multifaceted, but it's not unpredictable. There are entire scientific fields dedicated to such assessment & analysis. we are not interacting with the writer…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 03:48 PM
1

Why did they choose Netflix? Why did you for that matter? Someone else's values, resources, or cultural cache shaped both decisions at play, even if indirectly. You didn't stumble across the recipe or number for the pizza through your own independent explorations, and the pizza wasn't crafted or delivered by your own hand. None of the shows on Netflix were performed by you, and I'm fairly willing to bet the algorithm that fed you consumable content wasn't programmed by your hand either. Involved…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 03:30 PM
1

nobody else is involved in my one-to-one interactions except her and I. This is notably and measurably false.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 03:19 PM
1

People are individuals, and they react in hundreds of different ways depending on the situation, but those situations aren't unpredictable. Living life under the illusion that they are doesn't seem particularly freeing. It just looks like outsourcing the labor of anticipating the consequences of your own actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 03:13 PM
1

You get security by being less guarded? Not for nothing, but that reads as contradictory. Typically going shields down increases vulnerability, not the opposite.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 02:09 PM
1

More power to you, but that's not an especially convincing argument for people trying to find an inch of security in a turbulent world
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 01:57 PM
3

Casual sex uncoerced by economic incentives is distinct from long-term relationships. Like I said, some people want to be wanted, and prostitutes don't fill that need.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 01:17 PM
1

Or well-poised enough to run through the list of possibilities as they emerge. Preparing for the most likely outcomes is better than choosing to be unprepared for anything.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 01:14 PM
1

That sounds like a flaw in the system of Advice
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 12:56 PM
1

A valid reason for them to consider that advice as crap
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 12:51 PM
2

You literally repeated your argument without changing a single detail. Again, store-bought donuts are fine, and have their place, but that's incomparable to a donut homemade by someone who wanted to see you happy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 12:40 PM
6

I think this fails to encapsulate the desire to feel desired. Paying for a service worker to assist in some casual masturbation is well and good, but there is less than zero reason to believe said worker desires anything from you but the rather mercenary transaction of the good old come-and-go. It might be a useful economic act, and serve some mechanical functions, but I don't think it addresses the meaningful sense of undesireability that haunts. All things being equal, therapy helps some peopl…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 04:54 AM
6

Sounds like a rigged game for scoundrels
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 04:47 AM
1

At least one is
/r/PurplePillDebate26/08/25 04:44 AM
1

That almost sounds like an improvement, but I'm at least more empathetic than that. Drama would, if nothing else, be more stimulating than stagnation.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/08/25 11:53 PM
2

Do you not flinch just slightly that the best advice for men on the autism spectrum is just to lie? I may not feel fully comfortable existing unmasked in neurotypical spaces, but the idea that the best way to improve an autistic person's romantic prospects is to teach them not to be autistic is so horrifically bleak.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 11:36 PM
–

So his options were constrained.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 03:23 PM
2

"That's life" is not a particularly useful rhetorical strategy. Life sucks, and it will continue to suck until it sucks less. That's not a good reason to make life suck more in hope that it theoretically sucks less sooner.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 11:21 PM
1

That is an issue yes. There are some strategies for navigating discomfort, but very few arguments to convince someone they should experience discomfort for nebulous ends.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:59 PM
1

It's a matter of scale boss. The soreness of lifting beyond your weight class isn't comparable to the dread of not knowing where or when your next meal is, but it is rhetorically prudent to recognize that different people have different frameworks for what is and isn't bearable.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:54 PM
-3

"Kill" and "hurt" are completely different things. Going to the gym might not kill, but to the inexperienced there is a lot of suffering that goes into building that habit.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:48 PM
1

What is "actual accountability?" I feel like this is a precedent that could be leveraged fairly maliciously.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:38 PM
1

it never hurts to try
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:35 PM
0

Define "harm"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:33 PM
2

All of which is as reasonable an assumption as you're just offering advice out of the kindness of your heart. More reasonable if someone's especially cynical.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 10:08 PM
1

That TikTok is a cesspool of anecdote and grievance impractical for generating a useful framework for engaging with the general culture of loneliness resulting from current social trends, I am begging you to even try and listen here. Read some bell hooks Watch a video from F.D. or the leftist cooks. Shortform outrage economy shorts are not a practical lens through which to engage with this issue from, because at best you'll only ever be confirming your own biases, and at worst you'll be building…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:52 PM
1

TikTok has incredibly limited utility in devising a useful framework for navigating loneliness. For every video talking about how loneliness is man's personal failing, there's three more examining how every woman is a vile hypergamous temptress ruled by biological imperatives.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:46 PM
1

You know a guy like that? I can name an entire community who's been dunked on for their unhealthy relationships with love and intimacy. You get three guesses which one-
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 11:39 AM
1

Again, plenty of men laugh at the male loneliness epidemic for any number of reasons, but that doesn't discount the fact that plenty of men have had lust & love deliberately conflated for long enough that they legitimately cannot tell the difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 05:38 PM
2

You don't have much of a framework for complacent voters do you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 05:19 PM
14

You can be complicit in harm from a place of apathy. Just ask everyone who's bought a Nestlé product.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 03:55 PM
3

It would be closer to a woman being upset that she's not a 1950's housewife, but you're dangerously close to arguing that feelings should have some sort of rational origin point or material harm in order to be valid, and I think that's much more necessary to interrogate in this moment. Do you think men aren't fucked up as young as children by ideas of masculinity?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 03:42 PM
3

Exactly the same? You know what "comparable" means, right? I feel like you're rather militantly determined to misunderstand me here.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 03:28 PM
2

You haven't read Chainsaw Man, have you? It's going to be much more difficult to explain the specific conflation of desires that comes from being told your entire life that you should seek a specific type of satisfaction, and that any other form of emotional expression is simply unmasculine. I don't think you necessarily have the framework to make sense of the "not getting my dick wet is loneliness," that comes with the patriarchal programming of men being expected to throw all their emotional l…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/08/25 02:47 PM
3

If it never meant that, then people would never use it that way. Besides, this is a particularly fallacious line of thought to begin with. Expecting loneliness to have a specific type of manifestation in all possible cases is like expecting ASD to impact everyone on the spectrum identically. You're not really accounting for the subjectivity of the human experience with this type of claim. Loneliness to you may not come with a sense of intimacy-starvation, but that's no reason to assume such is t…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/25 02:22 PM
3

Are we purity-testing loneliness now?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/25 02:19 AM
1

Your annoyance doesn't meaningfully detract from how systems function. With the assumption that you'd prefer to see the end of patriarchal thinking within the lifetime of your descendents, I think a reasonably accurate perception of the system is more practical than the fallacious belief that men, as a demographic, are rationally coming to the conclusion that binding themselves to patriarchy, and all that comes with it, is to their benefit. The top of the pyramid may be run by men, but it's idio…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 03:29 AM
1

I believe the point of dispute here is your claim of exclusivity. You seem to hold onto the idea that men are exclusively sex-negative in a world where they navigate spaces reinforced by men and non-men. The idea that men are somehow singularly, uniquely sex negative in a world where women can, and often do, adhere more strictly to christian doctrine than men is a ludicrous claim. The argument that boys, all boys, do not respect or care about the opinions of their mothers or teachers is another …
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 03:14 AM
1

Society is still deeply patriarchal, which forces all of its participants to move within its confines in specific, regulated methods. Women are in positions of custody and ownership of boys have more than enough influence to shape the opinions they form on sex and sexuality even before they enter the socialization engine that is schooling. Women don't need to have positions of power and control to parrot the myths sold to them by the community pastor, or by their fathers, to impressionable ears.…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:47 AM
1

You're being sarcastic to ignore how women are themselves complicit in reinforcing patriarchal systems of control. I empathize, really, but you're not engaging with this conversation in any way that's productive for either of us. If you're trapped in the reductive binary of men being singularly and exclusively for their perception of sex and sexuality, there's not an argument I can make to dissuade you, especially if you don't have the language to make sense of what I'm trying to explain.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:33 AM
1

Those are far from all of the possible ways in which a man can be sex negative, and it doesn't include the values internalized by their parents or peers, values that are notably not exclusive to men.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:19 AM
1

All the ways? Each and every single one of them? That's a claim that requires some evidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:00 AM
1

No, I'm trying to explain that people don't make decisions in a vacuum. That's not assigning blame. Apply even a little cultural analysis to your claim that men are sex-negative, and you'll see it's not a uniquely masculine phenomena
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 01:24 AM
1

You legitimately aren't trying to engage with the point I'm trying to make.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 12:27 AM
1

It's not a matter of having the same sex drive, it's a matter of what myths and cultural norms are reinforced by the community. Society is sex negative, and that trickles down into the behaviors enforced and penalized by men and women alike. Neither men nor women are being uniquely sex-negative, and it's a little shallow to attribute either gender's biological constraints. This isn't a conversation about natural impulses. it's an examination of social behaviors.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 10:53 PM
1

? A) amongst themselves, in dorm rooms where they roll their eyes at guys who don't follow their own arbitrary standard of sexual conduct. To their children or nephews when explaining how hormones will actively ruin them and make them unpleasant to be around unless they act with the strictest of discipline B) even if they only said that type of thing in spaces where they're trying to immediately ward off suitors, that's still perpetuating the same sex-negative attitudes of the society they opera…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 10:25 PM
1

See, this is why I think you're ignoring me. I'm not talking about consent, that didn't even enter the conversation. I was talking about the social structures that define what type of sexual expression is and is not acceptable. Women set just as many standards of what is acceptable and shameful as men do.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 10:11 PM
1

Why would I follow a sliding goalpost away from the premise that "men police each other's sexuality?"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 10:07 PM
2

? I don't think you're taking the time to actually engage with what I'm saying. Policing and shaming sexuality isn't a man-exclusive activity. Policing and shaming a man's sexuality specifically isn't even a man-exclusive activity.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 05:07 PM
2

Aren't they? I've seen more than my share of women slutshaming, likening men's behavior to dogs, and decrying what they believe to be "indecent behaviors," for the sake of maintaining their own sense of purity and decorum.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 04:55 PM
2

I'd argue that those are broadly the social consequences of an overly puritanical society. The ideas perpetrated by society to regulate sexual conduct are more than a little regressive in my opinion, but they serve a very clear purpose in pushing conversations about sex and sexuality underground. That's not, like, a "men" thing. That's a "society" thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 04:26 PM
1

Oh? How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 04:19 PM
1

This isn't beating the sex-negative allegations lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 04:13 PM
1

It doesn't need to be reciprocal, sure, but that's not what I said.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 04:00 PM
2

I didn't say it was regrettable. I said it was temporary, impermanent, conditional. If it were possible to lose, then there were conditions to its maintenance.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 03:58 PM
1

While it lasted? That sounds like a loss, my dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/25 03:52 PM
–

This is... measurably false?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/25 09:08 AM
10

Then how did you lose it?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/25 09:05 AM
13

Who exactly patched meaning into life? Did I miss that balance patch, because I have opinions on the idea that life is "meant" to be challenging.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 02:40 PM
1

I'm not entirely sure I see the utility of your usage though? Congratulations on not being dead, but I'm not sure what value is there.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 05:43 PM
1

You and I have very strongly conflicting definitions of alive.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:52 PM
1

Are you particularly adept in being satisfied with an unhappy existence?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:45 PM
1

No. But if you said 'you need money to live, but not love,' I feel like it's reasonable to question what makes money distinct. The slow death from starvation is indistinguishable to me from the living death of solitude.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:39 PM
1

My own definition? I'm actually using definition 6 from the Oxford learner's dictionary "To have a full and exciting life."
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:05 PM
1

You're alive, you're not living. You're maintaining biological functions, not experiencing the joys of life. There is a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:51 PM
1

And again, we circle back to the surviving-living distinction. I don't think survival is worth the price of admission.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:47 PM
1

Romantic love frequently doesn't snap a miserable person out of their misery. That's different from romantic love not making someone happy. A life could be a 6 or 7/10 on scale, and be bumped comfortably from mere survival to thriving with a solid relationship. Sure, romantic love won't cure depression or poverty, but neither will going through the motions of earning money to make rent.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:34 PM
1

Happiness is subjective, but I strongly doubt there's a person on the planet who's subjective experience of Happiness is worse than their subjective experience of unhappiness. having romantic love will never just make someone happy. Didn't you just say happiness is subjective? How do you go from that to "romantic love never makes people happy"?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:25 PM
1

I'm comparing not being "happy" to being a vegetable in a coma. It was said pretty early in this thread that romantic love isn't the only viable form of love for happiness, and I'm inclined to agree. There's more than one path to happiness, but a lot of people haven't reached a point in their lives where they can effectively decenter romantic love. Absent socialized Healthcare, not everyone's going to get the therapy they need to untangle why romantic love is so uniquely valuable to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:17 PM
1

I think you're conflating surviving and living. I am personally of the mind that it's better to be a corpse than a vegetable, and the line between a vegetable and the thoughtless pursuit of money to maintain a standard of living is very thin to me. If I have to survive unhappily, then I cannot imagine a good reason to pursue survival.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:03 PM
1

You need happiness to live. Survival means shockingly little in an apathetic universe.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 02:59 PM
1

For survival, not especially for happiness
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 02:54 PM
1

I'm particularly of the mind that people aren't bad because of their thoughts, but if that's your belief system more power to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 02:53 PM
0

It isn't your responsibility, sure, but it is still a distinct limitation on your ability to make sense of foreign perspectives. You may never need the skill, but it is still a skill issue.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 02:49 PM
0

If you cannot see how someone reached that point, how exactly are you going to see the ways out,
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 02:46 PM
-1

That sounds like a skill issue, to be honest. You're limiting the amount of human experiences you could reasonably make sense of via your own revulsion.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 05:39 AM
1

survive You need money to Survive. People need love to live.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 05:12 AM
0

But - but relationships aren't supposed to be transactional - Listen, bossman, I'm sure you know this already, but people get really steamed when you reduce the mechanics of human relationships to mere exchange of value. I don't know what it is, but people seem utterly convinced that there's some transcendent property there that defies such narrow analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 05:10 AM
3

Do you intend to take personal responsibility for how you interpreted a text that was offering a clear juxtaposition between similar behavior and motives?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/08/25 10:44 PM
1

The only conversations where that is even remotely possible are in vaunted ivory towers cloistered away from the layman populace. Until everyone on the planet has at least an elementary grasp on logic and rhetoric, you will be the only person in most of your conversations trying to find a bedrock of objective reality through the murk and mire of lived experience and bias.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 01:01 AM
1

If your goal is to suggest that they may be wrong or biased, you will have a harder time doing so from a perspective they've already considered alien. If you're a brick wall, there's no reason for your interlocutor to indulge your argument. You don't have a shared language
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 12:51 AM
1

No, that's an inaccurate read of my claim. I said that, for the sake of being able to reach a point of mutual understanding with an interlocutor, it is more practical to try and see where they're coming from than to presume objectivity. The reason I am struggling to find an unrelated example of "trying to meet someone where they're at in a conversation without indulging in the other person's narcissism," is because navigating the fact that some people are just going to be self-absorbed idiots un…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 12:40 AM
1

An unrelated example of meeting someone where they're at without indulging their own sense of narcissism? I'm not entirely sure what you're asking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 12:18 AM
1

By all means. You have my empathy
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 11:38 PM
1

Explaining the pressure points in your convictions isn't a jab, it's explaining the chain of consequence from your choices to others.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 11:12 PM
1

I'm skilled enough to do both. I get where you're coming from, and you probably see your respectful inflexibility as the correct way to talk to everybody without fail, but it will be your failure if people choose not to hear you because you sound funny. Your inability to adapt to the perspectives of others for fear of being taken in by narcissism is only going to inhibit the amount of people you can talk to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 10:51 PM
1

Sure.. Say for example, someone says something stupid, like "that's nonsensical word salad, speak plainly." The most practical response in that situation is to imagine how the person you're talking to made such an egregious failure in comprehension, and instead try carefully to find the words they can understand. Meeting them where they are, instead of expecting them to have your framework for thinking and speaking. "Oh, my bad, I mean that normal conversations require people to speak the same l…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 10:25 PM
1

Putting forth any amount of effort to deduce meaning from word salad nonsense.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 10:04 PM
1

Acknowledging and adapting to the perspective your interlocutor is engaging from, matching their pace and conducting yourself in a manner that doesn't patronize them for acting alongside their convictions.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 08:55 PM
1

That's an incredibly nuanceless framework boss. Does giving people grace immediately mean catering to them?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 07:04 PM
1

You're right. They don't necessitate special treatment. You're not treating someone as special to regard their lived experiences as viable contributions to their worldview. You, ideally, do that for everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 05:14 PM
4

Your perception of utility isn't something I share. I'm a university student engaged in several clubs designed to help people overcome social insecurity, and irl interaction doesn't really change a lot of dynamics in those spaces. People continue to mill about aimlessly, watch each other with guarded expressions across a board game or drink, and lurk in the clubroom corners gazing warily at the interactions of others. It is a dedicated practice dragging people into the pool of socialization, and…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:41 PM
1

I'm trying to explain that you should be willing to humor the perspective of others, which is the exact opposite of narcissism. You've been arguing that only narcissists would have the kind of self-regard to consider their own experiences valuable, and I think that is an incredibly flawed strategy for pursuing any kind of truth, let alone objective reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:35 PM
1

I think you're confusing narcissism and self-regard.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:29 PM
6

Me personally? I'm generally going about cyberspace advocating for a bare minimum regard for the literalist. You'd be surprised how many people look over their nose at online weirdos for not reading the subtext in a reddit post, even after knowing how many people in these spaces are thoroughly ASD. It may not necessarily be ableist, but it feels dangerously close, y'know? As a general rule, I try to intercede in those spaces, because it feels a little inhuman for the human experience to require …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:11 PM
13

I think with enough social pressure, any change is possible. That's part of the reason communities exist, no? Advocating for the change you want in the world is the second step in bringing that change about, immediately after bringing that change forth in yourself. Could you imagine how dismal the world would be if the the sufferagettes were only able to change how they thought about the world?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:58 PM
14

We're equating the argument of "just because you believe something, that doesn't mean everyone else does," to all possible permutations, friend. We don't exactly live in a world where humanity is humanized, and under this argument specifically, we shouldn't. Personally, I'm not particularly inclined to concede to the perspective of a nonsensical status quo, but hey, maybe I can dock a few points off my self-evaluation to consider the feelings of everybody else.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:55 PM
21

An excellent argument for abandoning one's self-regard. "You might think you're a human being worthy of love and respect, but if the rest of the world doesn't, then why insist you are?"
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:40 PM
1

Do you think treating every interlocutor with a moral framework antithetical to yours like a child is going to bring you any closer to success? Will people be exceptionally motivated to see things your way simply because you claim to have the objective perspective?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:34 PM
1

Sure. People will do that, quite a bit, but not in enough cases to justify imposing your own rationality on others. That's just as narcissistic. It's an act of arrogance to believe you hold a monopoly on the objective truth of the world, and deny the experiences of everyone who doesn't walk in lockstep with your view. Unfortunately, people have self-image that need to be accommodated in communication, lest you give the impression you're talking down to a particularly petulant child. The choice t…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:27 PM
18

It does throw the rubric into question, all things being equal
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:23 PM
1

Why do you think objectivity is required in a relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:21 PM
1

No, objectivity exists, it's just not required for interpersonal relationships in a lot of cases. The appeal to objectivity is used a lot in religious circles as an appeal to some sort of transcendent truth, but I find that doesn't really need to be employed in informing people that their actions can be harmful, or stressful, or antisocial, or noble, or the like. Physics may be objective, but people very rarely are. If you're willing to regard someone's inner world with the same empathy and nuan…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:16 PM
1

Sure, but that's mutual consensus, not objectivity. A shared reality doesn't necessarily mean an objective one.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:12 PM
0

What do you do about the presumption of misogyny?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:11 PM
1

Why must we agree in those definitions? It's at least possible for me to communicate while understanding that someone else has a wholly different framework for existence than I do. Making sense of how people broadly navigate social or intimate spaces is part of the same skill, and it relies more on consensus than objectivity.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:10 PM
1

Do I think I do the same? Like, do I think I'm generally pleasant to be around?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 01:10 AM
5

The framing of this argument seems a little contemptuous, no?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 10:37 PM
5

There's an expression ask demographics being monolithic that I think springs to mind here
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 10:01 PM
5

Perception does inform reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 07:58 PM
8

I was confused about this too. It shows up too often in this discourse for me to take it at face value.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 05:12 PM
1

I didn't say "too much effort," I said "enough effort for two."
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:51 PM
1

Nah, that shit would suck, but I'd at least have enough self-awareness to recognize the amount of effort that would go into me not contributing to that problem. I wouldn't consider that level of effort to be some kind of "bare minimum," so much as I'd attribute it to a baseline willingness to try for a relationship rather than simply exist within one.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:46 PM
1

The criteria for being enjoyable to be around? If I like being around them, they met that criteria easily enough, but I'm not entirely convinced there's a hard and fast list for being an enjoyable presence.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:33 PM
1

It means I find their presence enjoyable?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:22 PM
1

An individual who is pleasant to be around.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:21 PM
5

Having your own life in order, with a sense of who you are, what you stand for, and where you plan to go next.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:18 PM
-1

"Actually making it a bit easier," is certainly far from doing nothing, I'd claim. Opting to reorganize both of your lives so that the two of you are doing less work together than you would apart does sound like a chore, because that requires a level of attention and effort that I would categorize as "above the bare minimum." Redpillers may be unhinged rationalists one bad day from outright nihilism, but it's crazier for me to wrap my head around "the bare minimum," still being "work hard enough…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 04:13 PM
-3

So the options are, if i have this correctly Remain single Remain single- redpilled Perform enough emotional regulation for two people
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 03:52 PM
0

Define "bare minimum"
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 03:12 PM
6

It may be hard to read sarcasm through text, but "Druggies are great girls!" seemed a little cynical.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/25 10:59 PM
4

Druggies can be great people. Addiction is not a moral failing.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/25 10:51 PM
10

Art eyes dont make things much clearer, boss.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/25 12:18 AM
3

Correct, and pretty frustrating to boot.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 10:01 PM
20

How much they matter is an unsolved equation.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 09:46 PM
1

"To an unhealthy degree?" It looks like I'm not the only one making assumptions about OP here. For that matter, I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that I'm arguing that OP should eschew socialization to pursue his interests. My argument is that cultivating those interests is vital to identifying and engaging in communities OP may actually find value in, not merely a 'waste,' as you claimed.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/25 02:36 AM
1

He's talking about his interests, which can easily be leveraged into social environments wherein he can meet people who share those interests. Arguing that he should abandon those interests for the sake of optimizing his social acumen is less than useful.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 11:04 PM
1

Your doubt doesn't change reality boss. Women attend those conventions like everyone else.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 10:12 PM
1

hentai has absolutely no community aspect to it, since it's fundamentally him and whatever pixels he's looking at, no other humans involved. That logic applies to any media consumed on an individual level, but you'd be beyond foolish to claim fandom spaces don't exist just because you have to personally consume content to get involved in the larger conversation. Besides, my friends and I regularly discuss the themes and ideas present in media like that all the time. It's basically a book club fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 10:01 PM
1

Again, I'm not arguing for shoulds, I'm arguing for value in community. Being around people is a good thing, even if you're not physically around people. Discussing shared interests is a good thing, even if it's happening over discord instead of at an lgs. I'm not gonna tell OP to abandon their hobbies and interests for some optimized interpersonal skill-building strategy, because Again, such things strictly do not exist. Being in proximity to people is worth supporting, and ultimately more prac…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 03:28 PM
1

At the very least, the way you think is more entertaining than the doomerism espoused by red/blackpillers. I'll be thrice-damned before deprogramming them becomes my responsibility above anyone else's. That's a community project.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 10:42 PM
1

Would I? I don't see any reason to believe the average guy in this subreddit is amenable to reason. At the very least, this is more entertaining. I consider that an accomplishment in itself, and more in line with my goals overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 09:56 PM
1

These are conversations I need to have with my fellow man? Why? Me and my boys are doing just fine. There's no return on the investment of trying to police all of society.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 09:54 PM
1

Oh boy, are we talking about the myth of unconditional love now? Truly, I get a little thrill in my spirit whenever I get to examine how media, parenting, children's stories and cartoons all sell this mythical idea of pure romantic fulfillment to young boys and girls provided that they meet whatever arbitrary standard is set by the writers. Some people have built so much of their identity around the idea that love shouldn't have conditions and limitations that they have a near-psychotic break wh…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 09:33 PM
1

men demonize women by saying everything they do is transactional. Claiming relationships are transactional isn't demonization. It's a description of the status quo. and then they also demonize women who aren't transactional enough. It sounds like there's some incongruence between what men as a collective think and feel about the idea that relationships are an exchange between mutually consenting parties. I can't imagine a world where that wouldn't be the case, boss.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 09:14 PM
1

is a man who gets turned on by how a woman looks not also responding to stimuli. They are, and notably, they're not lying about it, veiling their interests behind ideas of growing attached to someone's personality beyond that initial point of interest. why do woman need to comfort themselves by not admitting it's transactional? I thought transaction wasn't inherently bad. Don't ask me, I'm not a woman. I don't have any feelings positive or negative about the social context surrounding the idea o…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 09:01 PM
1

OP isn't saying "only" women are transactional. I believe his exact words were closer to women, or people who experience reactive desire more specifically, are being"transactional and insincere." They're responding to stimuli, participating in transaction, and pretending that they're doing anything else in order to comfort themselves. Presumably OP doesn't believe guys engage in such self-deception because of spontaneous desire. You'll notice that I'm not particularly advocating for slutshaming …
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:16 PM
1

Yep. All human relationships are transactional, expecting some contribution or another to keep running. That's how society works. Scrape away the veil of vibes and doing things for "no reason," and you'll find that a lot of human actions are reactions to other forces. The only possible non-transactional relationship would be something completely exempt from cause and effect, wherein there is nothing one party could do to change the behavior of another, where no possible transaction could occur.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:02 PM
1

If someone is having sex based off vibes, it is worth noting that they are responding to stimuli, participating in an exchange, being transactional. Burying the mechanics in layers of abstraction doesn't really mean the mechanics dont exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:49 PM
1

I'm not sure "tranaactional," is a thing you can be more or less of. It's more of a you are or aren't thing. If, for some reason, you are withholding something until a necessary condition is met, then you are participating in a transaction. Likewise, if for some reason you are providing something with the intention of achieving a specific outcome, you are also participating in a transaction. Both of these behaviors are transactional, consciously or unconsciously. I'm not particularly convinced a…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:37 PM
2

That's the vibe I'm circling myself, honestly. It feels like a pretty normative claim that nobody in the world gets something for nothing, and trying to map exactly which exchanges lead to which outcomes is very ND-Coded
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:25 PM
0

well, men are the ones who use whore as an insult. Not just men, and I'd argue not even mostly men. Men weren't the ones spearheading the outrage campaigns against Chappel Roan, Sydney Sweeny, or Bonnie Blue, for example. would you be emotionally fulfilled if nobody ever actually spoke to you, just gave you money? No, I'd have money. Likewise, if my employers never paid me, and just gave me a hug and assurances of my humanity, I'd still be broke, even if I was emotionally fulfilled in my poverty…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:22 PM
9

I'm of the mind that I should occupy a personal philosophy that helps people. If everyone thought like me, I would want the world to be better for it. Gassing out on empathy doesn't make for a more reasonable world in my estimates, especially if the average moral position on empathy is "I'll only care about people who care about me."
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:13 PM
6

In theory, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:05 PM
2

Basically. They're both transactions, but "men are at least honest about it," is the vibe I'm getting here.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:04 PM
1

I legitimately had a debate with a guy who compared women who want an emotional connection before sex to prostitutes, because both are transactional. . . . Sex work is work, all things being equal. But additionally, emotional security and connection is not super different from cash in terms of currency. The only problem I see with this premise is the idea that sex workers are worse people for having clearer hoops to jump through than "make me feel safe and loved." the poster is saying it's not s…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:03 PM
1

Men use the word transactional as a negative most of the time. This doesn't pass the sniff test to me. "Transactional" is most commonly used in the idea that "relationships aren't transactional," which is an idea promoted mostly by the blue-pillers and women in this subreddit. This says two things to me, both that women are the ones perceiving transactions as inherently negative, and that blue-pilled rhetorical strategy believes natural exchanges of energy are somehow distinct from how I'd categ…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:40 PM
3

So how does that make it non-sincere Dunno, I'm not OP. I think sincere transactions can exist, and I'd argue that the exchange of formalities is a pretty popular form of insincerity. If you smile at someone and they smile back, is it not sincere because you smiled first? I guess it depends, doesn't it? If they smile back because they're afraid I'll walk across the street and demand they smile otherwise, then it's not sincere, its a survival tactic. You guys just want to pathologize everything w…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:22 PM
4

I don't think it's a new buzzword so much as it's just a mechanical description of a phenomenon that's commonly taken as a good. The idea that "if you perform this labor, this reaction will occur," is by definition a transaction. Reactive attraction, by virtue of responding to stimuli, is a transactional response to "something" a guy does.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:14 PM
1

I recognize bars as one of many possible avenues of socialization. Like playing games with friends. I agree that the majority of gamers in competitive shooter communities, like CoD or Apex or Valorant can be fairly revolting, and I'd absolutely advocate for anything that could meaningfully move the needle away from that kind of toxicity, but there are other, expressly more collaborative spaces that do build skills that can be leveraged into real-world social development. There are games like Amo…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 04:04 PM
–

STP is quite possibly my favorite love story of all time, and there's a really fascinating gendered read about how men and women are placed in a system wherein the most frequent means of contact and connection they can access is the inflicting of pain upon one another.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 03:56 PM
1

We are a social species boss, if we see one of our own getting ready to poison themselves, I think there's reason enough to express concern, if not intervene.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 03:54 PM
1

Congratulations, you've successfully argued against the 80/20 rule. Nicely done, that's an argument with some real weight in these circles, genuinely. Honestly, this is a much better structured argument than "based on what I see, men don't have it that bad." There is a bit of a problem though, and that's that I don't really care about what's going on with "most" people. They'll be fine, they're having the normative social experience, with only reasonable amounts of duress. My interests lie near-…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 03:45 PM
1

Premise 1, I disagree with from an intervention level. Practically speaking, Knowing how people feel and what motivates them to act is typically a highly effective means to encourage people away from antisocial behavior patterns. Their feelings matter as the force that broadly generates the next action of any given individual. Premise 2, your definition of love, is something I find uniquely suspect, because it is strictly improbable to love someone without a conflict of interests. If love is alw…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 08:00 AM
1

that's literally something I never once said or implied At least until there are limits to the expression of those "unusual things," and I'm pretty sure my limit is probably far lower than yours based on this discussion so far. Because your argument is that there is a correct expression of love, a "true" love that transcends personal perception, when we already established that I'm not especially convinced that's true. If you hold that kind of belief, I'm not sure I'm envious of your conviction,…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 07:36 AM
1

I think we agree broadly that behavior matters more than feeling, but I think it's arrogant to determine that you know more about how someone else feels than they do. You're more than capable of doing unusual things for love, determined by your metrics for what are in someone's best interest, even if it runs counter to your loved one's perception of their own best interests. If your definition of love can abide causing duress for the sake of someone's health, happiness, or best interests, than i…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 07:27 AM
1

As defined by. . . You? Them? God?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 07:22 AM
1

So you would abide harm if it improved health? Your love abides hurting someone for their own good?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 07:20 AM
1

Always acting in that person's or thing's best interests, based on what would make them the happiest and healthiest, never harming that person. . . Avoiding any and all behaviors that could be associated with hate, harm or antipathy. What would you call an intervention? If someone you know, someone you love, is engaged in behaviors they take joy in despite the harm caused to themselves or others, do you categorize the efforts meant to shake them from that habit, be it drugs, or adultery, or casu…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 07:14 AM
1

I don't think I've been particularly clear on where I think feelings weigh in on how we act, but if it helps, I broadly consider how people rationalize their actions to be truthful at least to themselves. If someone claims to love someone, they could very easily be lying, but it doesn't seem particularly useful to conclude they're lying strictly because their display of emotion runs contrary to my own sensibilities. That said, you haven't quite gotten around to clarifying what love is, or how it…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:52 AM
1

I'm not entirely convinced of your premise that harm and love are mutually exclusive, so I'm trying to map why you've drawn that conclusion to see if it makes enough sense to adopt personally. When you mentioned that you could think of no examples of someone openly declaring contempt or animosity towards a society while behaving nothing but kindly towards it, I was reminded broadly of many people I know who deeply hate, and conduct themselves with kindness and compassion in spite of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:41 AM
1

Are you, like, exempt from the social contract or something? I see people acting like kind, sympathetic human beings despite openly admitting to loathe humanity all the time. It's part of the things people have to put up with to navigate living in community.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:27 AM
-2

I'd argue more towards the former than the latter there, since it's pretty difficult to quantify any act of "harm" as indistinguishable from an act of "hatred."
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 06:17 AM
–

I feel like you would enjoy a visual novel called Slay the Princess. It deals a lot with ideas of love and pain, especially the idea "can we love someone we hurt?" And i feel like it makes a fairly compelling argument for the idea that "loving someone" doesn't make you magically exempt from "causing someone harm."
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 05:28 AM
1

That's also true. That's why it's a community effort, so nobody needs to take the single duty of managing their community.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 03:23 AM
1

You're right. That's why it's important that the people trying to regulate communities are themselves well-regulated. There's a difference between the digital panopticon of the Tea app, and just checking your boys when they start representing a danger. You don't need to be a cop to make sure your brother isn't bragging about keeping his women in check.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 12:36 AM
1

To be fair, community justice is something that everybody should be responsible for. To do otherwise would just be handing a free pass to abusers to do whatever they want, or outsourcing justice to a police force that still disproportionately arrests men in situations where de-escalation would be preferable.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 12:28 AM
1

It's not about where effort is best directed though. There's no optimal strategy on the planet that guarantees romantic success. Convincing someone that hitting a bar will net more successes than being able to act like a decent person in more controlled environments is a dangerous proposition, and it's arguing from ignorance to argue that the social skills developed in a virtual lobby don't translate to a bare minimum regard for your fellow man in other spaces. Your definition of "waste" is some…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/25 12:20 AM
1

See, where we agree is that community is a valuable tool in developing romantic competence. Finding community is one of those things that will edge the needle towards finding romantic success maybe a fraction of an inch at a time, but where you seem convinced that is only possible through the grueling effort of going into fewer and fewer publicly available spaces for doing so, I at least have the basic empathy to meet someone where they are and workshop solutions from there.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 10:12 PM
8

Alright, "choose better" is bad advice. What next?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 09:47 PM
5

I think any imposition of gendered standards from an outside force is dangerous, but I'm not entirely certain the standards you're seeing are the ones being imposed.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 07:11 PM
–

Not to the exclusion of biological distinction. You're missing a few intersections if you think everyone is subject to identical social forces.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 06:35 PM
2

How are you concluding that "most" men are in relationships? What degree of majority are you arguing for? 50.1%? 51%? 60%? A claim like that is simple enough to quantify with research, I'd imagine, but to take your lived experiences and limited perception as gospel is asking for an amount of trust you haven't really earned, boss. I'm not trying to be insulting when I explain how your perspective falls prey to the same biases as most other people in the planet, nor how your self-justified snark d…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:57 PM
–

This is a foundational misrepresentation of feminist thought, even at conception. The argument most feminists present is not that "men and women aren't different." It is that "men and women are deserving of equal treatment." The trouble, I find, is that feminists are not the ones telling people what feminism is, and that can make the layman very easily innoculated against feminist thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:40 PM
2

The sequence of events I just saw was something to the tune of OOP makes a claim, outlines their logic, and presents their conclusion from that logic: "men aren't really struggling in the dating market, I see men dating all the time" OP makes a counterclaim, using the same logic, and presents a conclusion that is measurably untrue to illustrate the flaw in said logic: "people aren't really struggling to buy homes, I see people buying houses all the time." OOP responds with contempt, or confusion…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:33 PM
1

You're missing a lot of context, I guess. This conversation is going to be incredibly difficult if you don't even know the basics of gaming as a hobbyist community. I will say, 'possibly' is doing a crazy amount of heavy lifting in your diagnosis, boss. The 'possibility' of success is not a surefire solution, and you dont exactly have much advice in the way of being comfy with the uncertainty that doesn't read as powerfully condescending, considering how little you know of the multi-player gamin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 05:19 PM
4

Oh. So this is just ragebait.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 07:32 AM
1

Again, you're making these normative claims of how someone "should," be spending their time, and I'm not inclined to agree with the distribution. Why should someone spend a minimum of 20 hours a week going through the rigors of relationship cultivation, more specifically, why should those efforts be spent independently of collaborative videogames like Apex, CSGO, or Baldur's Gate 3? Why such a stringent definition of "non-wasted" time?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/25 07:17 AM
1

Grim
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 09:48 PM
0

I'm not particularly inclined to consider the pursuit of catharsis a waste of time. I don't really agree with your premise there.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 08:12 PM
2

I'm not really sure holding up "some women" as an example of them not taking the advice they give to men is an exceptionally useful framework. It's kinda like saying "some Asians are good at math," to justify the model minority stereotype.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 07:40 PM
6

Different demographics require different language to communicate similar ideas. Unfortunately, there's something of a language barrier between men and women that makes ideas one group might take as a given into a 102 course on how that group sees the world. This isn't really a "woman exclusive" trait, and it shows up a lot in spaces where different subcultures find themselves arguing about what they believe to be common sense.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 07:30 PM
0

At all?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 07:28 PM
–

Poor male behavior like "asking to split the bill,"
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 05:10 PM
-1

If videogames were purely childish, there'd be no reason for the M rating. Games are for everyone. Also, there's no reason a struggling man couldn't want better for themselves and want to jack off to characters in fantasy settings without imaginary feminists conditioning them to think their desires are inherently predatory.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 02:49 PM
-4

Hands and Imagination created "no mercy." Not for nothing, but the changing social ecosystem isn't gonna be all sunshine and rainbows for everyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 06:29 AM
-3

Man, I love when my children play The Last of Us Pt.2. They really enjoyed the thematic depth of Yuri Lowenthal saying funny curse words as the multiple-hour-long condemnation of cycles of violence and retribution slowly conditioned them to higher and higher acts of brutality- Jesus christ man, how high is the horse you're on?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 06:27 AM
1

I think selling sex goes beyond "sexual impurity," and so do most people. This is the bandwagon fallacy again. Society should continue to examine its biases if they only contribute to harm or justifications of harm, because the inverse of that position is reactionary stagnation and valuing the status quo over any real pursuit of justice. If "nobody wants to deal with that," that's an indictment of what people are willing to pursue justice for, not a normative claim of how the world should be. it…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 09:06 PM
1

What makes sex work a walking PR-Disaster if not a normative cultural standard that disproportionately values sexual purity? To me, that sounds like a personal inability to focus on your own business. A retired sex worker isn't any less likely to be a Risk than the average sexual predator, and we just put one of those in office.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 04:45 PM
11

Would you expect the average citizen of the confederacy to be an abolitionist?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 03:29 PM
1

Common sense is a bandwagon fallacy. Less than two hundred years ago It was common sense that slaves were biologically predisposed to submission. I'm not denying that prostitutes exist in a high-risk environment, but I'm inclined to think that the majority of that risk is extrinsic to the nature of their work. They don't burn every bridge to having a normal life so much as a whorephobic society takes every chance to shame them for trying. To say they're choosing to be a social pariah is not an i…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 03:06 PM
1

For thousands of years, we thought the earth was flat and blamed succubi for wet dreams. As we improved as a society, we developed a more advanced understanding of how people interact and interplay. We threw out the antisemitic conspiracy theories of blood libel and new world orders, and we developed frameworks of comprehension around how crimes, poverty, social disregulation, and community support interplay. There is no scientifically supported evidence of the social utility of shaming sex work…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 02:38 AM
1

No, that's a man treating their wife as a whole ass person If we broke down those behaviors into a list, sacrificing free-time, working full time, nursing someone to health, buying gifts, and kissing their forehead before leaving, I can't immediately identify any behavior that immediately and uniquely implies recognition of personhood. A father could do most of that for their kids, and kids are almost ubiquitously seen as non-persons until their age of majority. Hell, capitalism sells the myth t…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/07/25 01:14 AM
1

Your point is that sex workers are bad people, and should be shamed by the society they operate within. That's an incredibly wild claim to make against an entire demographic.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:41 PM
1

That's not exactly a philosophy that holds if you're incapable of maintaining neutrality, boss. Sympathy and Antipathy don't have space for apathy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:37 PM
1

How incredibly binary.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:34 PM
0

I think you're conflating "encouraged," and "not discouraged."
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:28 PM
0

The contradiction is holding apathy and contempt in the same space. You're either lying about how little you care, or are being openly hostile to something you know very little about.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:13 PM
0

So you don't give a fuck about them But you do think they should be looked down on And you don't see the contradiction there?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 11:06 PM
1

https://youtu.be/SmHHnPLllUk?si=-Fel8-efATgwTvY_ Conveniently, here's an expert analysis on the impacts of censorship
/r/PurplePillDebate25/07/25 10:31 PM
1

I didn't say harmful, did I? Are you personally of the opinion that all lies are harmful?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 11:11 PM
–

I didn't say it was a crime. I said it was a lie. Not all lies are criminal
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 07:41 PM
1

I did support my statement. I even pointed out where you could find supplementary material if you gave even an ounce of a shit. You don't, so I'm not going to try and spoonfeed you. Sit in your morals if they satisfy, but don't put removing your apathy in the list of my responsibilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 06:36 PM
1

Catharsis is absolutely about solving something. It's about offloading stress, or finding emotional relief in the face of pressure. To that end, how someone finds release, and the consequences of that release are absolutely valuable factors in analysis.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 06:33 PM
–

You're proposing guys manipulate the truth to present their most beneficial aspects. Do you know what it is called to manipulate the truth?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 03:20 PM
–

I didn't say you should volunteer your failures. I said that choosing to be duplicitous about how the truth is presented is lying. Don't get me wrong, it's a useful skill, and I'm not gonna say you shouldn't lie to get the job you want, but you should at least acknowledge that manipulating the truth for personal gain is both lying, and something everyone does.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 03:15 PM
–

one shouldn't be telling the exact truth about all of one's potential deficiencies This is called "lying"
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 02:36 PM
1

You'll notice that there happen to be multiple problems to be solved. They do all need to be solved, but the solution is going to come from practical efforts, not necessarily cathartic ones.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 06:21 AM
1

I don't buy the narrative that women don't have control over how they navigate patriarchal systems. The choices they make within those constraints are still choices they've made of their own will, and the consequences of those choices are just as downstream of their influence as their choices are downstream of the system they navigate.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 05:13 AM
1

And those attempts can be met with varying degrees of success or failure. Is it a successful attempt to buck misogyny by creating more misogynists?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 04:33 AM
1

No, we're just not paid instructors. If you want a class on the long-term historical impacts of prosecuting sex workers, I would recommend a YouTube video, not a redditor
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 04:32 AM
2

But not, notably, no abuses. Sorry dawg, that's just capitalism.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/25 04:19 AM
1

I don't think conflation was what's going on here. Describing misandry as a tool that perpetuates misogyny is a lot like describing recuperation under capitalism. Patriarchy is similar in the sense that it will use all available excuses to justify itself, and taking advantage of man's pain under the system to maintain it is just one of many strategies available. Pretending it doesn't exist, to me, feels similar to saying anticapitalist media somehow isn't sold for profit on the open market.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 09:03 PM
1

An academic conversation is different from talking to a potential bot on a social media platform. I'm not going to write you an essay because you think whores deserve divine judgement or something.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:59 PM
1

I'm arguing about the utility of OP's post . I think it's a premise that deserves analysis. Whether or not the most effective means of deradicalization is misandry is a conversation I'd have, but this conversation seems dangerously close to agreeing that people should hit each other until we end patriarchy.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:58 PM
1

Not what I said, not what im arguing.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:21 PM
1

I care.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:54 PM
2

Ever work at Amazon?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:45 PM
1

I'm not going to drag you kicking and screaming to the premise that "banning porn affects more people than pornographers." If you need to do some research to examine the validity of my claim, I'm happy to point you in the right direction, but I'm not dunking your head underwater to make you drink.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:38 PM
1

Real "There's no ethical consumption under capitalism, boss, so buy a muscle car-" energy there. Not for nothing, but if the only available coping mechanism someone has for dealing with misogyny is misandry, then it's difficult to expect people to change positively in response to that particular cycle of grievance. "The abuse will continue until abuses stop," is not something I'd consider a practical maneuver.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:36 PM
1

Maybe. But that doesn't defeat the initial premise, does it? That misandry is one of the many forces supporting and reinforcing misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 05:49 PM
1

Look up the consequences of the Tumblr porn ban.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 04:36 PM
1

Are you incapable of checking the terms of service on a social media site yourself? Do I have to take you gently by the hand and point out how "depictions of the female breasts" can be led to the exclusion of "depictions of the female breasts for purposes of education?"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 03:43 PM
1

Catharsis can have utility. Otherwise there'd be no use in complaining about a task that needs to be done anyways.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 03:38 PM
1

I know how generalizations work. They're broad sweeping statements that ignore all nuance in favor of making a normative claim. They're problematic for much the same reasons as I've already described. I hope this helps.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 02:28 PM
1

Well, yeah. It changes the rule from "all humans are bipedal," to "most humans are bipedal," doesn't it? Unless, of course, that one-legged baby ceases to be human as a result of its condition. Likewise, "All humans see other humans as criminals until proven otherwise," is such a statement that is negated upon a single exception. "Most humans," is a position I couldn't argue against, but as I'm a part of "all humans," my lived experience will suffice to dispute any absolutist claims about human …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 02:05 PM
1

Again, I've explained this. It severely limits how much information is readily available, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 01:51 PM
–

Am I not included in "Everyone?" Is your normative generalization still correct if "not everyone agrees?"
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 01:50 PM
–

They're also not motivated purely by some inherent sense of evil. There's like 30 sociocultural failsafes that failed to inhibit a particular outcome in those cases, and those require examination just as readily as whatever justification the offender buys into for their actions.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 01:49 PM
1

Outstanding
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:50 AM
1

Your love seems to come contingent with the obligation of excellence. I hesitate to call that love.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:46 AM
1

"Learning to market oneself," without "playing games or trying to pretend to be someone they aren't," is a fairly contradictory concept, no? Putting your best foot forward necessarily requires downplaying your bad side, which is a pretty duplicitous course of action.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:44 AM
2

He also asks what people intend to accomplish by using misandry as a tool. what are misandrists trying to achieve through misandry? That feels more like an analysis of utility than a rhetorical question to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:17 AM
–

And this tiptoes dangerously close to an appeal to purity. The sort of argument someone who believes "only rapists, murderers, and abusers would feel empathy for rapists, murderers, or abusers" would make.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:14 AM
–

I think it's poor praxis to deny the humanity of criminals, or to construct a narrative of good guys & bad guys when we have more than enough data on crime to indicate that most people can be driven to it by circumstance.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:11 AM
–

I don't profile everyone as thieves until proven otherwise. There are entire weeks where I've left my front door unlocked to no ill effect. To assume everyone in the world is just opportunity and impulse away from criminal action is deeply cynical.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 07:10 AM
–

Do you think it is possible to advocate for the dismantling of a rhetorical strategy without condemning that strategy? Like, is it within the realm of possibly to see something happening, notice its limited utility, and advocate for an alternative without declaring the initial problem as something reprehensible?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:51 AM
–

Dunno. I'll think about that when OP clarifies their position.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 06:18 AM
–

Condemnable, sure, but I'm not convinced that's the most effective strategy available. Condemning misogyny has only been so effective, let alone condemning misogynoir. I doubt the most effective solution to misandry is a failing solution for misogyny, and I doubt that's the solution OP's advocating for.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 05:54 AM
–

OP didn't make a conclusion, only a claim. I could assume intent and say "OP is arguing that misandrists are directly responsible for misogyny," but I don't have the inside track on intention there. It's more practical for me to conclude that OP is describing one phenomenon of many, and trying to examine how this phenomenon specifically gets swept under the rug of the many other social forces motivating misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 05:43 AM
–

Nice. I wish the other 4.1 billion men on the planet operated exactly like you. How can we get the average guy to your enlightened moral position?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 03:49 AM
1

I'm saying that enough people get their information from their social networks that Fosta has measurably impacted more people than sex workers alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 03:41 AM
1

I'm willing to suspect you pulled that 99.9% number directly from out of your ass, but I'll at least humor you. How many women can you imagine dont have access to a primary care physician, a family doctor, or anyone in their immediate sphere of influence who can with medical expertise point out what warning signs exist for cervical cancer? Are you going to assume 99.9% of women on social media will have access to an expert to warn them in advance?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 03:12 AM
–

Condemnation will not stop people who already believe they're being persecuted. A more robust answer may be required
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 02:13 AM
–

Is this praxis or catharsis?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 02:12 AM
–

I'm very curious about how simple it would be for men, as a demographics, to just be moral, as determined by whichever cultural standards you think will work best. How easy do you think that process would be to achieve?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 02:10 AM
1

In your worldview, Fosta doesn't exist, boss. I'm not in the habit of empathizing with people who have utterly ignored empirical reality for the sake of maintaining their own position of apathy. Likewise, I'm sure you didn't hear me describe a single educator "dying to talk to kids about sexuality," when I was pointing out that downstream of your position is just more excuses for politicians to tell educators to deny practical information from children who will grow up to suffer without it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 12:33 AM
1

I can imagine someone who doesn't share my premises just fine. I've explained rather patiently why I find such a position suspect. But you've skipped pretty handedly past "how does this affect people near people like me," now haven't you? Are you making the claim that every educator is grooming kids, or just the ones teaching them how puberty works?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/07/25 12:26 AM
1

I don't care what the founders believed. They justified slavery. Clearly their understanding of political consequence is roughly 200 years out of date. We have enough evidence to see how levers of influence will use fringe issues to claw more power away from the populace, and sex workers are one such fringe issue. Let that slide, and it's a single conservative project away from defining any professor who teaches kids about puberty, or gender, or menstruation, from being fired for potentially gro…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 11:50 PM
1

You're asking a question that justifies censorship.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 10:51 PM
1

I'm telling you point blank that several social media platforms made infographics on breast cancer or menstrual issues bannable offenses because their diagrams were too "erotic."
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 10:31 PM
1

'You' as a demographic. The average, disaffected, middle class woman will have a friend who's primary access to health information is the internet, likely even social media.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 10:07 PM
1

Alarming, no. Concerning, possibly. You're free to feel however you want, but on a practical level, you are choosing to condone harm against a vulnerable group, and that type of justification, as I've patiently illustrated, will spread to people outside of that group. People close to you, who will be denied access to practical information because you think it's useful to punish sex workers for living indecently.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 10:03 PM
1

What is defined as "smut," boss? Can you think of a single definition of pornography that doesn't boil down to whatever the dominant socioeconomic group considers explicit? When Fosta passed, it wasn't just erotic material that was forced underground. Trans Healthcare information was deemed too sexual for public consumption, menstrual management information was deemed too explicit, information on female-specific healthcare concerns, like warming signs for breast or cervical cancer was considered…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 09:38 PM
1

https://www.bjcl.org/blog/sex-sells-but-not-online-tracing-the-consequences-of-fosta-sesta This law specifically targets sex workers via leveraging corporate censorship obligations. As a result, it has rolled in more stringent restrictions on what is safe for anyone to post online. Not just sex workers, anyone who uses the social media platforms is beholden to the pressures of Fosta-enforced censorship. What would you call that if not a collective punishment?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 06:02 PM
1

Not even if the laws used to justify that action will inevitably be expanded to include your daughters? Like I said, legislation used to punish sex workers will be expanded to control the actions of laypersons. If you don't think whores and junkies are worthy of basic human decency, that's a skill issue on your part, and that very apathy will be used to hurt you in the long run.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:27 PM
1

No, all things being equal, I dont expect you to care even if I recount to you directly how Sesta/Fosta ushered in a hilarious new age of digital censorship under the guise of protecting women from human traffickers. I could point out several historical examples of how sex workers have been used as the wedge issue to further limit the rights of a broader population, and still not surpass your personal investment in looking down on people who engage in sex work. I can say that you should be motiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/25 05:08 PM
1

See what I mean? It's going to take months to explain how team wealthy man uses the position of women as social leverage to justify abuses against team poor people. You have to build a framework for analyzing these dynamics on a level beyond simple gendered binaries, or you'll fall for easy narratives of victims & victimizers. It's the LBJ quote about tricking the lowest white man into believing he's better than the negro all over again.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 07:08 PM
1

The idea that there a "team man," that somehow supersedes the class interests of "team wealthy elite man," is why I suspect you're struggling to grasp the complementary forces of patriarchy, capitalism, and white supremacy.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 05:25 PM
1

And then they came for me, and there was nobody left to speak out-
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 04:53 PM
0

A bad man doesn't negate that men are still the institutional majority.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates21/07/25 04:52 PM
2

This doesn't sound like it's a perspective informed by talking to any sex worker interested in more organized advocacy projects. Also, there's a wierd piece of rhetorical slight of hand in the idea that decriminalization is somehow an incentive to engage in sex work, as opposed to criminalization just being a mitigating factor putting people who engage in that type of stuff at risk. It paints the conversation as SW being something we're either praising the virtues of, or reviling with all the we…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 09:04 AM
1

Because they're often victimized by the same forces putting your life under pressure? Because they're people worthy of the same rights, respect, and care that every other person should have? Because we have a historical precedent of targeting Sex Workers with uncharacteristically puritanical laws, and then expanding those laws to affect wider and wider demographics under the auspices of protecting the vulnerable? Nobody's asking you to Moonlight as a bouncer on the local street corner, but bare …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 09:00 AM
1

"Left up to the states," historically, has been duct tape on some fairly dubious arguments. See: "abortion should be left to the states,"
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:56 AM
2

Are you unironically advocating for harm to befall a population? If someone's goal, politically speaking, is to "protect sex workers," then practically speaking, doing shit like banning them from the internet, arresting them when they come forward with abuse stories, allowing credit card companies to refuse payment from the most common digital platforms, or publicly shaming anyone who falls into Survival Sex Work or Human Trafficking are the least effective measures one could pursue to "protect"…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/25 08:42 AM
1

What's a Simp?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 05:13 PM
1

Men still hold the majority in government, corporate, and cultural seats of power.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates20/07/25 02:54 PM
2

That sounds a lot more layered than "simple."
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 08:06 AM
1

I do think you're misunderstanding what I'm advocating for here. Which is reasonable, I don't think I was clear. I don't care "what people find attractive." I care about "what people do in response to that attraction." It would be nice to exist within a social configuration that made the expression of attraction something transparent and uncomplicated, regardless of whatever biological imperatives compel otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 02:30 AM
1

? Who's advocating for a change in sexuality?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 02:13 AM
1

And I think it's reasonable to advocate for things being better than they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 02:06 AM
5

All of it? Does it strike you as some kind of impossibility that a guy could use OF without being trapped by it?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 11:50 PM
3

Hyperbole is the start of many great thought-terminating clichés
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 11:46 PM
1

Simple?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 11:41 PM
1

Are we seriously using appeals to nature to determine how society should be operated?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 11:28 PM
3

This is absolutely "dont think about elephants" advice. "Shove the things you want down, way down, and focus on literally anything else, then maybe people won't find you so rancid to be around." Frustrating.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 09:47 PM
2

Oh absolutely not. I'm willing to bet this will only accelerate unless there's some kind of robust social intervention strategy is implemented
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 03:52 PM
5

Oh absolutely not. I'm willing to bet this will only accelerate unless there's some kind of robust social intervention strategy
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 03:51 PM
8

Trends are trends for a reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 03:49 PM
–

And if you assume all people are always lying, as a matter of common etiquette?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 12:37 PM
–

Is it hating women to know they're as capable of free choice and presentation as men?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 12:32 PM
1

I don't. That's the point. Connection without strain is the goal, and I don't see any avenues towards being desirable that exclude the strenuous physical and mental exertion required to buy the goodwill or interest or affection of others. Why should anyone take that as a given? Why is it just accepted as a fact of life that people should work for their food, when we know hundreds of people who are born with a conveyer belt in front of them?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 12:31 PM
–

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 12:25 PM
1

Why does effort have to be mutually exclusive with comfort?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 11:41 AM
–

I think "just be aro," might be up there with "just sleep with men," in terms of deflection lmao.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 11:12 AM
1

Why?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 11:09 AM
4

Nothing like hearing claims like "winner" and "loser" as if they're mechanically distinct from "high value" and "low value"
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 10:17 AM
1

I may have been a little hyperbolic when I said "painlessly," but I wouldn't go so far as to call my assessment of your claims a strawman. I fully understand your position that growth and improvement should be worth the effort to anyone who's interested in that. Likewise, your assumption that I'm questioning the value of self-improvement without having actually put in the effort is about as baseless as my claim that you thought such effort was without ordeal. I'm not just sitting on my ass and b…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 10:06 AM
1

How much of your gender identity is based on how others treat you?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 09:48 AM
1

If someone saw you as a man, or a woman for that matter, do you believe that would meaningfully change how you see yourself? Or would you likely feel some incongruence with the way people address you?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/25 01:58 AM
1

What is your opinion of what makes a man?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 11:37 PM
–

You're reading an assertion I didn't make. I'm not claiming that one's identity is only a matter of self-perception. I'm claiming that one's self-image should take the lion's share of how they choose to perceive and present themselves. One's Gender identity is not all they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 11:27 PM
–

How does "people's identity are a matter of self-perception," ignore the influences of social pressures and genetic factors? Perception doesn't spawn into existence from a vacuum.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:54 PM
–

Recognizing sex-gender distinction isn't a philosophical position. It's a matter of recognizing lived experiences under a societally-constructed framework of being. Biology alone doesn't account for how people are conditioned to think, believe, and function in community with each other.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:30 PM
1

Why is humanity defined by it's two sexes? That doesn't strike you as wierd and reductive?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:28 PM
1

Things aren't useless because they exist beyond the framework of biological essentialism. "Morality" doesn't cease to be a functional concept just because there's no genetic indicator of conscience. I'm implying that we should have a more cohesive framework for language than just pretending there's only two sexes, and those are also the only possible forms of gendered existence. Throwing away "objective," definitions is how we refine our understanding of complex subjects. Updating our understand…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:11 PM
1

by that reasoning, people with genetic defects cannot be considered humans. Which is why, I'm sure you agree, it is fundamentally misrepresenting humanity to reduce it down to genetic indicators. Gender is much the same way, because it is fundamentally misrepresenting gender to tie it to genetic markers. It's the same type of foundational understanding that would convince someone to think furries believe that they believe themselves to be physiologically and biologically identical to the animals…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 09:44 PM
1

You're doing the bio-essentialism thing where you tie the label of "woman," to a genetic state that isn't even matched by every single woman on the planet. Again, Turners, Swyer, and de la Chappelle Syndrome alone throw that paradigm out of focus. Not all women are genotypically female, and to argue otherwise is an argument that invalidates the lived experience of any XY-Woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 09:35 PM
1

You're doing this thing where you tie transness to body, when I'm not particularly opposed to social transitioning. You can be a woman with classically male biology, even if you never pursue an ounce of gender-affirming care, because your mind doesn't need to be in congruence with your body.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 09:07 PM
1

Yes, the idea that transwomen are just feminine men is trans-exclusionary. It doesn't regard the lived experience or values of trans people, you're just trying to reinforce a failing binary. Transness isn't stored in the surgery, it's in the identity.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 08:41 PM
1

Feminine men and Transwomen can exist in the same place. Being a biological male doesn't exclude someone from a gender identity. I'm not trying to make anyone anything by describing how people choose to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 08:05 PM
1

Sex and Gender aren't the same thing, boss. Software and Hardware.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:56 PM
2

This is a question I'm curious to see the answer to. If you tried everything and still failed, there's only a couple rebuttals offered in this space, and I'm already making my bet on which one is going to be used.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:26 PM
5

The joy of negative reinforcement loops
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:21 PM
5

Is it? Fun conversations with strangers have broadly been exhausting in my experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:01 PM
1

I focus on "gender," because its something everyone has, not just the LGBT community. I focus on "sex," because there are way more manifestations of sexual characteristics than two possible outcomes. Those are important details to keep track of, and they're especially important to keep out of the reach of anybody attempting to impose a binary where one doesn't exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:47 PM
2

This is actually cool as hell.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:41 PM
1

The idea that it's possible to become a 7/10 painlessly, and that effort will be rewarded with slightly improved odds in the romantic roulette is something worth the price of admission.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:39 PM
1

Who said men have to be masculine? Certainty not me, for my interests are in the complete dissolution of imposed standards based in gender, the idea of mandatory gender roles is what I'm referring to as a cage, and eventually I believe that we will reach a state as a society of infinite forms of gender expressions. Classifying people by their sex doesn't achieve that end as well as I'd like, because it falls back on earlier gendered expectations of what one with a certain biological composition …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:36 PM
1

How baselessly optimistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:11 AM
1

Just buy a lottery ticket, boss. If you keep throwing money at the right program eventually you'll hit big and never have to buy another ticket again-
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 10:01 AM
1

I agree, broadly, with the idea that it was putting people in boxes that got us in a lot of messy situations, and gender is one of those boxes without a doubt. The trouble is that, for a very long time, discussions on selfhood & gender identity were part of an invisible cage used very effectively to constrain what and how people could be. A few centuries of targeted active propaganda about what a man or woman's place in the world is can entrench all kinds of really stupid or harmful ideas of wha…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 08:35 AM
2

No, Male and Female are hardware, and they don't account for all possible variations of human sexual characteristics. Again, "Man, Woman, and Both," are not two categories. How would you classify someone born without functional sex organs?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 08:08 AM
1

It's not pain free, it's less painful than failure. I recognize that it's impossible to avoid pain entirely, barring the obvious and final solution, so for now my goal is to experience as little pain as possible, to minimize risk, and live in such a way as to be comfortable with a low hum of discomfort, as opposed to periodic lances of agony.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 08:06 AM
-4

A dialectic is a pair of simultaneous truths. "Patriarchy hurts men," is true, because it imposes a series of near-impossible roles and obligations for men to aspire to. More often than not, these aspirations are a path to stress, grief, and an early grave as a result of subservience to other forces (capitalism, white supremacy, we all know the song and dance by now-) "Patriarchy unfairly privileges men," is true, because the end result, the self-perpetuating mechanisms of patriarchy establish a…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates17/07/25 08:03 AM
2

It's like you almost understand the difference between sex, gender identity, gender performance, and sexual attraction. Hardware doesn't dictate software, right? There's nothing wrong with being interested in a specific set of equipment, but the software is where humanity tends to reside, and very few people are interested in a body with no mind.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:55 AM
2

Turner's Syndrome, Swyer's Syndrome, and de la Chapelle's syndrome are consistent enough on their own to prove that more than two variations of hardware manifest in the human organism. Hell, even concerning your hypothetical example of perfect hermaphrodites, capable of impregnating themselves, you can't find the proper place for them within your constructed binary.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:44 AM
3

It sounds to me like fudging the numbers for simplicity's sake. Why does a fully functional sex organ determine someone's gender? Edit: spelling.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:32 AM
2

So the two sexes are, by your standards "Man," "Woman," and "Arguable?" Does that sound like two to you?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:28 AM
1

a painful learning curve is a good price to pay for a life of being able to take social risks in the pursuit of friendships, sex, romance, etc. That sounds like a pretty unverifiable claim. The price of admission seems much steeper from where I'm standing, and personally, I'm not a fan of anything that requires receiving pain to gain a benefit.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:25 AM
2

your body is either a man or a woman. What are intersex people?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:21 AM
1

Don't fix what isn't broken. This is a thought-terminating cliché. The fact of the matter is that we have many, many human beings who don't fit cleanly into the binary constructed by people who think biology is as simple as XX = Woman, XY= Man. There's multiple persistent cases where those aren't true, and multiple cases wherein someone is born with just an X chromosomes, or an XXY Genotype. Those conditions, by consequence of appealing to a narrow, simplistic worldview, are constantly excluded …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 07:04 AM
3

You're arguing for geocentrism, boss. Why is it so difficult to keep up with the expanding scope of scientific progress here?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:53 AM
0

Where do we account for Swyer's Syndrome?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:49 AM
1

how about stop being on their phones all the time and force themselves to talk with people. Taking risks does make people better at managing risks, sure, but why take a risk when you know the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth attempts are going to be painful failures? Some people were lucky enough to have a controlled environment to try new things in, like a high school or a university setting, but those spaces are optimized for putting people in proximity to one another. Not everyone gets…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 06:46 AM
1

The common points of conversation there are usually talking about how scuffed the pandemic was to an entire generation's social skills, but there's also a persistent economic downturn which is putting a lot of people in survival mode. Risking is riskier when you have less to lose.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 05:42 AM
2

Not for nothing, but if the vast majority of human beings would willingly subject themselves to the risk of emotional vulnerability in exchange for human connection, I dont think it follows that all humans should be comfortable with that risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 05:10 AM
7

How many spins of the romantic roulette wheel are expected before it's reasonable to consider spinning the wheel to be too much effort? Like, between 50 & 500000, how many tries should someone be able to take in stride before reckoning with the idea that gambling just isn't healthy?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 05:02 AM
2

Call it a utopian ideal. Personally, it would be quite nice to be able to approach someone, flatly ask for sex, a hug, hell even a conversation lengthier than "nice weather we're having, eh?" Without the endless social tightrope of acting 'normal,' but we haven't quite reached that place in society yet. I'm not particularly fond of the way people flinch at me when I do anything even remotely autistic, so I've gotten pretty good at acting, but as I'm sure you can tell, acting is just lying with g…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 09:19 PM
4

Why should the pain of rejection be part of the game? Why is that a necessary feature?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 09:12 PM
5

I definitely think the larger social atomization builds this situation up a lot. Women, historically, have practically been trained for the ordeal of tracking down and building community as a survival mechanism. Now that guys need to build those skills themselves, the disparity in competence is basically being brushed off as guys not trying hard enough to master a skill they didn't realize was a skill until relatively recently.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 06:44 PM
67

So, if I'm reading this correctly. Women aren't harder to date, they've just raised their standards to exclude a higher population of men than was previously acceptable to settle down with. I may be missing some details, but this sounds like saying, "Women aren't picky, they're selective." That's is a distinction without a difference.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 06:11 PM
1

What is the intrinsic value of a human?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 08:09 AM
0

I'm not sure I track the thread on this one Thinking that having a vagina brings value is why men in this subject struggle to maintain any kind of romantic or platonic relationships. Could you clarify this point somewhat? It seems wierd that guys are struggling to maintain any kind of relationship for thinking there's something valuable about "having a vagina." That's like blaming guys for being single because they're "interested in women."
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 08:08 AM
2

Autistic sounds pejorative here.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 08:01 AM
1

Okay, under that paradigm, I found the definition as agreed upon by the American Psychological Association: the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for different genders. In a human context, the distinction between gender and sex reflects the usage of these terms: Sex refers to the biological status of being male, female, or intersex, whereas gender implies the psychological, behavioral, social, and cultural aspects of gend…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 10:35 PM
1

Tell you what. You seem remarkably sure of your position, so I'll do you a solid and let you have the last word here. I've heard your opinions on this topic, pondered them with all the depth they've required, and find myself utterly exhausted trying to reach any point of synthesis here. You're free to assume whatever intention you want, but if you're looking for an honest sentiment, I've sat down to have this conversation with far too many people who would rather I sit silently and let them vent…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 07:14 AM
1

Ah, it's projection. I never invalidated your feelings. I just didn't bend to your version of the narrative. You seem to be exceptionally fond of dialectics. Have you considered the possibility that your assumptions about my need to talk down to you, my efforts to police your tone, my constant dismissal of your emotional truth have been entirely you assuming my intention? Not once have I claimed your feelings to be invalid, or irrational, or spawned from a vacuum, but it seems you're convinced t…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 06:36 AM
1

Nothing like an appeal to purity in a post where the primary interlocutor spent two days trying to explain how "honesty shouldn't have to tone-police itself." Do you think being emotional makes you less intelligent? Do you think I believe that when I asked you questions about intention and strategy while you continued to assert such would be unnecessary in a sincere conversation? Why are you permitted the special privilege of coming in hot? Hell, of the two of us in this conversation, which one …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 05:56 AM
1

I'm not upset because I recognized the pattern, I feel like we've covered this already, and you seem uniquely unwilling to listen when someone else is being honest and communicative. What is upsetting is that you'll say things like: I did the labor to articulate a pattern, offer reflection, and ask about a consistent observation of why even good men struggle with emotional accountability. And not have asked a single question about how that situation came about. It wasn't in your opening statemen…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 05:24 AM
1

You have a pretty magical perspective on what a debate is, and I'm not particularly sure I share it, given how much effort it took to find a premise worth engaging with. You just said that your purpose in using this space as your emotional dumping ground was to fish for anyone benevolent enough to reflect on your pain, and I think that's incredibly arrogant. If you came into this space, specifically to vent, with the hope that someone would go out of their way to use your pain to achieve some ki…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 05:03 AM
1

Now that we agree that women have long carried disproportionate emotional labor, even with "good" men, then the next step is not guilt or blame, it's accountability and intention. See this? This is a claim that merits dispute. This is a debatable premise. How, and why, is accountability and intention the next step, as opposed to any alternative, like letting women keep doing what theyre doing, or designing curriculums to reprogram the incompetent man? Why, academically speaking, should anyone be…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 04:32 AM
1

You're making a few assumptions about my first instinct that I think are pretty suspect. We've been at this for a couple days, now, and I've tried to engage with this point in several different ways. It looks like you have too by the nature of your edits to the original post. Let's try it this way: Yes, women have disproportionately borne the brunt of the emotional labor in relationships, yes, men aren't particularly putting forth an effort to uplift their weight. Yes, even a good man expects a …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 04:08 AM
1

I feel like, if I'm not mistaken, I was pretty clear about being fine with the analysis. Are you just actively not trying to answer my question? Why here? Why are you expecting anyone to respond to your plight with empathy and support here of all places? You're not asking to understand the phenomenon of male emotional mismanagement, you're not asserting some type of solution of merit, you're bemoaning that guys aren't acting like your feelings matter, and then bitching when guys don't act like y…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/07/25 03:36 AM
1

Maybe I misunderstand your question. You want academic, peer reviewed sources explaining the difference between sex and gender?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 11:06 PM
3

Yeah, this seems like an attempt to bait a discussion than dissect a premise.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 10:51 PM
1

W thread
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 09:28 PM
2

Hey whoa wait a second. This guy didn't get his girlfriend in the mail after meeting the standard you set. What's happening here?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 09:26 PM
1

You wouldn't trust a master of anthropology to have a measure of insight into how society has organized around ideas of gender roles? Or of having an understanding of the differences between biological and sociological phenomenon? But you'd trust a book who's primary use case is documenting how words are used in colloquial spaces, not how they're academically perceived?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 07:10 PM
1

Why the Motte & Bailey? If you choose your words, specifically, to say "men," why is it my responsibility to assume quantity, especially when you went through the additional effort of expanding the modifier of "men," to "even good men," to encompass more men in your analysis? What about that framing is even remotely unclear? I'm not refusing to acknowledge that men as a demographic aren't doing emotional labor in their relationships, I'm again asking why, in specifically this space, you're askin…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 06:35 PM
1

"Men, all men, even the good men, are so fragile that they can't handle me being vulnerable." Yes, if the pattern you're shooting at is every single man on the face of the planet, I feel like it's a reasonable position to be part of the pattern you're taking aim at. And let's be clear, I'm not obligated to do the emotional labor required to take that in stride. I don't know you, I have no reason to respect your judgement, you're not in a space where empathetically listening to you talk shit abou…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 03:54 PM
1

If you don't aim to shoot someone, but a bullet fired from your gun hits another person, are you in the habit of saying "well geez, you shouldn't have been on the other side of the barrel. That sounds like something you should've thought about"? Again, I'm not tired of hearing "guys need to work on their shit." I'm tired of hearing "guys need to work on their shit while I sit in my feelings and throw mud around because it's cathartic to me personally." Being hurt is not a rational or moral justi…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/07/25 03:25 PM
1

Why is it odd? Dude sacrificed every chance he had on the altar of capital.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 07:12 PM
1

Then you lack imagination, bossman. Out of billions of people in the world, it's one hell of a gamble to assume not a single one feels differently. Ask Elon if he'd rather be loved than powerful.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 07:08 PM
1

I'm not sure everyone has that choice, though.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 07:00 PM
1

You've used the same thought terminating cliché throughout this conversation, and out of respect I'm not trying to engage with this particular argument, but some things don't sting because they're particularly poignant, but just because they're shitty things to say. Examples, "men are so fragile, even the good ones can't take an insult"
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 04:14 PM
1

If the only way to center women's exhaustion is to denigrate men's incompetence, then I have to wonder if the inverse is true. Is the only way to center men's role-strain under patriarchy to condemn women for not working hard enough, do you think? I'm not inclined to believe so, but it does paint a rather interesting narrative about how people achieve connection across gendered trenches.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 03:59 PM
1

I'm not saying you don't deserve to be heard. I'm asking why this is the space where you chose to demand attention? Again, there are so many subreddits for exactly the type of engagement you seem to want here, but you chose this one to make a mess for the sake of vulnerability. You're again, making an assumption that basic decency to me feels conditional when women express frustration, when I'm trying to illustrate that all human behavior is an expenditure of effort, and requesting people to exp…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 03:37 PM
1

Do I seem like I'm expecting perfection? To me it feels like I'm explaining to someone crying on a park bench why people are walking away instead of patting you on the back. asking for conversations that hold space for frustration, without invalidation or deflection, isn't asking for emotional labor. It's asking for basic decency. Do you know what exercising self-restraint, compassion, attentiveness, and a willingness to engage with a premise is? I'll give you a hint, it's not a priceless dispen…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 03:28 PM
1

I strongly recommend the work of Forrest Valkai, for the ease of consumption, because it seems like your ideas of what gender is are in something of a conflict with most sociological and biological discussions on the subject. Gender roles, gender identity, and gender expression are all much larger conversations than I'm currently inclined to go into, but we do already have words for the inherent biological differences between people of different chromosomes for what its worth. Those words are ca…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 03:19 PM
1

Maybe the point of confusion here is that you think I'm treating all of womankind like freaks for asking for empathy and basic human decency? In that case, the clarification I'll offer is simple: I'm not policing women, I'm policing you, specifically, for framing your pain as a topic of casual discussion that should be handled with grace and dignity. I wouldn't have wasted the energy in any other subreddit to be fair. Like I said, there's plenty of spaces where messes are acceptable and even eag…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 03:03 PM
2

If you're comparing physics, something that can be measured without the flimsy labels of "good" and "bad," to something as hotly debated as human nature or our general social organization patterns, then I'm very curious how you perceive reality. Positive and negative perceptions of the various ways relationships exist in a transactional or exploitative context isn't quite as clear-cut a practice as recognizing gravity as one of the fundamental forces of reality.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 02:50 PM
1

See, you keep doing this thing where I say "it's not particularly useful to expect others to take your words with grace or compassion uncritically," and your response is "if you react poorly to what I say, that's a personal failing on your part." And for the life of me I can't be convinced to agree. If my boy hit me up and said "women these days ain't shit man," I'd ask for the same clarification as if someone in reddit said "men these days are so pathetically soft," because the emotional truth …
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 02:38 PM
1

This sounds dangerously close to conversations around the idea of "just being honest." For what it's worth, and as additional clarification, I'm not in the habit of narrowing my eyes at vulnerability. The first 5-7 lines of your opening statement were pretty reasonable, even if I frown a bit at the idea that women are uniquely long-suffering for having to tiptoe around the feelings of men, a skill men broadly aren't even allowed to develop and then rapidly punished for failing to execute perfect…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 02:07 PM
2

There's a mechanical difference between being cynical and wallowing in cynicism. I'm also pretty active in my community, and I regularly engage with the systems I intend to see changed because I don't especially believe that anyone will if I don't. I still go to work, try to keep my siblings out of radicalizing communities, and maintain at least a semblance of civility in public spaces, because I recognize the utility of basic social decorum in an environment where engaging with others is necess…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 01:32 PM
1

No, I'm not, because perception and social expectation arent stored in the inherent nature of humanity. Those are things shaped by lived experience and epigenetc manifestation. Additionally, gender is used for a lot more than sex differentiation, especially in the more rigorous conversations about identities, roles, and expression of gender in human society specifically. There are entire social sciences studying gendered expectations across cultures, entire biology textbooks clearly defining the…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 01:27 PM
2

I mean, personally I'd say letting everything beyond your control slide simply because you can't do anything about it alone is the ultimate concession of defeat. Choosing blind optimism in the face of clear-eyed wariness because it makes life easier is just conceding to the constant pressure to suck it up and plaster a smile on for the sake of keeping the peace. To that end, cynicism is a much more practical tool for finding flaws in a machine that can still be tinkered with.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 01:14 PM
2

I feel compelled to reiterate that if you're asking for empathy in one hand and talking about how fragile men are in the other, you are definitionally asking for a free pass to insult someone. "Man, just let me get this off my chest. Women are so shallow. they never seem to ask about my interests or feelings, they just expect me to be the guy willing to sit and listen to their day, even the nicest ones never really listen when I talk about the things I enjoy," is not a particularly productive fr…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 01:10 PM
1

Ah, reprogramming. If you're grateful for what you have and are a pleasant person to be around more people will want to he around you So just, change the way you see the world, easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 01:01 PM
2

The truth is even a good man can have a fragile ego and you'll always have to walk on eggshells just so he won't feel "disrespected" on even the most unreasonable things, like saying "No." Because for them, "No" means they have no control over you. Crazy! These are your claims, boss. If your conversation is about how uniquely exhausting it is as a woman to have to put up with the emotional fragility of even a "good," man who still foundationally desires to control you, that's not a belief indica…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 12:57 PM
–

So for the sake of appealing, it's more practical to feign optimism in the face of the bleak reality that "most people dislike cynics." Are you advocating for deception or reprogramming here?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 12:43 PM
–

This is a strangely universal claim for a species that shouldn't have universal habits.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 12:40 PM
3

Again, nothing here is especially debatable, but it sounds like you wanted a shoulder to cry on or to bitch about how soft men are moreso than any kind of practical conversation. Why is this conversation in debate, as opposed to r/vent, or r/I_dont_like ? More specifically, why is this place the designated safe zone for gendered distress, compared to any other subreddit?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 12:33 PM
1

You're confusing sex and gender again
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 12:26 PM
5

Ah, the correct answer in that case wouldn't be to respond to this like it was categorized as a debate, then, huh. Yes, it feels bad to be the one footing the emotional bill in a relationship. That's unpleasant, and hopefully, you'll find a guy better than the best guy who's still sensitive to engaging with a framework utterly foreign to him. Until then, it seems like you're probably going to have to do the exact same thing the typical inkie is told to do in situations wherein their expectations…
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 06:11 AM
8

Is this a type of problem unique to women? Do gay men have the same quagmire of norms to navigate? Do men not have to put up a constant performance of vigilance to ensure that their partners feel seen, heard, valued, and present in relationships?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/25 06:04 AM
1

Your tag is amazing BTW. I empathize with being an overwhelmed millennial.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 02:11 PM
1

Did you read me saying that was one of the premises I disputed? As in "I don't agree with that point, and here's why," disputed?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 01:59 PM
0

Missing out on riveting cultural commentary from the likes of Brett Cooper & Candice Owen's, are we? I envy your narrowed field of view. To the point I was attempting to illustrate, even if Sabrina specifically was facing criticism from queer spaces alone, I was trying to draw attention to the fact that we still live in a culture distinctly ruled by puritanical concepts surrounding sex, sexuality and female agency. Capitalism may be trying to extract twice the labor from women these days thanks …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 01:57 PM
14

There are two premises with this that I disagree with. The first premise is that "being," blue-pilled sets someone apart any more effectively than "acting," blue pilled. People historically have been incredibly easy to lie to, especially when they convince themselves they aren't. The second is that the vast majority of men nowadays are red-pilled. Luckily, we don't live in that sort of hellscape yet, but the old shadows of masculine & feminine gender roles continue to haunt a lot of what is expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:39 AM
3

Not many, but I'd wager enough of them are out and loud enough to lower the bar for everyone else, including the liars competent enough to take advantage.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 07:30 AM
1

I'm personally of the mind that pain is an indicator that something has gone wrong, and that it's reasonable to be avoidant of any space where suffering is just the cost of doing business. Too many spaces can very easily build up the argument that pain is good, that it confers worth or value in your ability to endure, to restrain yourself, to embody discipline as you suffer in silence for me to take any argument about the natural place of pain uncritically. It is not virtuous to endure, even if …
/r/PurplePillDebate12/07/25 06:00 AM
1

That does raise a larger question about what exchanges need supplementary compensation. The argument about uneven distribution of labor in relationships is still an ongoing conversation from one pair to another, and I highly doubt the neurotypical romantic is going into marriage thinking about it like a contract negotiation.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 11:45 PM
1

Yes, I know, it's quite frustrating to be told otherwise, and yet it's a persistent idea in dating spaces that relationships should somehow be natural, but not transactional. I have made these exact bullet points in other conversations with other people because social creatures like people are inherently driven to conduct these types of exchanges all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 11:35 PM
2

What are the terms you'd use?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 11:24 PM
1

"But relationships aren't supposed to be transactional-"
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 11:23 PM
–

Emphasizing certain things to the discretion of others is a lie by omission. By that metric, being "business appropriate," is about as deceptive as using a "customer service voice," which is a normal, common lie people use all the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 11:13 PM
3

There's a conversation about Averages that I think is worth adding to this discussion. During the early days of aeronautics, when the U.S. military was trying to make standardized seats for their air force pilots, they made a rather intuitive mistake of trying to engineer the seat around "the average person." When pilots got into the cockpit, most of them voiced a measure of discomfort or difficulty working within the confines of those averages, because wouldn't you know it, the physiologically …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 10:45 PM
1

I'm the best equipped to have conversations on sex, gender, schema, and perception of selfhood, but broadly speaking, Gender is distinct from sex because it is a psychological response. Gender is how one perceives themselves in relation to the society they inhabit, specifically in relation to the gendered standards of that society, and how well-aligned one's selfhood aligns with whatever schema they've constructed around manhood or womanhood or being nonbinary. Under that paradigm, the most accu…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 10:16 PM
0

An appeal to definitions is a pretty weak way to argue for perpetuity. Unless you're arguing that a definition can be better refined to limit exceptions, I'm not buying the idea that exceptions are just given. More importantly, language is known to change and adapt to reflect more nuanced understanding of things all the time. We better understand what manhood is, so it's dumb to stick to a definition that has proven its failing utility.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 04:45 PM
2

You would call men with De La Chappelle syndrome women? Why? The purpose of a category is to include all things of that category and exclude all things outside of that category, and I dont think chromosomes include all men, or exclude all women for that matter. We have plenty of situations where someone chromosomally xy develops into what would be called a woman from the layman's view, people with Swyer's Syndrome for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 01:13 PM
1

The thing is, your definition doesn't just exclude women. What do call a man with xx chromosomes? If manhood is stored in the chromosomes, then by your definition, any abberant gene expression could kick someone out of the "man" category even if they present as such.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 12:35 AM
1

The trouble with this argument is that it is trans-exclusionary. If "manhood is stored in the chromosomes," trans men aren't men. This argument has been dissected ad-nauseum, but I'm sure you have some revolutionary new angle that both validates the existence of trans people, and upholds the biological reality of sex and gender being synonyms.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 09:42 PM
5

Is manhood stored in the dick? Does that not seem like an incredibly bio-essentialist argument?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/25 09:33 AM
-2

It's crazy how few of these statistics actually dispute feminist thought on the pervasive harms brought about by patriarchy. Like, throwing stats at the wall and saying "look, men have it rough too," doesn't provide a cohesive framework for how or why men have it rough, but if there were hypothetically a social order that values male disposability as a means to generate power and influence for a key class of person, I wonder if that system might have deleterious effects for anyone who can't effe…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates19/06/25 05:02 AM
1

Hoh boy... where to begin?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/06/25 09:13 PM
-15

This isn't the framework applied by feminists writ large, and hasn't been since at least the second wave Feminism has been attempting to engage with gendered systems of oppression on every angle, that's why TERFS are so consistently ostracized, because women as a class don't deserve any particular exaltation on the basis of their sex. I strongly recommend reading some bell hooks, because there's a lot of text about how feminists orient themselves around their real enemy, and how that enemy impac…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates28/03/25 06:54 AM
2

And part of that thought does require identifying systems. You cannot end crime without a systemic understanding of poverty. You cannot solve two hundred years of economic mistreatment without understanding how historical factors have been leveraged against entire populations. It's not a matter of "dividing people," because those divisions have already been made by people already rotting in their graves. What is economic justice for a Native American if your only solution ignores the hundreds of…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/03/25 05:12 PM
2

This one's not on the Intersectional Feminists, to be fair. The desire to dogmatically individualize what are percievable social trends on multiple different axis doesn't meaningfully address the problems people do have in common. We need to have a framework for how class, gender, race, ability, and other stratifying factors create common experiences so that people motivated to advocate for improving those systems have the best possible language and strategy for doing so. Without a concept for P…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates08/03/25 03:59 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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