TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

sublimemongrel Archive

View 18 posts and 49,493 comments by sublimemongrel 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)
74

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/18 03:01 PM
42

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/16 09:13 PM
38

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/17 04:09 PM
37

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/16 09:11 PM
32

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/16 07:44 PM
28

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/16 12:17 AM
26

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/16 02:58 PM
20

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/16 02:35 AM
20

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate03/09/17 06:04 PM
17

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate05/10/16 09:44 PM
12

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate01/10/16 12:35 AM
12

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/16 09:48 PM
12

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/16 03:03 AM
9

sublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/18 01:24 AM
9

CMVsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate05/11/16 01:06 AM
9

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/16 11:42 PM
7

Discussionsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate23/02/17 04:27 PM
3

Question for RedPillsublimemongrel/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/16 03:41 AM
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 49,493 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-4

Damn.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/08/26 03:52 AM
5

The “cultural outcome” lmao. What culture? The one you specifically agree with? The one that may have all sorts of hidden or only recently brought to light downsides for those who are now allegedly being “empowered” with ideas you don’t personally agree with?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 12:45 AM
1

Of course it’s intentional framing - I added that piece already with my prior comment. I wouldn’t argue what you are essentially arguing however - that it’s some sort of type of propaganda. I don’t think the point is as simple as hey women are just as valuable as men are if you put monetary value to the work they do in the house just look at dollars and cents if you outsource it, I think the monetary expense of outsourcing it all is certainly relevant to the picture but it’s not the entirety of …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 03:20 AM
3

lol the issue there is not being the breadwinner omg. It’s those expectations that they also play housewife/SAHP role on top of working fulltime. Like THIS should be the real common sense yo. You have it essentially, backwards.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 01:17 AM
-1

Because it is indeed unpaid? Just facts. Acknowledging it is in fact, labor, is only half the story. Adding that it’s also unpaid - also objectively true - adds to the connotation of the term. Which is to name a concept where women’s labor is undervalued and under-appreciated, at least as compared to men, and yet also expected as part of women’s role as wife, mother, woman, whathaveyou. And “introducing the concept of money to something no reasonable person would ever equate it with” - I’m assum…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 12:29 AM
-1

I mean that’s a strange argument probably formulated in some knee jerk way to not only justify the stated reason (men paying for dates), but also to highlight the common circumstance of the “raw deal” so to speak that many women do experience. It’s a flimsy argument, nonetheless, and likely just a cheap attempt to highlight the broader issue here. As to your follow up - framing it as if it’s not “labor” is taking the objective reality out of what it actually is. “Unpaid labor” is a more objectiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:39 PM
0

What. First off - who in their right mind is saying paying for dates during the dating period at all is equivalent to a potential lifetime or even just a few years of doing more housework? Whomever is saying that has the whole premise wrong to begin with. Those are not and will never be equivalent like effort or financial value wise except maybe in a very small minority of cases. Secondly - you don’t actually think women who insist the man pays for dates in early dating are legitimately thinking…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:15 PM
3

lol “lazy” aka they just don’t care enough 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️ This isn’t a job or like actual responsibility. It’s pure choice based on what motivates you. “Lazy” is so funny it’s not they are lazy, they just care less than you. You also don’t know what gaslight means. It’s gross how often that word is thrown around for literally anything some man around here things is “women lying”. Like no. Grow up. No one is psychologically abusing you because of internet arguments
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 01:20 AM
7

No, not strictly. Positive means the government has to give it to you. Negative means the government can’t take it away because it’s innate most of the time - meaning you are born with it, Lockean concepts of natural rights here. Frankly not a lot of positive rights even exist. Easiest and most obvious example is Gideon v wainwright - now firmly embedded in 6th amendment jurisprudence. You conflating personal decisions like will my GF fuck me and can I break up with her for not doing so has fuck…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/08/26 04:22 AM
7

You can continue to argue against whatever fictional PPD person you’d like making arguments not here if that pleases you 👍🏻. It’s certainly not me. Good effort to avoid the actual question and intent of this post though. Which is why is it controversial to expect such men to inform their future partners of this beforehand. Herculean ducking efforts there, though a bit obvious, unfortunately for you I know bait when I see it.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:51 AM
5

wtf are you talking about - there’s not a single person arguing here from what I can see that is like against the ability of men to seek paternity testing. The OP and issue is exactly what I just stated - arguing men should inform their future partners before pregnancy that they will insist on this rather than spring it on an unsuspecting already pregnant and now presumably confused and hurt partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:41 AM
6

Establishing LEGAL paternity versus a discreet cheek swab sent away to a lab for dna results from a kit you can buy at Walgreens are two separate things. You also can’t establish LEGAL paternity in the US with such kits. However you now have a dna test presumably valid not like dna testing is particularly difficult labwork, for your own purposes. Then the next step is legally validating it through a testing process that the courts deem admissible for actual legal paternity proceedings. That’s fo…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:37 AM
6

But no one is arguing men getting or seeking paternity test, aka a “protection”, shouldn’t exist. There’s laws permitting those tests to be done - btw. Nothing saying it’s illegal for men to get in most places. OP is arguing he should inform his future partners of his decision on such a future occurrence so she can make her own informed decision on engaging in that relationship. Why is this controversial?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:25 AM
6

That’s a ridiculous comparison. Women already know not to do that that’s like me saying oh teach men not to be deadbeat fathers - we all know they know what they are supposed to do. Bad actors are bad actors. That’s not equivalent at all to expecting a man to inform his future partner that hey no matter what - regardless of any real basis set in reality - I’m gonna need you to agree to a paternity test in the event of a pregnancy during our monogamous relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:16 AM
3

That’s exactly the same thing. It’s asinine to pretend otherwise. Oh I need you to take annual std test or something similar isn’t any less about “piece of mind” STDs can seriously fuck you up. Of course it’s accusing someone of cheating as well when it’s asking for a paternity test out of the blue for no apparent reason. Like think about for two seconds and pretend that’s not accusing someone of cheating lol. “We are monogamous/married/whathaveyou now you’re pregnant but I’m gonna need a patern…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:13 AM
3

No lol. Esp not later stages. Do you know much pregnancy fucks with your body, sleep, weight, literally so many things that do the opposite of making you horny?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 02:00 AM
4

Telling women to do what exactly? What is the equivalent of a man informing a woman before sex that he’d want a paternity test if there’s ever a pregnancy to asking or telling a woman something before sex?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 01:57 AM
5

No, although it’s dependent on state law and you’re kinda speaking of the opposite scenario. There are like I think like a very small number of states in which bio dad is really screwed in that scenario tbh. But in most, bio dad must petition for legal paternity (within the SOL - those time limits do differ state by state). Husbands status as presumed father isn’t dependent upon him even signing something - the fact he’s married to mother when a child is born during the marriage is the salient f…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 01:50 AM
6

It doesn’t “count” for child support whatsoever nor does it effect custody you just generally have to establish paternity through the courts because you won’t be subject to “presumed fatherhood” statutes - that is, assuming you’re not already subject to one from a different context (like marriage). Biological fathers ALWAYS have legal rights to their biological children they just might have to go through the legal step of establishing paternity first. These are innate rights - constitutionally b…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/07/26 01:27 AM
3

What in the hell. “The reason is women can’t land a joke too scared and are boring can’t carry a conversation”. Lol. You aren’t spending enough time with them.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/07/26 01:19 AM
0

It’s also reasonable to question someone’s credibility on a given topic or particular opinion or at least weigh that when considering their argument. Which can be done reasonably but folks will scream ad hom at just about anything. Idk if that’s considered formal or informal or whatever but I see it overused a lot, even when questioning credibility or motivation is very much valid to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:54 PM

Example 2 is not really akin to example 1, which is clearly more explicitly seeking emotional support than example 2. Also though I have not seen these posts, what sub were they posted on? This one? Don’t you think the specific subreddits you are apparently using to come to this conclusion are relevant?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/07/26 04:25 PM
7

This is so obtuse to even be ironic. “Men don’t know” 😂 yes they do. Men who are essentially, children, aren’t lumped into the general “men” in my book at least when I generalize men. Particularly the ones who you are die hard trying to defend as if they “don’t know”. Gender roles lol even the few you picked out for men are *laughable* I I will repeat utterly *laughable* compared to what historically has been delegated as gender roles for women. Ohhhh you paid for a few dates and mow the lawn on…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 01:33 AM
8

Yeah that’s super convenient. Let me just discount all the shit men do because I could argue they are “biologically more fit” or some other bullshit that makes zero sense. Of course breastfeeding is still labor. So it is for a man doing manual domestic labor even if his “significant biological differences” make it a lot more easier and efficient for him to do them compared to a women. Get outta here with that bullshit. PS she specifically said the issue would be *if* she was still expected to do…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 01:05 AM
7

Nah. I can’t even believe yall say this shit outloud sometimes. It’s 2026, men fucking know they should help with the house and kids equally or at an arrangement that is mutually agreeable to both parties- particularly when both are working full time. This isn’t all on women to “communicate” while he sticks his fingers in his metaphorical ears like a child. Grow up. Pay for first date, make first move, “protect” (who the fuck is spending daily hours each day “protecting”), heavy lifting” (tf doe…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 12:55 AM
8

But women aren’t by and large complaining they today suffer those injustices. They may point them out to show the systemic nature of such and how it may lead to lesser yet more current inequalities, but at least I’ve never seen a modern woman complaining she can’t succeed at all etc, because of legally permissible discrimination against women that hasn’t existed in 50+ years… The point is this shit doesn’t happen in a vacuum and you can’t just erase said prejudice that has persisted *systemicall…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 12:46 AM
2

YOU are the one over simplifying it lol. First of all there are all sorts of studies and data on this issue, and the majority at least that I’ve been privy to show when counting both paid and unpaid work - women are doing more. Idc if it’s 30 min a day that shit adds up long term. Many of the same data sets show men have much more free time than women. Maybe it’s cuz they sleep less, maybe it’s because total work usually adds up more for women, maybe it’s both. Nevertheless, there’s plenty of da…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 12:40 AM
4

I have real clients. You’re not one of them. Figure it out yourself. Have fun with the law firm advertisements
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:50 AM
3

No of course there’s an advantage, you’re just still being an idiot. And it’s not my job to teach you shit especially when you’re SO confident you know all the things. Hint: you do not.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:35 AM
5

No. Doesn’t work like that. Also I am by no means an MRA just because I agree with joint custody 50/50 default custodianship statutes. Nor have I only represented men. You need to stop educating yourself through YouTube. Edit: also that is in no way a compliment. Not to me nor Danika Patrick. You’re trolling with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:17 AM
5

Yeah I think that women might actually be better than men on average at* some* legal roles Gee, thank you for your expert opinion in that respect. Thank god for this, the bars who license me, in fact all state bars everywhere, are just eager for your opinions on what some roles women might be better at legally on average. Please write them. so that would be a hot reverse traditionalist fanatsy: being a stay-at-home to a female breadwinner who is a literal mens rights activist, being hot in the c…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 03:15 AM
3

My source for both is being a former practitioner. Have you repped many men during a divorce? lol I have. Nevertheless **I am glad** to see things gradually changing. However, it will be gradual.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 02:16 AM
2

This is not how this works
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 01:23 AM
6

Maybe you should explain what the alleged social media trend entails here because I’ve not seen that so unfamiliar with what it even is attempting to convey. Sole custody is not easy to get in the US - in any state. If that’s what you mean by “full custody” I can’t really tell. I also can’t say sole custody in the US is one to one what sole custody is in Belgium. With family law shit you need to be more specific. If you mean primary custody or what’s more formally called primary residential cust…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 01:15 AM
15

No. Y’all are basing this off of social media not real life
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 04:45 AM
16

WHAT? WHAT IS COMPHET omg they’ve gotten fucking crazier?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 12:30 AM
3

Great. I’m not trying to date you trust me you’re safe bro
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:51 PM
4

I’ve been here a gazillion times longer than you. I know what I’m talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 04:49 AM
10

Yeah yall see what you want to see, read into what you want, etc. you’re being so obtuse I’m sure all you see is literally up your own asshole. I can’t explain it any better - this isn’t reality. Idc how many TikTok’s you’ve perused with women “smelling misogyny”. Point being “women” aren’t doing that. Yet here - men (not men everywhere btw, but men here) like to argue otherwise. Yall are so fucking backwards in any event - regardless - if you blame women for the poor behavior of men - under the…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 03:43 AM
1

You are def not wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:45 AM
11

No. Because men feel the need to constantly blame women for “choosing wrong” and all the ills that men apparently feel in dating - the “good guys” etc., suffer because women all “choose wrong”. And only choose asshole who abuse them, allegedly. This is what’s repeatedly here as naseum by men on this sub
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:44 AM
7

You’re not wrong but it’s overly hyped as some sort of trump card for men (because they don’t even understand what a prenup is). Anyone with legit assets going into a marriage should get one, anyone with legit earning potential comparative to their spouse should consider it if they have concerns AND ANYONE who is the lesser earning spouse considering quitting their job to raise kids etc, should ALSO consider it with their own attorney/doing it right, etc, because it’s there to PROTECT YOU TOO. D…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:34 AM
17

Right, OP’s point is that only women apparently are expected to always pick up on it. Frankly only men on this sub ever argue that if a man did wrong to a woman (like in any metric) it’s “her fault for choosing wrong” and “she missed red flags I wouldn’t have”.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:28 AM

It’s not about “treatment” they aren’t “treated poorly”, it’s about education. That choice is objectively bad for those who choose it if the relationship doesn’t work out and/or behind close doors a lot of the time even if it doesn’t result in divorce. Those girls should absolutely be informed of the legal and factual reality of what could occur beforehand
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 02:08 AM

Did you read the OP?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 01:59 AM

Stats probably would already show that if you didn’t do many controls because the stats would be skewed to upper class folks already since only upperclass folks have the opportunity to do that as it is. If that’s the case it wouldnt show much of anything of value other than woohoo rich more privileged people have better lived and outcomes as if that’s a revelation.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 01:58 AM

No. It is not. Hating women is centuries old. New platforms for manifesting it does not equal new phenomenon or ideal.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/05/26 03:44 AM

Thats very sweet.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 04:13 AM
0

Dude you are very determined to completely missing the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:52 AM
1

Sure the vast majority of the compensable porn market means nothing about men in a general sense. Men are just left behind and completely ignored. Sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:27 AM
1

That IS porn
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:22 AM
7

This is well thought out, well written and generally a good topic here. What I will add as a millennial who grew up in the 90s early oughts - “you go girl” - rhetoric as well as a still young-ish woman during the me too movement: Toxic masculinity from what I gleaned was always about so called masculine traits that hurt everyone - mostly men as the primary victims - and were nevertheless socially enforced. So, self-sufficiency/stubborn individualism like never asking for help, seeing a doctor, b…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 03:18 AM
2

Jesus Christ this isn’t hard. The available porn is what men consume and what makes money. That’s it, there’s nothing else to the “quality”. If it didn’t make money they wouldn’t produce it. There’s no large group of men holding all the moneybags demanding higher quality porn for you because that’s you and some other small number of men with less or no moneybags “Men will put up with” you mean “what men will pay for”. I’m sure if you individually paid more you could find the higher quality or mo…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 02:59 AM

You’re treating them as if they are mutually exclusive. Which they aren’t. You’re also not just saying that. lol
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 02:50 AM

Compatibility is about learning to work together as a team and compromise (so both of you are a priority in the marriage/family), not becoming mini twins to one another. Nevertheless your post isn’t wrong - I think you’re just using a weird, not normal idea of what people mean when they say compatibility is important.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/05/26 01:25 AM
2

Idc if you think that’s the case 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:08 AM
1

Yeah you could, doesn’t make it relevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:06 AM
2

You could say anything you want, doesn’t make it apt.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:04 AM
2

Yeah ok, believe that if you want if it makes you feel better
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:00 AM
3

I never said any of that. Don’t put words in my mouth. But your idea that I’m some sad lonely 30+ woman desperate for marriage isn’t a thing. Of course married men can be misogynistic but that’s completely besides the point. You seem determined to go on irrelevant tangents. I’ve never once mentioned anyone whatsoever about men sucking or being horrible or getting some comeuppance or anything remotely that could be considered a revenge fantasy - that’s all you babes. I will not stand by 1% versus…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:38 AM
3

Yeah ok, I’ve been married for over a decade (and I got married two years before age 30 lol) so that’s a big miss, nevertheless it’s not the point and you’re losing focus. There’s no 10% of men having a “glow up” compared to women after they age. 25-30 is a little young for these numbers though regardless. 25 is like peak for MOST folks not a minority. 30 isn’t far off. Drop off occurs moreso 35-40ish, and then it’s mostly men and women at the same rate maybe men able to carry on a bit longer, v…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:18 AM
6

I replied to you because you seemed determined to defend the “virtually none” versus “a minority of men”. You’re 1% versus 10% is frankly just wrong. It’s silly revenge fantasy male BS. You playing into ad homs is just like icing on the cake substantiating how you’re not being objective here. It’s not a primary focus for my argument (clearly).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:08 AM
2

It’s not 1% versus 10% lol. It’s more equal. And yes you did, regardless if so and so “did it first”.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 12:01 AM
2

No - the other comment said “virtually none” versus “a minority of men” - it’s both a minority. Like a small minority for both - barely any men will age better than women and those that do also have to work for it. That’s facts. Regardless of whomever is jumping to ad homs “it says more about you” like stupid petty bullshit that’s besides the fact.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 11:57 PM
4

It’s not though. And the tiny amount of men who might age better than the smaller tiny amount of women isn’t worth talking about. Small minority of either gender. Men holding onto that as some sort of trump card is dumb and doesn’t move the needle. Most of yall won’t be that, neither will most women like like accept that, maybe.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 11:48 PM
7

Are you serious? That’s an insane illogical analysis. “I picked wrong for a wife therefore it’s a guarantee she’s the reason for the divorce and also therefore my kids automatically should be with me most of the time because there’s a ‘serious chance’ she’s not a good mother.”
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:55 AM
-6

No. Jesus Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 02:51 AM
2

So if I said “saying most men who want to use women for sex is equivalent to saying most men have penises” you’d be like sure 👍🏻
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 11:14 PM

All drugs ultimately approved in the US anyway are gonna start with animal trials before they move to human clinical trials. That was even a requirement at least up until recently (I think they’ve eased it now, but practically speaking, that’s still what almost every drug company is gonna start with) Also I think the bio mechanism for the now marketed GLP-1’s came from some sort of research on Gila monsters, I don’t think they did clinical testing on lizards probably used rodents or rabbits or s…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 01:15 AM

Yea I’m guessing some sort of smell/hormones or idk maybe something specific to the way women look like long hair or something that’s far less common in men for something that has absolutely nothing really to do with gender. Assuming it’s not just a fluke.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 12:35 AM
29

This isn’t the “gender war” it’s simply an environmental observational study wherein the researchers are specifically stating they have no clue why the results are what they are. There is no real takeaway here but by and large tons of science is similarly not groundbreaking or has no real big takeaway. Often it simply leads to more questions. There are plenty of studies that seem silly on their face but might lay the groundwork for something bigger and more groundbreaking.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 11:14 PM
0

Literally LITERALLY red pill from its inception touted itself as a necessary evil responding to feminism. This wasn’t a grifter thing. This goes back even to the main three heralded as red pill founders. This type of shit was on the sidebar 16 years ago when I started delving into it. Red pill has never been “just people sharing opinions about what they believe is the most important factor when it comes to attracting women.” Y’all take every opportunity to try and pretend it’s always and forever…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/04/26 12:10 AM
9

No. It’s not a red herring at all. I’m not even sure you know what that means. This person is specifically talking about manospherian responses, she’s not saying it’s men in general. Second, manosphere constantly states it’s a needed response to “feminism” while ignoring the need for feminism itself. The fuck you think feminism was a response to? Things going well for women? Y’all love to ignore this point as if you have the high ground because “it’s just a response”. As if the things you aren’t…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 04:00 AM
1

Yeah sure 👍🏻 arguing with me over and over again about how it actually works IRL today in practice really proving that for ya.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:34 AM
2

Sure let’s pretend we were talking about theoretical “visions” you had. 👍🏻 Great job with all the downvotes btw - such confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:15 AM
1

Sure 👍🏻 imma let you figure this out now for yourself. I’m done trying to teach an ignorant ass about shit they are so utterly desperately wrong about. Ps any lawyer - I mean the DUMBEST lawyer in existence who passed the bar by .01% would agree your incoherent comment about what “proving it” means is legally ignorant.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:06 AM
1

You’re a stubborn idiot. If you were actually interested in learning - particularly after I already told you that I support 50/50 default custody laws - I could have told you specifically why that benefits men, IRL. Instead you wanna argue with me over and over about shit you don’t understand. Continue to be so stupidly confident in shit you don’t understand. If you actually cared - about men - you might actually learn something. But let’s not pretend that’s what happening here.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 04:03 AM
1

Oh honey. Not only are you conflating the criminal and civil burden of proof, you aren’t even addressing admissibility of evidence. Evidentiary standards for admissibility and burden of proof to prevail may be related, but they are not the same thing. You absolutely do not need to meet a BOP of “beyond a reasonable doubt” to prevail in civil court. Also you’re incoherent here. BARD and POTE are two different burdens of proof. The fuck does “Just saying it means preponderance of evidence” mean af…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:58 AM
1

Omg. No one is arguing it would not be a statute. Almost all family law is in a statutory code - in every single state, that’s irrelevant whether the default is 50/50 or PRC with visitation. Those are all statutory. All of it - 50/50 or PRC is a default presumption. BY STATUTE. There is not a single custody statute - 50/50 default or otherwise - that eliminates the possibility of negotiation or court intervention if someone disagrees. ALL of them require both parties to agree if the default resi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:49 AM
3

I hope if you ever need it - you hire counsel. You’re not educated enough to go it alone here. Which is most people btw. Hopefully you never need to.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 03:00 AM
3

Wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:57 AM
4

Sure I do, because I am exactly that. And sure you did, despite the fact you aren’t recognizing that you did - unless you misstated yourself. “Because then it” (ie a 50/50 default standard) “requires a parent to actually prove” (what do you think “proving” means, legally if you’re not referring to evidence and the standards of admitting said evidence?) “someone is abusive instead of just saying it” (arguing “just saying it” is something applicable in states that do not have a 50/50 default stand…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:56 AM
12

More than she does? Why is that even relevant? Why you giving credit to someone based on having a dick without any other context other than “he may financially support a woman doing all the primary work/volunteering”? As far as you know he doesn’t give a fuck or even have a clue what volunteer efforts she engages in. You’re bending over backwards here to dismiss the efforts this person is stating women make.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:34 AM
8

lol so only non capitalist men factor into your whole “men care about peoples equality while women only care about women’s equality” argument? Is that what you’re saying?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:27 AM
10

No, wrong again. But happy to see your responses in real time meanwhile you’re ignoring mine
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 02:07 AM
1

Yeah again, wrong. The evidentiary standards don’t change whether you’re in a 50/50 default state or just one with primary residential custodianship and visitation to the other parent. Still waiting to hear what grand expertise you bring here. Maybe try actually reading a statute or something
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:59 AM
7

This isn’t how it works - even in 50/50 default states. Which I am all for - I agree with 50/50 default. But it doesn’t mean what you think it does, apparently. You are the one who needs to educate yourself
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:56 AM
7

Correct, both parties must opt in to begin with
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:52 AM
8

I used to practice family law - as a lawyer. I repped plenty of men. Though im not in family law practice anymore (thank god) I also still have a lot of day to day friends who are. I’m not ignorant on this topic. When I say step by step I mean there’s a bunch of steps that occur well before you get to a contested custody battle before a judge, first and foremost just being negotiations between the two lawyers. Before contested petitions and motion practice is engaged in. I’ve represented men who…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:50 AM
7

Well that’s not exactly accurate. It’s not like it costs “tens of thousands of dollars” to ask for more custody, regardless of who is seeking it. Custody during a divorce or just a custody proceeding alone is a step by step process that is by and large far less expensive and involved than a full blown custody battle at court with a a trial where a judge decides. Most states have required mediation even before it gets there. And most cases won’t even get to required mediation because that’s only …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:37 AM
14

What was his point even - women who do such volunteer work only count if it’s 100% on their dime on top of full time work? Or what - it’s not really women doing it if they have a husband providing for them as if those women were forced to choose that type of volunteer work by men? What an obnoxious detour that was.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 01:30 AM
6

You’re talking about two separate things - first. “Men’s issues” are not the same as “everyone’s issues” for which men (and women for that matter) by and large are not advocating for some carve out or special focus on a gender - aka “poor people” or “children killed by wars.” Similarly “women’s issues” are also distinct from those “everyone issues” too. Most women advocating for something like helping the poor or preventing child death are not specifying they only care about women. That’s the fi…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/26 12:18 AM
2

Not really. I don’t see how it’s central to feminist ideology to make broad sweeping generalizations, whereas it’s definitely central - like it’s a foundation - for red pill ideology.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:23 PM
1

No it isn’t. There is no “simple” argument to “all victims are responsible whether through ignorance or solution.” And your “reasoning” isn’t reasoning nor was it what I argued against to begin with. If you cannot see this than I too cannot help you further.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:24 AM
3

This is why people like you are impossible. I never said a single thing about women never being bad, or men always being worse. I also not once brought up domestic violence. YOU made claims about women MOSTLY doing x behavior. I said actually I think men engage in behavior that is analogous just in a different form. You lost your mind and insisted no no no, men couldn’t possibly do that more, and when they do, there’s excuses for it. It’s not the same thing blah blah blah. NOW you’re bringing up…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:02 AM
3

You’re - yet again - not simplifying anything here, you’re changing it entirely. This weird teacher process you’re also attempting to employ is also not working for me. I don’t need you to break down some step by step process you think I’m not understanding in your argument - I’m neither interested nor do I have the time for however the fuck long that may take. If that’s what it takes to explain yourself - maybe you’re not articulating accurately to begin with. Rather than assuming your audience…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:46 AM
1

You’re not simplifying the premise - you’re changing it. I’m the one who pointed out to begin with the flaw here - the argument that makes them responsible. This whole house of cards you’re building is based on the initial idea that victims are somehow responsible for abuse or allowing it if that’s more palatable to you, in so many words. You chose to claim the premise behind supporting that is “all victims are responsible” - be it “ignorance” or “solutions”. And you claimed (boldly I might add)…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:40 AM
5

You right, particularly second graf. I’m not even disagreeing there’s a misandrist caricature here - 💯. That being said, more outlandish than anything early terps could ever imagine?? Are you unfamiliar with the doctrine’s most well known founders back in that era?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:27 AM
2

Yeah - still laughable. “Many fucking marriages” comment regardless. Zero possibility that women are as controlling of their male partners as men are of their female partners. Zero.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 04:26 AM
0

Negging isn’t genuine or supplying empathy wtf there’s no definition or use I’ve ever seen where your “maybe he was genuinely trying to acknowledge how hard cancer can be” justification fits in there whatsoever.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:51 AM
3

lol ok if that’s what you want to believe - there is no way women REMOTELY engage in controlling behavior like this as much as men. You don’t see the corollary to what you all call “shit tests” ok just call it abusive then I guess. I disagree - it’s boundary testing and seeing how much you can test and the other person will tolerate. It’s not exactly the same but premise and purpose can be similar. Absolutely zero possibility women do this anywhere near as much as men. Like that’s incredibly lau…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:41 AM
2

It’s def done to women just takes on a bit of a different form - it’s men seeing how much they can control her. What she wears, who she sees, she has male friends? Gotta check that, she’s going to girls night out?, a man is speaking to her, dare even flirting with her? Gotta check her on all that. Escalate escalate escalate depending on the man. That’s how men shit test. Let’s see how much control she will tolerate. They may not even care that much, it’s a test designed to see how far they can g…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:11 AM
2

No. Your premise is first of all wrong to begin with. At least the one you started with - which was yes children are responsible for their ignorance. Now it’s objectively they aren’t. 🤷‍♀️ Secondly, no. You argue based upon some sort of mechanical thought process you’ve decided makes sense in your head, but you completely fail to factor in humans and how they behave. “Sufficiently self aware” and “first thing they will try to do is resolve the issue” are not objective metrics at all. At least in…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 03:01 AM
2

But children aren’t “responsible” for ignorance. That implies they had reason to not be ignorant or had means to not be ignorant to begin with. Which they most often don’t, because duh. Objectively your argument makes no sense. And it’s not that simple.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 02:53 AM
1

lol that’s a nice little fiction you’ve invented there
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 02:44 AM
1

How are you this obtuse? Do you think I’m arguing with him about substance? Are you incapable of seeing there’s other reasons to call someone out?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 02:42 AM
7

Dude how can you get your analogies so fucking wrong while also spouting “same logic same logic!” That’s so fundamentally different it’s not even funny. First of all the person presumptively causing harm in that scenario (ie the driver) isn’t doing anything intentional, breaking any laws or rules, and is likely not even suspecting someone to wonder out in the street. They are at all akin to the abuser you’re apparently analogizing them too. Secondly, the person wondering out in the street is bre…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 02:37 AM
3

But that’s the whole basis of red pill ideology. Pretty hard to argue against generalizing large groups of people in general when your whole ideology and rhetoric is based on doing just that.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 12:58 AM
2

No - premarital property isn’t community or equitable property subject to splitting upon divorce UNLESS you commingle it. To be extra careful, men with premarital property or women for that matter literally anyone can get a prenup. Which can ALSO cover property earned during the marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 12:55 AM
3

What? You don’t have to be married to raise your kid or even stay with its mother? Custody isn’t dependent upon marriage at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 12:52 AM
9

Of course there is, Jesus Christ. “No logical reason” do yall hear yourselves? The logic has to do with harming versus being harmed - one is more culpable than the other. The premise being - harming others is obviously more problematic and violative of other innocent humans than tolerating harm inflicted BY others to oneself. You’re the one not being logical. Possibly analogy might be drunk who decides to drive (ie creates risk of harm to others) versus drunk who just sits a home but is slowly k…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 12:44 AM
1

So guess you agree Mr meme is using a logical way to argue? Lol, do you work for him? Why you trying to make an argument he allegedly made more palatable? You’re not supporting his method of presenting arguments at all - which is what I was contesting to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 06:00 AM
0

No I’ve directly attacked his typical method of arguing. It’s the same approach and position over and over again. And it’s bad. And 100% pure bias. You wanna defend a meme and some dude’s outrage as a “quantifiable metric” go ahead.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/04/26 05:46 AM
3

But they aren’t really attracted like true physical attraction, that’s just what most old dudes tell themselves if and when they land such a younger woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 02:31 AM

lol right on
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:43 PM
2

Honey pregnancy and/or birth alone outweighs all of these alleged cons that men have
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:42 AM
1

Wooo so scared, big man with his block. Fucking stick with it for once. 👍🏻
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 05:35 AM
2

What is your relationship like with these women you are so frequently with? Are you like flirty with them or as others have said, might you be coming off as the safe gay guy friend? Very hard to tell from your OP how you may be coming off so that could be false as hell
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:50 AM
2

All you do is look for reasons to argue against women and insist men are hapless victims of women. You don’t seem capable of making actual legitimate arguments that have any real teeth or value. Here you are with a fucking meme. You’re a fucking problem, probably more for yourself than anyone else
/r/PurplePillDebate06/04/26 01:29 AM
5

Jesus Christ should I charge for every piece of advice I give to male colleagues? I don’t. And you’re talking about random unsolicited advice from online anonymous sources? Are you joking?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/26 11:02 PM
0

Red pilllers are obviously not the correct folks to speak to on the subject so like, if you’re gonna participate here you should probably accept the definitions we’ve all accepted and get over it. You don’t get to define it.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/26 04:21 AM

I mean you nailed it with circa 2016 - everything shifted with maga movement - at least from what I saw. Red pill became more and more aligned with “conservative/trump/tradcon” and here’s where we are today.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 10:55 PM
2

In the real world “most men” are not capable of doing this, let alone trying to or hoping to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 04:09 AM
7

This is so reductionist it’s absurd. Women have easier LIVES as in all the things involved with living as in LIVES ….because there is a larger market for female sex workers hence they always have this “backup option”? Meanwhile men are “starving in the street” because there is less of a market for them to be sex workers? Is this genuinely your logic here?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 03:57 AM
-1

You literally just ignored everything he said.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 03:48 AM
14

The best comparison I always think of is did he ask her to be exclusive/girlfriend +boyfriend/ask her to move in ON THE EXACT SAME TIMEFRAME AS EVERY PRIOR GIRLFRIEND? If not, under their logic the new GF is second best, he desires her less, she’s getting shitty second class treatment. Like y’all 🤦‍♀️ think about it for 2 seconds and then realize how petty and illogical that would be. Then think about it for two more seconds and realize it’s the same damn premise y’all arguing about “if she does…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/26 12:52 AM
3

If you can’t support your initial premise that YOU wrote in a DEBATE sub and need to bring up a bunch of maybe tangentially related- maybe not- shit. That is on YOU I never deviated from the premise. You now have.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 11:21 PM
3

Hun you can’t just randomly target shit but even brought up before and expect that means the whole argument we were having just goes out the door. Either I gave you a valid reason to think more critically or not. You’re raising entirely different premises here, it’s random. The only one I’ve even had time to read and can personally speak to is boys getting charged with child porn where girls sent nudes - let me tell you - I’ve represented both boys and girls for that activity. It’s ridiculous ei…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 11:08 PM
3

I haven’t. I would absolutely include say a female gang member engaging in gang violence voluntarily similar to a man similarly situated. She doesn’t get a pass for being female. Same as I would a male victim of college sexual assault being taken advantage of as a similarly situated woman. He isn’t less of a victim because, male. No one is applying some sort of one-sided gender dependent nuance here, you are making that up. The facts and circumstances aka the nuance matters most, not the gender
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:54 PM
3

Depends on what you mean by the “law” - if you mean purely from a legislative standpoint, sure. But that’s a little naive right? If you mean more broadly taking into account not just written legislation but prosecutors, judges and juries aka HUMANS advocating and charged with applying the law, no you’re wrong. As I said - you’re not applying nuance here for your main argument. CLEARLY such nuance hasn’t like completely missed you, hence your frat party hypothetical, you just don’t like nuance (h…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:47 PM
4

Oh it’s definitely nuanced in the eyes of the law, let alone at trial where juries decide, are you joking?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:33 PM
4

I’m saying it’s more nuanced than what you’re making it out to be. It’s not 1 to 1, which is what your whole argument is built off of.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:30 PM
6

You’re conflating these things. That was my point - they aren’t the same. You’re acting like going to frat house party in college is like akin to voluntarily joining a violent gang - it’s not and I assume you’re smart enough to understand why.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:26 PM
19

You’re conflating dangers inflicted by potential unforeseen third parties to dangers you did to yourself. It’s not the same thing. You could say those women may be naive maybe, but it’s not the same thing as someone like choosing to engage in reckless activity itself that knowingly endangers them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:20 PM
17

She’s talking about getting treatment for illness or disease, like cancer, heart disease, etc. Things that have much better long term prognoses with early diagnosis, monitoring, and intervention.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 10:14 PM
4

But you want her with this part time job or?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 02:32 AM
9

Ok, you own land, which you put in your parents name, but also there’s a trust for like what, rent payments or something like that which are earned from that land or? I’m just trying to figure out how you’re the breadwinner. Do you work/have like a day to day job or?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 02:20 AM
11

So like you’re not actually earning? Confused. You have a trust fund from your parents with a monthly allotment or?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 02:09 AM
1

Nothing you’ve asserted is backed by any logic to begin with, as I’ve already said.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 12:54 PM
1

Ok, believe that if you’d like
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:56 AM
1

That you wish to ignore the entire argument and any logic therein is entirely on you. But stay dumb all you want
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:55 AM
1

Yeah keep digging your hole. Nothing about this supports the idea women are more violent than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:18 AM
1

It’s not an accurate use of words because you found some Latin historical root that isn’t relevant to what literally anybody - scientifically or otherwise - uses today. That’s YOU using disingenuous bad logic for a claim you have nothing else to support with
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 02:04 AM
1

Yeah a stupid argument based on definitions?, not a clinical, or even legislative based one, mind you. No we going back to etymologic history here lol Still ignoring the rest of my comment. Still not applying logic. But yeah go ahead and stick with the whole well the Latin root of the modern day word child is convincing while literally no one using their brain is buying it. “The most accurate denotation”. Lol ok. You’re so far off from making an actual point here you should just stop digging you…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/03/26 01:29 AM

No, the English/latin history of the word fetus does not - by any means - justify your argument that legally procured abortion is in fact violent and should be included in violence statistics which are clearly using a different definition of what violence even is. Not only did you not address most of my comment whatsoever but you’re attempting to to use some sort of pseudo intellectual etymologic rabbit hole to avoid doing so. What you aren’t doing is applying logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 11:06 PM

Jesus Christ you know damn well violence data isn’t defining violence as legally procured abortions - for good reason. Are you also including American footballers in your whole violence argument or folks who decide to end life support as violence? Are you including the death penalty in your whole perspective on violence rates? Come on man. Nobody cares where you particularly (or religiously) fall on the basic boring abortion argument - claiming it needs to be counted as gendered “violence” in da…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 10:33 PM

You are using it to argue against a statistic about men and violence. You are clearly arguing abortion is a type of violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/26 09:24 PM
16

Nobody is “washing dishes twice” unnecessarily. Y’all twist yourself in knots to make justifications for why common and regular complaints you see about men’s effort in domestic labor that BOTH are responsible for - mainstream ones I might add - are just figments of women’s imagination or due to things like “her unrealistic standards.” Why is it so impossible for y’all to believe any of it? That maybe MEN - a LOT of them are NOT pulling their weight or sharing in the domestic responsibilities in…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/03/26 01:14 AM
0

I love it when a man pretends he’s “all men” or somehow the designated spokesperson. You’re so full of shit
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 01:15 PM
0

No it fucking isn’t y’all are so delusional
/r/PurplePillDebate11/03/26 12:54 PM
-4

You understand you’re not actually arguing at this point right? Not by any means anything logical or coherent.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 04:39 AM
1

Jesus Christ is the only reciprocity you care about financial cost? How can you be this obtuse? You’re really gonna throw proposing in there? As if that isnt culturally ingrained IN ALL OF US more than any of the other “romantic efforts” to be more burdensome on men that you’re pointing to? Let me tell you one that costs way more than your 5k average engagement ring - child birth. Fuck even birth control in general adds up - usually on the woman. But sure you wanna throw low hanging fruit like p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 04:12 AM
4

This isn’t the life of most men what are you talking about? Most men aren’t doing all this shit with zero reciprocity. Come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/03/26 03:34 AM
10

Women obv vet for physical attraction - hence the mountains, leagues of complaints from men screaming “it’s not fair!!”. That some may have said other things are more or just as important does not they aren’t vetting for it. Today’s women by and large ARE dating men they are physically attracted too. Secondly you are ignoring my second question - HOW are you expecting or arguing they should vet for “relationship history” - also WHY is that the second most important thing outside of physical attr…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 01:02 AM
11

Women obv vet for physical attractiveness - I have no idea why you think women aren’t vetting for that - are there questions or certain points they are supposed to making on dating profiles that you are saying NEGATE women vetting for this? How you supposed to do this but for swilling right on his picture or meeting IRL and taking it from there? Second - relationship history? What does this even mean? Are you expecting women to like submit a questionnaire or out of the gate ask like hey are you …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:52 AM
11

So how are you supposed to screen for that in early dating? Like so confused here. Shared hobbies, politics apparently don’t matter, metrics that might give some insight into certain shared values like income, whatever you mean by “status” and “social proof” also don’t matter - so what does? How are women supposed to be vetting for compatibility early on then?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/03/26 12:44 AM
3

Are you using some different username? I didn’t ask YOU that whatsoever. You don’t have a fucking clue what you are talking about and that’s weird af.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 06:02 AM
4

I didn’t ask you a fucking question are you losing your mind?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 05:58 AM
5

How the fuck would you even know one way or the other? You wanna call me an asshole for SUPPORTING shared parenting laws? Are you so stupid you can’t even read what’s in writing here? No You come out with this entirely irrelevant comment calling me an asshole - what is wrong with you?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 05:51 AM
5

Yes, absolutely. But there’s various levels of custody and what it might mean to seek it - it’s not as simple as “gets custody” or “doesn’t get custody”Hence my comments. Seeking clarity because his commentary was vague if you know anything about what “custody” might mean or what extents (or money/effort) might be to seek it. Y’all go practice family law for a bit and get back to me
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 05:41 AM
6

I don’t know the ins and outs of the florida law I will choose Kentucky if I had to pick one - but I’d really like to know more about all these abuse of discretion appeals you’re apparently writing before you continue to lecture me on what I need to do to combat some fictional cabal of “feminist overlords”. I already told you I’m a feminist - you want me to fight myself? On legislation I already told you I agree with in principle and main intent/substance?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 05:00 AM
5

What appeals are you writing that are all an abuse of discretion standard? Good lord. In actual state court of appeals or are you talking some sort of admin law? I can’t tell you how many appeals I have written myself - actual appeals not some ALJ thing - and only the evidentiary decision ones are abuse of discretion. I’ve even written a family court appeal - and it wasn’t abuse of discretion either. Not saying that wouldn’t be the norm there but you need to be more specific - are you writing a …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:55 AM
7

Wrong. That’s not how it works even in states with a rebuttable presumption of 50/50 residential time - sure it easier to get 50/50 - it’s not guaranteed just like it’s never been guaranteed to be less than that before those laws took place. But again - you’re the expert right?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:41 AM
9

You need to be even able to define what getting custody means before you make arguments like this. It’s foolish. I’ve helped more men get custodial rights for their kids than you ever will in your lifetime, but sure, what do I know right?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:31 AM
7

Here is a fact - most men aren’t spending thousands in family court to “get custody” that’s something you made up or read somewhere and ran with it like it’s absolute truth. All the while you continue to not define what you even mean by “get custody” so I can’t even tell if we are arguing about the same thing here - you need to educate yourself more on this topic if you’re gonna make a whole debate post about it, particularly if you’re gonna dig your heels in on it. Idc what you’ve read about fe…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:24 AM
6

No. You don’t understand what you’re talking about here. You’re conflating less common circumstances with the far more common ones and pretending that’s gods law on the matter. It’s not.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:18 AM
3

I mean at least one of those I can say with more experiences than most - ie men getting custody when they seek it - is currently and historically true at least for any generation of folk on this sub, although you haven’t defined what “get custody” means so that could change if we aren’t on the same page here. I think it’s just more relevant to look at facts and data points though - and the only alleged tactic you’ve identified in that domain is “rewriting history” using one super famous one off …
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:00 AM
10

Are you dying alone yet?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 01:43 AM
20

Y’all only see sex as a reward and use random stats to say See!! You only “reward” men who are bad”!! It’s a completely disingenuous argument that’s repeated over and over and over Dating/sex first of all isn’t a “reward” good boys are entitled to. Second of all all y’all’s stats on this are just take face value to mean one thing and one thing only - that bad boys are rewarded and good boys are punished. It’s an insane use.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/02/26 01:34 AM
20

You can’t link some 13 min video none of us wants to watch while making many of your arguments some sort of rebuttal to said video that none of us are watching. We aren’t angry at this YouTube post like you are nor are at least a lot of us willing to wade through this YouTube post that clearly angered you Your whole post reads like a 13 year old wrote it, sorry
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 05:03 AM
7

The facts are it’s NOT normal or typical.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/02/26 02:08 AM
7

Who is saying the employer foots the medical bill?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/02/26 03:20 AM
4

Right, happy for you and congrats on beating cancer man that’s truly amazing. That being said, you’re not really addressing my argument here.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:59 PM
3

It literally takes time, effort, organization and planning. You seem perturbed at the terminology but are you genuinely denying this exists as a concept? As a single parent this isn’t exactly as applicable to you, but imagine if you were with the other parent as a single family unit and you’re both supposed to be splitting these tasks and responsibilities equitably yet you’re doing 90% of it while your partner only ever does 10%. In such a scenario - you don’t see how that would be frustrating? …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 08:35 PM

No. One persons argument about one example from their life is not convincing as some one quick to go to fallacy fallacy! As you are, you should know that. “A few situations I’ve encountered” isn’t the argument. YOU are the one being disingenuous if you think the main premise is some sort of oh here and there random choice circumstances this is a valid thing. Be real here. Second, no, it’s not my job to support your claim that I’m strawmanning with a bunch of arguments you’ve allegedly seen that …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 06:49 AM

What use of it then? What use of it are you supporting? I’ve not seen one that isn’t some illogical bullshit excuse subtly disguised to do the inevitable blaming of “women bad” which is routinely what happens here in this sub. Would you like me to invent an argument I haven’t seen here so you can pretend I’m strawmanning? Because you have made clear you aren’t interested in putting forth your own opinion. Therefore you’re arguing I’m strawmanning an opinion I’m saying I’ve yet to see, that you a…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 06:22 AM

It’s like you ignored everything this person said…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 06:06 AM

Yeah of course you would say that. Make an actual fucking argument instead of attempting to support ones you haven’t made that I’m critiquing.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 06:00 AM
1

You can’t just roll with “you just hate men” because I’m calling out men’s asinine illogical criticisms on this sub. What sort of argument or premise are you even starting with here but for - I don’t like you, I don’t like what you’re saying, it’s not what im saying and I’m a man, therefore you hate men? I don’t give a flying fuck about your one friend wanting to date men only from Australia or South Africa. Literally that’s meaningless and not giving any credence to your ultimate argument whats…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 05:21 AM
3

What an incredibly ignorant thing to say. You’re being dismissive - exactly what OP is saying isn’t helpful (and they are right) while also lumping in men’s safety relative to women as equivalent to men’s safety relative to men (also a point you’ve glossed over made by the OP) You don’t get to ignore all those points with “well some women date men I don’t agree with therefore they get what the deserve and it’s the same as violence to men from other men”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 04:43 AM

No it isn’t. That’s just your assumption not her experience
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 04:33 AM

It doesn’t matter. If you’ve only had sex on your timetable ie what you are comfortable with you will be accused of “withholding sex intentionally” by men on this sub. The whole idea that maybe you want to actually get to know someone and develop feelings and attraction is literally alien when faced with me here who deem that a “punishment because you’re withholding sex.”
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 04:30 AM

“Choose better” is a tagline for when men on this sub want to backseat quarterback any particular woman’s choice in any particular man. There is no criteria or process, it’s just whatever that particular critical commentator decides to make at the time. It applies to literally any and all circumstances where a relationship didn’t work out - doesn’t matter if he cheated - choose better, doesn’t matter if he was violent - choose better, doesn’t matter if xyz - the point is, men here will use that …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/02/26 04:25 AM
0

Adults
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 01:42 PM
1

No
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 01:36 PM
-1

Yeah that’s not a good excuse for being an asshole of a person, like in life, generally. Aka being a red piller
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:56 AM
-1

ARPALT
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:54 AM
1

ARPALT
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:53 AM
7

But that’s not a covert contract, you’re misusing that term. You being pressured from some social or online presence to do something is NOT a covert contract. I might as well say my tiny titted ass is being pressured through a covert contract to get a boob job. But I mean that’s nuts man. My husband isn’t doing that. Y’all need to be specific when you use terms and not just wildly apply it to anything that might seem remotely relevant
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:42 AM
10

Dude did you read some of his follow up comments? He literally admitted he thinks that paying for a date is an expectation she should put out. I applaud you for your effort but I think you’re getting a little deeper than OP here. He’s been pretty clear these expectations means men should get sex. Again, he is the one trying to enforce covert contracts here. That being said, YOUR premise is not wrong. But I’m struggling to see what feminists are specifically trying to enforce here? Who mainstream…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:37 AM
6

Omg suggesting if you do x or y you might be more attractive to the opposite sex in some broad context is not a covert contract, Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:29 AM
7

Hun you’re the one who needs to reread it… he’s literally saying if women ARENT meeting these expectations of sex then they need to like make it clearer or somehow feminists need to make it some platform. The WHOLE PREMISE is based upon expectations men hold he’s saying women need to address, not men.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:15 AM
5

So no that wasn’t actually a factor for me at the time I decided to have/had kids. But I understand it. My H and I were both 30s for first child and he was 39 at second so like - feel you on wanting to enjoy your 30s but like you can only delay for so long ya know? I was 33 and 37 for my kids and my H is about 3 years older so I mean men have a little longer longevity here but not like so much before it’s either a weird situation or an unlikely one to expect. I absolutely do not recommend having…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 05:12 AM
9

That’s not what’s being said. A man for example saying at the end of the date hey here’s your half is a ok. A man picking up the tab saying lovely date hope to see you again a ok. A man expecting him picking up the tab means he’s gonna get laid is the definition of a covert contract. Similar thing with his “chore play” example. That women/feminists are telling you these things do NOT mean you should expect sex is in fact an example of them trying to dismantle these covert contracts that men expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 04:37 AM
25

This person has absolutely illustrated in a very direct manner how they are correct - the examples you pose are you pushing covert contracts onto others and not vice versa. As for red pill dogma, sure not manipulative at all - dread game, treat her as interchangeable, treat her like a teenager, “promote” her with the level of commitment you give, AWALT, etc. sure not manipulative at all. Sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 03:08 AM
15

What studies and how are you defining “hedonistic” I feel like that’s a pretty amorphous term
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 02:12 AM
34

So I have two young kids. If you want some cookie cutter-expected-of-mom’s answer bullshit like “the joy of children” or “I was born to be a mom” I’m not the person you are looking for. I’m an older millennial (so not Gen Z or younger) so while I didn’t necessarily grow up in the exact current cultural zeitgeist surrounding children, it was definitely still a decision for me at the time I decided to have them and not some sort of huge social/religious pressure cooker choice. I was also in my 30s…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 02:04 AM
4

So by your own admission it’s fuckall either way then?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:15 AM
14

There’s a lot more disadvantages objectively in the US to having a kid as a woman than advantages, like come on. Being a mother in the us is not some privileged position. Y’all all say shit like this having no idea.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/02/26 04:13 AM
2

What two “glaring examples from this decade indicate that feminists do not believe in bodily autonomy at least inasmuch as you are comparing that to abortion jurisprudence?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/02/26 02:40 AM
1

Yeah typical whiny pants response from you. If you can’t even follow a central basic premise of YOUR OWN POST that’s a you thing. You can go with your pearl clutching outrage that someone isn’t daring to be as nice to you as youd wish they would be because you made a dumbass premise to begin with and now can’t defend it or you could actually defend your premise here.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 06:52 AM
3

It’s not asymmetrical if THEY ARENT REJECTING YOU. What?? You literally spent half your post talking about the hardship and emotional labor men go through being rejected YET your premise is those women who ARE with them aka DIDNT reject them are supposed to be like oh wow look at all this emotional labor he’s done. With putting himself out there, and being rejected, …. By other women? You’re also grossly misrepresenting the majority voice of complaint for womens emotional labor if you’re boiling…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 06:43 AM
-1

So women are supposed to do like what? Make up for all this “emotional labor” their man allegedly has done before she was even involved and even after this particular woman has NOT rejected said man? I for one do not count every single time I’ve had to put any effort into anything - emotional or not- that might be pleasing or helpful to the guy I’m with as some sort of tally with an expectation he must make up for it in some way, lest it’s some great cosmic unfairness to me.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 06:27 AM
5

Yeah dude anyone can. The point is whether it’s a realistic thing to make yourself worried about. Christ y’all are so single minded
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 08:11 AM
0

This is not relating to ops argument at all. But ok go off with your tangent.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:42 AM
6

I wouldnt go so far as to say stupid but I would put that in the “him” category of creating insecurities for himself. If your woman is treating you good, you’re satisfied sexually and you feel genuinely loved and that she’s attracted to you (aka the sex aspect again), who cares about whatever narratives you could make up in your head about Superman? Why dwell on that it’s just gonna create resentment that frankly probably isn’t fair to put on her. Like how dare folks have dated others before the…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:41 AM
1

Same
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 04:35 AM
4

It doesn’t make “men” insecure. It makes some men insecure. Downvotes aside, I don’t understand why guys on here that promote this narrative don’t understand they are likely in the minority of men in general. And I never said I didn’t get it - I get it. From that man’s perspective of course it’s creating insecurities. That doesn’t make them realistic. And fair enough - we all have insecurities that logically aren’t sound god knows I do. The difference is I recognize this is a me issue - not some…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 03:40 AM
4

Well OP does, clearly. I’m not sure how youd know according to your own logic whether it’s a or b though unless you’re thinking about her past possible partners or she like, tells you
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 03:29 AM
1

I’m not being obtuse at all. If you think this topic hasn’t been posted over and over again ad nauseam for the years I’ve been here you’d be mistaken. I myself even posted a counter years ago! Nevertheless your OP doesn’t talk about some specific proof someone has akin to “would go down now won’t with you” which is also an odd example not aligned with most men’s arguments on this very topic. Your post is far more general and leaves open plenty of random ideas men might have - potentially fabrica…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 03:11 AM

Questioned by who? What does that mean or look like - “questioned”? Are you saying folks should be interrogated, berated, or like just challenged? And if so on what grounds? You don’t like what they are doing, you think it’s unfair, you have some broader mission and think it’s harmful to said person with these alleged preferences, etc? Your examples may be example of preferences but idk they are fair to call “women’s preferences” as well
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 02:38 AM
14

Better question might be - what are healthy ways to de-program (certain) men from neurotically obsessing over non-existent comparisons they believe their current partner is making of them to prior sex partners. Because this op seems fairly simple but it’s actually more complex. You’re not tying this whole thing into simply “ways to believably show men you are in fact attracted to them” - you’re basing it on past likely unknown men to said man with this concern. And you also mean sex, like it’s a…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 02:27 AM
12

Women are not “largely attracted” to “outright evil men” wth. That’s also not why “nice guys” became a pejorative.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:23 AM
-4

I mean this is a narrative. One you’ve clearly spent time on and thought into. But it’s very much overthinking things. Anonymous folks on the internet always gonna go for generalized insecurities - that’s why men go for “you’re a slut/whore” or “you must be a dog/fat” or various other insulting things in the direction of women’s appearances. Your examples of common anonymous insults against men aren’t any different than that. Nobody trying to enact real change here. It’s dopamine rush doing anon…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:15 AM
11

Who TF is asking on a first date for you to suck dick under the table omg I hope you walked right tf out. That’s insane.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:09 AM
6

I mean “you absolutely can” while you’re arguing all of these caveats lol. Which aren’t even wrong per se but even your argument here is muddying your initial statement (“absolutely can”) because it’s dependent upon relativity, personal experience, foresight and ability to read others. If you mean “yes it’s possible for some people sometimes” gotcha, agreed.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:07 AM
1

Oh I definitely answered your questions just I guess not in the way you like. 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:55 PM
1

If that’s what your obtuse bubble allows you to believe - I am happy to live in la la land
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:55 AM
1

That’s a fucking you thing man? That’s not a me thing that’s not an every person thing and you taking it out on all of us isn’t the solution. Have you ever even thought maybe it’s not the sex that was the problem? Jesus Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:51 AM
1

You people and your invented fucking problems. I might as well lament the difficulty in learning how to suck dick well. You’re literally making some sort of victimhood argument here for women getting to know a dude before fucking him - oh the horror for that man. How oppressed and put upon he is. Is that really really what you want to be arguing here?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:48 AM
1

Understand fucking what? Y’all don’t want build a connection with women before sex because….its more pressure to perform? Are you fucking kidding me?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:40 AM
2

You don’t get to speak for OP or clarify his or her argument - which frankly isn’t about what men want at all. I am the one who brought up the analogous logic in arguments I’ve seen made by red pillers and the timeline in which women have sex. Op didn’t even bring that up. I did.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:38 AM
4

I’m not taking a side whatsoever. I’m saying ops logic is akin to another. I’m not saying I agree with said logic - no matter whether it’s op’s or red piller’s. And no - neither you nor the comment I initially responded to addressed this. I’m not missing anything - it’s just flying on by you.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:33 AM
3

WHAT omg. I can’t speak for your OWN experiences I can only speak to MINE. And mine are that yes sex where the tension, the crush, the lust has built is more intense and more meaningful. That doesn’t mean I have in any way shape or form said but oh if you don’t perfectly fuck me the very first time see ya to the curb you go. WHO IS SAYING THAT BESIDES YOU? Almost all the time sex gets better the more times you’re with someone and the more effort they put into understanding you and your body. Tha…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:22 AM
10

Normal basically. Nothing abnormal in either direction is ideal. Had one BF with a very curved one. That was a bit of a surprise but maybe I just haven’t been with enough dudes. Got over that quickly. Still a normal dick.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:15 AM
3

The fuck does that have to do with immediately discarding a man if the sex isn’t perfect on day one? Again, WHO said anything about doing anything of the sort? Not I.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:06 AM
4

No you’re missing the point. Op is saying well if you ain’t rolling out the red carpet for every girl you’re into especially since you say the ones you really like are less work, then you are treating them “worse”. This is the same logic red pillers etc use when claiming women who have ever had sex on a shorter timeline are giving “worse” treatment. You’re completely glossing over the whole comparison here and jumping into something tangentially - but not the point - related
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 04:04 AM
3

What? Who said that? Who is always having perfect sex the first time with anyone?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 03:50 AM
2

Touché I didn’t realize how creative you are. Extra points
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:59 AM
2

Random generator omg that’s even better. You literally had a random name generator spit that out and you were like cool - solid name, sticking with this. I’m actually really fascinated with how desperate you are to have the last word here. And frankly wondering how far you will go. Or how long it will take me until I get bored. Surprised that hasn’t happened yet tbh, you are certainly something special
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:58 AM
2

WILD take, I’m sure, but if you don’t want your very own self-chosen username used in a tongue in cheek manner on a debate sub maybe….don’t make it your username? I have very many weird feelings. Weird weird feelings for sure. None of them about you nor touched upon in this conversation with you this evening. Genuinely though. I’m sorry for upsetting you and I do hope you stay warm and have a good night. wherever you may be.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:47 AM
2

You are being obtuse. I’m sorry. But you are. I’m not afraid of “taking accountability” but I’m not going to like defend shit I never even said. You are really, REALLY reading into things here. Maybe you should take accountability for that.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:32 AM
7

Well my point is it’s the same logic - logic that when a woman uses it related to sex gets absolutely dismissed and ignored and attacked by all manner of things by red pill men on this sub. So that’s a little rich is all, at least if you are said men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:25 AM
3

I mean again if you want to read into the word “personalize” so be it. Like it’s just a word. That doesn’t necessarily mean ohhhh you’re attacking me I’m so offended. Literally you started talking about your own personal preferences here - that’s personalizing!!! As for the rest of this rant like I’m gonna go live my life now and forget about this in 5
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:22 AM
2

Frankly I just don’t have the patience for people here who act obtuse. Yes, you are reading into it. No, I never took anything as a personal attack nor have been offended. That being said, you seemed to want to talk about things on a more personal level from the get go. So I thought why not? Again, following your lead. Not sure why that’s such an instigating thing for you here, again wasn’t assuming anything you said to me was an actual attack on my own personal self. Nevertheless this is a deba…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 02:09 AM
2

You’re reading into things that aren’t there on my end. Only thing left to say I guess is I think you’re username is apt
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 01:47 AM
2

Personal doesn’t automatically mean “personal attack” it just means personal to you and me. lol. Your very first comment to me seemed like you were talking more personal - especially when you said ~me personally I find that a turn off~. But I never said nor reacted as if you were making a personal attack so that comment to me about taking something you said as a personal attack came out of left field. I have no idea where you’re getting the idea there’s some arbitrary reason here - I’ve consiste…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 01:41 AM
4

Who took anything as a personal attack lol? I just responded in kind. I can’t speak for you but IME as a woman, men who genuinely are into you aren’t all caught up with x number of dates first date third date whathaveyou. Like they just enjoy spending time getting to know you. It’s natural. And so is the physical intimacy when you’re both comfortable enough. It’s about building a connection. Not whatever you seem to be talking about. But if that’s not important to some men like so be it. Never d…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 01:28 AM
4

I mean you seemed to want to personalize this so? Just following your lead there. If it feels like it’s pulling teeth to get to know someone before sex like that’s probably someone who isn’t right for you ya know? Or her for that matter. All the guys I dated actually enjoyed spending time with me and I with them. Without needing immediate sex on the table.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 01:03 AM
8

Well we weren’t talking about me (or you personally for that matter) but if we were I can tell you without a doubt I only ever had sex on a timeline I felt comfortable with, after getting to know a guy and developing intense attraction, trust and mutual fondness (which isn’t a game, if that’s what you’re calling it). Still effort I suppose maybe just not the effort guys who are itchy about sex want I guess. Worked out wonderfully for me. Never “lost” a man I actually liked. Also like it’s fun … …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/01/26 12:56 AM
17

I mean this is the same logic for not sleeping with dudes super quickly when you want to see if they actually like you cuz you like them too. Yet red pillers largely tend to argue that’s “worse treatment” in all variety of metaphors and language.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 11:36 PM
1

You never asked me - you just keep insisting it’s something it’s not. At the very least you keep insisting something I disagree with. Confidence, drive, work ethic, independence, ability to achieve leadership and power. These are all factors like ambition that very well could lead to more money. Doesn’t mean it’s the money and lifestyle that may come along with having these traits that is what is genuinely attractive. And yeah that’s what I mean by conflating things. You’re divorcing the outcome…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 07:10 PM
1

No that’s not why women are attracted to ambitious men. You’re conflating a lot of things that may be appealing to women to have in a partner or might correlate to traits that inspire genuine attraction but aren’t necessarily the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 05:52 PM
2

It’s not though. Passport bros etc just tell themselves it is lol. It’s not actual attraction it’s attraction to money, better lifestyle, etc. nothing wrong with that per se I would assume most guys know deep down it’s not as genuine as they like to believe, but it just isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 05:36 PM
1

Yea again, not related to attraction.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 05:30 PM
2

No, it’s supposed to be based on attraction. You’re talking about circumstances and environment again. That’s the wrong use of that word
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 04:50 PM
1

Hypergamy isn’t supposed to be based more on circumstances and less on choice so disagree. You’re not following the definition here. I never even remotely said anything from which you could claim I’m saying heterosexual women just loose attraction to all men if they become educated and independent enough what a reach.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 04:46 PM
9

It’s because they are safer, more educated and generally have more opportunities to be more independent. It’s not “hypergamy” it’s just having more options - be it man/partner or no man/partner - due to an ability to be a more independent person.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 04:45 AM
1

You’ve now managed to detract an OP asking men about why they would be insecure about women outperforming them in some form or fashion into some meh hypergamy women are evil it’s all about finances post. Congrats I guess?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 08:53 AM
2

It’s 2026. If you’re drawing from some relic of the past that’s on you. Society and women et large aren’t all demanding men to be better than women in all the ways. it’s no longer some huge social expectation that men must always be better and women can’t be better at anything where the hell are you coming from that in today’s society women can’t be considered better than men in anything at all let alone individual men versus individual women and this is some big hinderance to men??
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 08:41 AM
2

The fact that you’re reading so god damned much into it like it’s not hard? It’s not abstract? I ain’t getting existential here man. If you’re a man who is one of the many who thinks this shit is unfair to put on men like just don’t be insecure about women earning more, succeeding more, being “better” etc. and vice versa for men who are the opposite. Like it’s not that deep. You’re going on about grass is green fuck your feelings nonsense. what are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 08:33 AM
2

The fuck are you talking about? Jesus this isn’t even a difficult concept.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 08:27 AM
2

It certainly is though if you harbor those beliefs yourself while expecting women to not uphold them.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 06:12 AM
4

Fair explanation but we also hear so much about how the provider role being an expectation of men, a requirement, etc isn’t fair or equal, is outdated and women who believe that are assholes. So like pick a lane I guess.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 01:23 AM
1

Men already use women for sex and have been for centuries and have been promoting and encouraging that amongst themselves so miss me with that logic. Y’all ain’t trying to level the playing field - you were just as much a part of creating it.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 01:12 AM
23

Abortion rights have never rested on some right to “consent to parenthood” that wasn’t the basis of roe or Casey. And the reverse is also not the basis of Dobbs. Also it’s a little weird to divorce it entirely from the whole pregnancy/gestation/birth aspect and just neatly pin this whole premise to the side. Lastly I for one would be down for LPS but only if it meant pre sex contracts. Otherwise you’re putting the entire responsibility of an unwanted pregnancy on women and there’s also various p…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 11:57 PM
1

😂 good try dumbass
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:53 AM
1

Absolutely not. Don’t make claims you can’t back up. Coward.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:41 AM
1

No. Link me where I said “I hate men”. Do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:39 AM
1

Where have I posted anywhere on this thread “I hate men” the fuck are you on about??
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:27 AM
1

Yeah. ok. I wrote that. Verbatim 🫡 And you over here telling me I’m the one who can’t read. Ok chief 👌🏻
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:16 AM
2

Blah blah blah. Emotional nonsense. You aren’t helping men, I doubt you can even help yourself. You certainly aren’t speaking for men. And you shouldn’t purport to. You are not representative of men if you think validation is somehow a problem worth trying to justify with an alleged solution of using others. And if you so much had read ops comments on the subject of sex work - youd realize you aren’t speaking for him either. And if you had the emotional intelligence of more than a pea youd proba…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 02:07 AM
1

Yeah dude I know. Might be more palatable coming from a blue pilled female lawyer feminist idk 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:23 AM
5

You don’t need to explain anything to me - I get it. Youre trying to much more then explain it - you’re trying to justify it - this childish alleged “problem” - as somehow being paramount to the welfare of others. It doesn’t need explanation - it needs justification if that’s what you’re saying makes using and hurting others ok. Justification you won’t and can’t provide. Because any attempt to do so is just ludicrous. lol “validation” get the fuck out of here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:21 AM
1

I’m not crucifying him I’m crucifying the mindset YOU are arguing here. Again. That of an entitled petulant child. Omg I’m a fully formed adult male who can’t feel attractive unless I lie to hot women to get casual sex. Boo fucking hoo. Grow up. You are not “men” he is not “men” don’t presume to speak for “how men think”.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:10 AM
4

I can only read what you wrote my dude. YOU are the one suggesting the real “problem” here isn’t the lack of sex - it’s validation. To which I will repeat. GROW THE FUCK UP. That’s not an excuse. I don’t give a shit what he wrote I’m responding to YOU and what YOU wrote. I don’t care what you believe you understand about “men’s heads” it’s completely irrelevant. Either you understand what it means to think like an adult or you continue with such a petulant entitled child mindset. Your choice dud…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 01:05 AM
3

Omg. You can’t run around acting like using and manipulating people is a real solution to your “problem” of lack of sex meanwhile being like wahhhh lack of sex isn’t actually the problem. Grow the fuck up. Dude is almost 40. You ain’t making some worthwhile valuable connection with some chick you have to lie to get into bed with anymore than a sex worker you have to pay. The lack of validation is now the problem??? If you are an adult male and can’t feel “validated” without manipulating others i…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:55 AM
3

In what countries is that meeting the elements for rape by deception?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:47 AM

He’s right tho, it’s not rape at least in the US and I take issue with y’all throwing that term around willy nilly so loosely. You aren’t a rape victim because a dude lied to you to get into your pants, no matter how awful that may be you’re not a rape victim.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:45 AM
9

If your “problem” involves resorting to using and exploiting people as the solution then YOU are in fact the real problem like duh. He could just pay for sex, damn.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:39 AM
7

These are just facts yo. Facts
/r/PurplePillDebate23/01/26 12:00 AM
6

So is men leading women on for sex “already happening and for a long time now” like you think this is some epiphany strategy you got here no man has ever thought of or engaged in? 🤦‍♀️ Im not complaining about anything - I’m pointing out this cuts both ways. Hence saying “this cuts both ways”. You wanna promote men doing this like on some grand scale - go ahead but don’t expect women to not engage in a counter effort just like I described. You reap what you sow etc. or is that also a little bit …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:42 PM
21

They Patrick Bateman wannabes without understanding the irony there 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:38 PM
6

I mean sure it might work if he can sleep at night but this also cuts both ways - you want women promoting women to use men for resources and favors and leading them on to do so to extract what they can from men and don’t worry about whatever hearts get broken in the process? No sex or any physical intimacy required. Just lead men on with abandon to get yours? Cuz that’s also a strategy that could work.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 11:34 PM
1

Ok chief you tell ‘em 🫡
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 03:01 AM
0

What the fuck are you talking about? Who is talking about you? YOU maybe? I said nothing about you whatsoever. Who brought up men not having friends? YOU. In fact I’ve repeatedly said why are we bringing outliers in here. You seem to want to take this in a very specific direction - unrelated to what my actual point was to begin with and frankly, not a topic I’m interested in engaging in.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 02:50 AM
1

Who cares? The vast majority of men are NOT in that situation let alone even tangentially related to the topic at hand. For those men, they have many other issues to tackle before they should even remotely expect or anticipate stranger women approach them for dates. Like step one would be just leaving the house. Why does every thread here have to devolve into some incel topic jesus.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 02:44 AM
0

Why are you making this about incels? No one is talking about socially shut in incel outlier men here from what I can tell. Most men have friends or an ability to get more should they so choose.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 02:34 AM
1

Ok that’s not even really what this post seems to be about but sure I’m sure you’ve seen comments like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 02:25 AM
2

That sounds like a problem you should probably work on before you’re lamenting online about stranger women not approaching you for dates. Most men aren’t in that situation anyways. Otherwise you could always try apps - also not the type of “approaching” OP is targeting here.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 02:06 AM
2

friends, acquaintances, school, etc I can’t speak for you but as someone who is well over age 25 I still have countless ways of meeting new people. I didn’t realize I was required to write each and every one of them out here to just make the point plain.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 01:59 AM
4

This post is confusing to me because you’re limiting this whole concept of approaching to like cold approaching it seems? Like being approached by a stranger? I had zero interest in doing that and it was always awkward when someone did that to me so, no. I don’t know where you’re getting some sort of premise here that women by and large even want men to be doing that. Meeting through friends, acquaintances, school etc is far more the reality for a lot of us and still involves a level of “approac…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/01/26 01:24 AM

Ohhhhhhh ok We found the only one here who knows successful men guys. 👆 He has a team y’all. A team! A team of ambiguously defined, allegedly successful men who are apparently representative of “successful men” everywhere. Oh they also won’t date me of course. Cuz he knows. He and his team.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 03:21 AM

Doubt, but how is anyone even supposed to respond to something as ambiguous as that? What are you even basing this on? What you’ve read online? That’s not how it works irl
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 03:11 AM

Nobody is specifically worrying about you - you’re over here speaking as if this is some common thing for men everywhere and of course the norm for those men who women actually want to even date. It’s crazy 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 03:04 AM

Ok well how many high demand men have rejected you for your body count? How are you even remotely representative of men? 5 people like Jesus yku genuinely believe that by and large the dudes women want most are worried about a women who has slept with 5 people let alone holding ideas like “wow damaged goods” 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:58 AM

lol 5 people y’all are so not representative of “men” here. Let alone the ones actually in high demand
/r/PurplePillDebate16/01/26 02:54 AM
3

What? Who are you even talking about? Everyone working a low paying shit job had “chances” - at what? Why are you automatically pretending folks like this had all these amazing opportunities and possibilities in life that they just squandered away due to whatever moral culpability you’re assigning? Hmm ok like maybe meet some ppl in the real world. Shit job or not they aren’t all junkie thrill seekers who wasted their life’s potential
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 05:23 AM
7

Ok yeah you have a delusional view here - folks working shitty low paying jobs living paycheck to paycheck are not all junkies and wannabe “SoundCloud rappers”??? How do y’all come up with this stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 05:15 AM
3

OMG the Uber Eats hypo 👌🏻😂
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 05:09 AM
6

Oh god now they all junkies? Soooo judgmental.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 05:05 AM
3

Who is the YOU here? Of course you don’t have time to find new hobbies. I don’t even see how youd have time to date or even meet new people? Most people - even young people in school with part time jobs are not spending 14-16 hours a day either in school, studying or working. I get the lacking disposable income part - I think many folks can empathize with broke kid in school. We just had like house parties and cheap beer. Do med school students not have parties or get togethers? That’s how i soc…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/01/26 04:56 AM
2

What does that even mean in a mutual trade with men of different skill sets where you aren’t relying on men to provide/protect like she was saying? You are arguing your tax burden makes you equivalent to those men doing the hard labor? So your reliance on bigger and stronger men who make your life easier and safer and provide the goods you want to buy is somehow different from women in the same boat?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/01/26 05:49 AM
3

Omg no. The fuck. Read some books read some history jesus lord. Birth control - birth control for women had your Margaret Sanger feminists make an argument that women should be able to enjoy and have sex recreationally - like men - instead of just for making babies. It was a direct assault to Catholicism’s take on the matter of when sex should be had - and particularly when women should have it. If that’s what you mean by “entitlement to sex” than fine - that’s a weird fucking way of phrasing it…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 07:05 AM
3

Nobody fucking says prostate cancer is funny.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:56 AM
1

Omg you are so obtuse
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:34 AM
1

I doubt you’ve ever actually looked at a woman in a “top position”. On paper or IRL for that matter
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:29 AM
1

Oh yes those folks - totally granting their potential investors into the inner circle of the shitty ways in which the business is run including which employees have zero merit, are overpaid, and how often that happens. Sure. 👍🏻 💯 What you’re really saying is you just believe you have some superability to tell if and when this happens. To normal people that would just come off as being a judgy bitch
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:28 AM
2

Oh damn we bringing in men’s dating preferences and AOC into this now for no apparent reason whatsoever? You going levels and levels into the void. My man here got layers of asininity.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:16 AM
1

Yeah ok 👌🏻. Now I don’t even believe you invest in shit, let alone own some companies. No business minded person is going hmm where’s the metric on dick riders I really need to see and understand that before investing. Nor are most investors getting some sort of grunt worker level insight to where theyd even witness it firsthand or become apart of the rumor mill for that particular company like are you just running around trying to dive into dead end startups with 20 employees tops? Literally de…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:09 AM
3

Who is “we”? You aren’t “men” - please. “I’ve written a lot about it already” to whom? Where? Why would that be relevant and why should I care - are you purporting to be some sort of expert on the subject by stating that? I don’t know you and you don’t know me. Tf I’m supposed to believe you for some abundance of written works you allegedly have that no one, let alone myself, has ever heard of 😂 You can think whatever you want about me I literally don’t give a shit. Go ahead believe whatever non…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 06:03 AM
2

Ok Mr gossipy man. I don’t agree and I def don’t agree you’re vetting investments on this basis. But go ahead I guess if you’re all about whatever gossip is floating around and that moves you
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:56 AM
3

Oh I’m trying to gain something now. lol that’s rich. It’s not common at all that women just never work hard and “get things” you are full of shit. Idc what you subscribe to “most men” that isn’t true either. Literally nothing you’ve even argued makes sense. Honestly you just seem like you’re making things up for the hell of it
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:55 AM
4

Oh! A text! How convincing 🙄 I wasn’t aware that “women” not having to “work hard” for “things” suddenly is gods law because of a text you received in 2003 or whatever from some chick you knew in college who blew a guy for a cheap deal on a POS car. You’re missing the point entirely, regardless. By that logic the fact I got a free pretzel once from a guy at a mall when I was 15 means women just don’t “work hard” to “get things” Sure as shit didn’t work hard to get that pretzel. Guess that proof …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:23 AM
3

No you don’t. You don’t “notice” this. What are you even talking about? You’re killing me over here with this idea that somehow you are auditing potential investment opportunities by how many potential women are out there riding dick to climb the ladder in that company. No you aren’t. The whole idea of that is just ludicrous on its face. Who is feeding you information about corporate dick coasting women at the companies you allegedly seek to invest in?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:18 AM
3

No it’s fucking not. I’ve lived in college towns too. We are now boiling this whole thing down to - in college towns some co-Ed girls can get a beater for a cheaper price by providing sex to some old guys? Y’all literally need to read what you write sometimes Christ
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 05:07 AM
2

Girl please. You cannot make some sort of claim that “women” have this ability/privilege when you know it’s bullshit. Like literally come on. Are you an adult who understands reality and the claim you are even making? You absolutely are making it some sort of typical near-universal “privilege” by including it in your list of privileges that “women” have. It’s a wild clam. That’s entirely unrealistic. At least if you live in the real world or have any experience with being employed or employing o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 04:43 AM
2

Girl acting like it’s just a thing available to all women with all jobs everywhere is complete nonsense. Hence my comment. HENCE MY COMMENT YOU BARELY ADDRESSED. I too know women who have fucked for job privileges or opportunities. Probably more numbers than you have. Nevertheless this not BY ANY MEANS some common/universal “privilege” like 🤦‍♀️. The fact you even include this very specific and mostly unrealistic scenario in your comment about “women” having things “easy” is just beyond me.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 03:55 AM
1

How is anyone supposed to take y’all seriously when you say dumb shit like this? Women do not “work hard” to “get things” and if they say they do it’s “self delusion”. wtf are you even referring to? What “things” and what “hard work” is allegedly being claimed to have been done to achieve them that isn’t “hard work” at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 02:41 AM
0

Ok Mr living under a rock. I’ll just pretend to ignore the however many hundreds of laws - state and federal - that have been enacted in the past decade or even earlier specifically to address the sexual abuse and assault of children, MANY of which were specifically enacted due to the outcry of offenders and their crimes coming to light where the offenders were more more prone to victimize boys (hello Boy Scouts, hello clergy). I can’t think of a SINGLE such law that is only for female victims o…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 02:31 AM
4

What is this nonsense I’ve seen twice now about women being allegedly privileged because they “can” fuck their way up in a job. Do y’all not see how unrealistic that is for the VAST majority of female employees? Are y’all so naive to actually believe this or you just subtly making the argument that women only move up because they exchange it for sexual favors? Who I mean who can honestly say women like WOMEN as a group are doing this let alone have some big privilege over men premised on the ide…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/01/26 02:26 AM
1

It’s not a matter of politeness. It’s a matter of just making sense and using logic. Which you failed to do. Then you deleted your thread. But yeah for future reference I would hope if you’re gonna post a bunch of nonsense that people can’t understand and isnt logical, I would hope you would learn a little. Fingers crossed. A condescending prick attitude of course doesn’t help. Do you need help in learning basic adult skills too??
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 08:03 AM
1

Yeah or just delete it because you realized it’s stupid. Maybe cool it with the condescending prick attitude next time you post.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:21 AM
0

lol real talk
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:17 AM
2

It’s possible…that I asked you a question to clarify….and you responded this way…and here we are. The fuck just make a point then if it’s gonna be this hard to get anything from you whatsoever. YOU wrote an OP inviting women to answer how bout you make it make sense Jesus god it’s not that hard
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:08 AM
2

The “bulk of women” are decidedly already with men around their same match or otherwise equally mediocre. Y’all miss miss middle, northern and southern America altogether. Y’all focus on stupid shit you see online that isn’t indicative of the average couple, who is statistically overweight not rich and mediocre as you say
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 07:05 AM
0

Are you kidding? Literally in your OP: I always wondered if maybe it's a situation like with peacocks and peahens, and we're just another species where one gender is way more aesthetically pleasing than the other. If you are unable to explain or clarify this statement, which is literally a whole 50% of your OP, I'm not sure what you want me to do here
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:56 AM
0

What do you mean what? That’s a straightforward question.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:52 AM
1

Are you arguing men are “way more aesthetically pleasing” than women?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:51 AM
10

There’s a lot of top 1% posters who have a red pill flair like you want all their names too?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:36 AM
15

Well obv that doesn’t appear to be a problem for him. Seems to have plenty of female options he’s happy with regardless 🤷‍♀️ Clearly your def of “good partner” might not match his and hey - that’s ok.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/01/26 06:36 AM
5

Nobody literally said one time men must marry sluts. Like that’s such an obvious strawman.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 01:39 PM
5

No they don’t. There’s no study or data that confirms or suggests women should be judged and shamed for sleeping around and men should be heralded. You are literally making that up. My appeal? What does that even mean? What am I appealing to? lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:54 AM
4

No, it’s not black and white and flawed thinking Yes it is. Absolutely. Your appeal to historical norms isn't a great argument not to mention history doesn't support that view anyways. You haven't provided a lick of reasoning for why men like you - in exclusion to a vast majority of things - think that "an incredible amount of charismas and/or high level of social skill" is something that needs to be given this deference of merit VERSUS the folks who don't necessarily have that should be being j…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:31 AM
3

Like how can you not see it? Ability to get sex is not something to either applaud or shame? It's meaningless and assigning some sort of accolades to it for one gender while simultaneously saying it should be judged, and actively shamed in the other gender is just...stupid? When do we automatically assign some sort of easy = bad (and should be shamed) and hard = good (and should be lauded) merit in any event? The whole premise isn't accurate - for multiple reasons. You are assigning automatic me…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 06:21 AM
5

Red flag doesn’t have to be moral failure. Depression is an illness - that doesn’t mean it isn’t incredibly difficult to deal with if you’re the partner of someone who suffers from. I also have experience here - it’s completely devastating at times to the fall out partner. Substance abuse/addiction is often similar - also a mental illness, but certainly you could agree that if you were aware of that it might be a red flag before committing yourself to that person?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 05:36 AM
5

It’s absolutely is based on the parameters y’all have set up here: sex and body counts should be applauded in men because it’s hard to obtain whereas for women it isn’t, let’s add the full argument here that not only should it not be applauded in women it should be shamed cuz it’s so easy for them. But where it’s also easy to obtain for men it’s still laudable and shouldn’t be shamed because there are less of those men?? This isn’t logic, it’s ad hoc reasoning because y’all can’t be consistent. …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 05:27 AM
3

That’s on you man, I could say exactly the same to you
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 03:48 AM
6

I mean they care less, it’s less of a flag for whatever be it sex or a relationship or dating whatever. They aren’t hung up on it and concerned about it in general. They like a girl they like a girl and that certainly overrides whatever minimal qualms that exist because she’s slept with a handful of people or more than anticipated I’m not talking about religious dudes or cultural outliers of course. Modern western attractive successful men that live today in the culture we are now moreso accusto…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 03:12 AM
6

Well in my experience attractive men are actually less likely to give a shit barring extreme scenarios because they don’t covet sex and form all these weird, potentially trauma-based ideas around it like lesser attractive men are more prone to do. They are more likely to be carefree about sex - no matter which gender is having it - and less likely to have strange ingrained biases about people who have some numbers under their belt.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 02:57 AM
5

You’re right - she probably has. And then probably left and never gave a single second thought about them or whatever unstated judgment they may or may not possess towards her 🤷‍♀️ Her point still stands though. By and large views like this are outdated, conservative, premised in some sort of religion holdover beliefs, and more likely than not held more often by certain groups that she decidedly isn’t interested in fucking (ie religious, non western, virgins, or trad minded red pilled type men).…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 02:38 AM
26

What’s always funny to me is how this same view that gets repeated over and over again in manosphere circles including this one I always initially attribute to just young naive people thinking. The ridiculous idea that women should be shamed for sleeping around while men should be admired and applauded because it’s “easier for women and harder for men”. It’s such black and white unrealistic thinking that I’ll admit has some surface level logical appeal if you don’t think about it for longer than…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/12/25 01:08 AM

But there’s plenty of traditionally “masculine” hobbies that have nothing to do with making money. I guess you could say things like fishing and working out are in some way “productive” but like financially. Then of course you have others like playing sports or more widespread - watching them which isn’t “productive” at all. I’ve never heard anything remotely bordering on he must only spend time with friends who can help boost his career. That’s pretty outlandish but just also doesn’t strike me …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/12/25 09:31 PM
7

Lmao I’m no biologist but reading that I was like uhhhhhh
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 11:19 PM
10

Honey the work of going through pregnancy, birth and raising kids for 18+ years let alone more than one kid is not in any way worth it for the sole reason of having some access to some man’s probably middle of the road salary. Like think about this premise for more than 10 seconds.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:14 PM
21

Since you insist on being dense, no you idiot. Hence your whole op being fanfiction. You wouldn’t know what women are attracted to if it bit you in the ass, unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 05:25 AM
20

Your whole op is incel fanfiction
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 05:13 AM
21

This isn’t a thing. Y’all are way more obsessed with “super hot super tall” giant dicked men than we are.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 05:02 AM
11

There’s nothing to rebut when you just make shit up over and over again. This whole thread you created and you act like a toddler
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 02:04 AM
8

What is wrong with you
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 02:01 AM
14

Good for you? You’re clearly perturbed by the reverse though so great job there 👍🏻 people really gonna rally behind your message
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:42 AM
13

It’s not illegal in the US to have gendered spaces. It’s just in a weird gray area sort of. Nevertheless with the “literally all” here you are again with the hyperbole. Men aren’t lonely or creepy or have zero responsibility for any of society’s problems because women threw a fit over a few things that included some male only spaces.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:39 AM
8

Of course pedos don’t only target boys what is even the point of bringing that up? The Boy Scouts being “ruined” and having the reputation it does today, isn’t just because girls elbowed their way in.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:30 AM
34

No? This is how men think. This is like some sort of weird porn scenario.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:27 AM
28

This op makes like zero sense. How you jump from one group originally intended for elderly men in one region in the UK to women need to accepting men being creeps and going further right politically to “everything wrong in society is women’s fault” is beyond me. You just might admit to being a little bit hyperbolic here? Maybe? You may very well have a point that male spaces aren’t the same, are being forced to be more inclusive etc. but this article, and the conclusions you’re drawing are not h…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:16 AM
15

Yeah I’m sure all the rampant child sex abuse that’s taken place over decades that’s only recently come to light had nothing to do with the demise of the Boy Scouts.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 01:13 AM
0

Sooo people who make arguments about how miserable and awful and undateable liberal women are must also be extremists?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 05:08 AM
12

Why are white women the only relevant women here?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 05:00 AM
-1

Not really this is just modern day “why feminists make terrible partners/mothers/wives” etc. stereotypical conservatives etc have been saying similar shit for years. It’s nothing new just flipped.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 04:54 AM
1

If that’s really what you want to take away from this sure. Myopic thinking wins again I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:36 AM
1

I never said it’s not in the bible. I’m not disagreeing with that. Once again missing the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:14 AM
5

Fair point then, I guess in my world (weirdly enough, mostly lawyers) we are your run of the mill not radical liberals/democrats, just trying to live our lives within our morals doing what we believe is right for our kids etc while still trying to retire one day.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:10 AM
1

I’m not interested in the scripture. You can’t tell me the examples I gave aren’t in the scripture either - despite the fact you think that since you haven’t been able to rebut that in 13+ years that’s supposed to mean it’s a shit argument. That’s not the point. It hypocrisy plain and simple
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:04 AM
9

Most liberals are also not some caricature my dude - it’s not conservative versus dyed hair keffiyeh wearing antifa member/free love polycule yo. It’s just normal people on the other side too not the most radical stereotype you can come up with.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 03:02 AM
1

Oh was the bible only invented in 2012? Or just your version of it?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:52 AM
1

The bible also says you can’t mix fabrics or trim your beard. Or eat pork or shellfish. Or if your eye causes you to sin you must gouge it out. Y’all don’t follow any of that shit get real. “But it’s all from the bible” no it’s not. Only the hatred you care about with a flimsy biblical justification. Not all the other mountains of things y’all do and choose to ignore that otherwise is or isn’t against the bible - like I said. Contextualists are almost always hypocritical. “Oh that part wasn’t me…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:49 AM
1

Bullshit. You don’t get to paint a whole religion as broad as Christianity with your hatred brush
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:32 AM
0

That’s literally all Christians I hate to break it to you. Y’all ALL interpret it differently, pick and choose what is important, what should or should not be take seriously or literal, etc. Come on like seriously. At least the Christians who aim to live by the message without believing in some sort of literal text are like normal regular good people. The literalists are always ginormous hypocrites
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:19 AM
2

What a dumb myopic view. “There’s only one way to be Christian and you must believe exactly what I believe”. lol ok. I’m not even religious but even I know that this is dumb. There’s like wayyyy too many denominations even for you to ignore here.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/12/25 02:07 AM
4

Bingo
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:30 PM
8

That’s not how it works in CA or anywhere really. Just because state statutes give courts discretion to award lifetime alimony once certain elements are met doesn’t mean it’s automatic or common. Most of time lifetime alimony awards - in the states that even allow it anymore - are limited to rare circumstances where the partner awarded is permanently disabled or too old to work etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 09:25 PM
3

So it’s essentially, meaningless. Lawyers aren’t gonna take that claim (if it’s even allowed for them to be in small claims court in WA, I have no idea) even as a niche practice. Can’t imagine that’s a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 06:06 AM
11

That’s already a crime in many states if it negligently infects the unknowing spouse and a civil tort in like all of them I think. It’s called negligent infliction of an infectious disease, civilly, at least. Generally, criminally there needs to be knowledge however.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:45 AM
1

It’s a 5k cap in WA? So like small claims? lol
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:38 AM

These laws aren’t archaic.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 05:37 AM
6

What do you mean by “illegal”? Stealthing isn’t a crime or considered rape in any state in the US, but there’s been a few states (like three) to legislatively carve it out for civil liability. I think like a few countries may have criminalized it but not the US Also making it something you can sue for does not mean it’s necessarily “punitive” damages. Punitives are a specific type of damages in civil cases in the US depending on case type, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/12/25 04:25 AM
20

Companies aren’t segregating women and men. What. Also you aren’t “inundated” with stories of men ending up in prison for saying hi to a woman. What??
/r/PurplePillDebate17/12/25 07:42 AM
1

Bullshit
/r/PurplePillDebate16/12/25 03:39 AM
2

Girl please.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:23 AM
1

Ok a stupid one
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:22 AM
1

You’re not saying that though - maybe you were - but not when you’re like oh the Clinton’s and Obama’s and Bidens! You know at that point you just come off as a fucking shill. Your last comment - fair. But the previous one has totally undermined you. And no one who isn’t like omg team a or team b is gonna take you seriously when you comment drivel like that. It sounded like a bot
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:08 AM
1

Omg no you didn’t! You said the exact opposite then you doubled down and a) admitted you didn’t know anything about the political history of its invention and b) said it’s just technology sure it had political implications but wasn’t any different than penicillin. Most people not understanding the social or political implications of the pill literally dude. You’re arguing with me about shit you admitted you aren’t educated on now you’re like well I was arguing something different the whole time!…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 03:06 AM
3

What does that have anything to do whatsoever with some sort of vague amorphous conservative movement against women that is already taking place? Why can’t y’all think a little. Nothing OP has said negates women’s fear - whether you think it’s irrational or not - of individual strange men. These are not mutual exclusive or hypocritical things “lol”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:51 AM
4

What? What does this have to do with divorcing your political party from what it’s chosen representatives do IRlL? You are the one arguing no fair no fair they don’t actually represent conservatives!! Now you’re going on about the Clinton’s and Obama’s??
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:21 AM
6

Omg this isn’t about you or your time or whether it would eventually be invented one day or not. You said it’s not political. Very few “tech” is somehow itself political, whatever you mean by that. The nuclear bomb is technology. You gonna say that too is non-political? Outside the box thinking here man. Just little abstraction is needed, not even a lot. The pill and how it came about had DEEP political implications, was DEEPLY influenced by them and so and so forth. I’d say compared to many inv…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 02:16 AM
2

Have you read anything about the history of it? eugenics, the Catholic Church, feminism. There’s three things heavily tied to how it came about or almost didn’t that are politically tied to its existence.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:25 AM
2

The politicians are nevertheless still representative of the party and movement. If you think your average gung ho conservative is Mr family values - politician or not. Yeah….
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:07 AM
4

If you think the invention of the pill was non political you are kidding yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 01:05 AM
8

What does that even mean? What rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:52 AM
3

There’s already a far right/socially conservative resurgence soooo like, are we supposed to be scared or something?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/12/25 12:44 AM
1

Yeah and women can’t abandon either if dad wants the kid. Neither can if grandparents want it! Almost like that whole process is intended for truly abandoned children.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:51 AM
-2

Men can utilize safe haven laws too though…..
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:31 AM
7

No, certain married men sure, just like certain married women. Not married men in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 04:28 AM
9

Dude no you’re just wrong. Like nuts level kool aid drinking wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:47 AM
10

Very few men are having hookups with hundreds of women, A. B yeah we have stats on that too, sex is consistently and statistically better, more frequent, and more adventurous within relationships. Most married men are married because of their money??? Are you joking
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:29 AM
15

No. Y’all can’t just make shit up because idiot manospherians say so. There’s no data whatsoever to support that regular dudes in marriages or relationships never get laid. In fact, married or partnered men consistently have more sex than single men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:20 AM
7

Extroverted people - men and women - are almost always going to be “preferred” by how you’re describing it over shy lonely introverts because they meet more folks, they put themselves out there more often, there’s a wider and larger number of people exposed to them. Your example of one is just that: an example of one. I could tell you how I married a super introvert over all the extroverted men who pursued me and guess what? Also an example of one. Doesn’t mean much.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:49 AM
4

I get you’re trying to be open minded here but you know the men on here - all of them - aren’t somehow not seeing or experiencing average regular every day perfectly decent men who are in relationships, have hook ups etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:36 AM
10

If that’s all you know it’s all you know. You can’t pretend exposure doesn’t play a role here. You think all those, apparently, baddies you’re over here arguing are somehow in high demand are around or being pursued by a lot of shy, asocial men with poor social skills? You think those guys are just killing it in the hood amongst criminals only the girls are ignoring them? You can’t just make these comparisons in a vacuum. Setting aside the culture you’re even specifically talking about (actual s…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:31 AM
16

No. Regular men have gfs, hook ups ect too. They aren’t all ignored until they’re 40. Hell demographics and logistics should at minimum make you question the idea that only shit men get laid Not to mention like actual stats on who is having sex, in relationships, married etc
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:11 AM
19

Tons of all types of men get women. Nice guys, family guys etc do too. Y’all just ignore the average couples because it doesn’t fit your narrative. And the you use 1 famous celebrity as your example of why that’s wrong……
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 02:01 AM
6

None of the friends you even have now will likely matter that much to you in 10 years even IF you even make the effort to maintain those relationships. This post comes off as like a super young person concern. Also no random is trying to jump you dude what
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 03:43 AM
3

As you age this nonsense about men and women and platonic friendships lessens. Like. It becomes as easy albeit not exactly the same as any other friendship. The need to worry about his sexual or romantic feelings, gone. You grown, probably married or paired up. Him too. It’s no longer a question for either of us like oh actual friends who just enjoy that level of the relationship and aren’t pining for or expecting more totally on the table!
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 03:40 AM
4

You should speak for yourself. I have a TON of male friends. Who love to hang out, talk, call me on the phone, etc. Just because you haven’t figured out that women aren’t your matchmakers, bodyguards, or interested in hearing misogynist rants about their own gender doesn’t mean men are you. (They aren’t) Also can’t hold a conversation or are just annoying? That’s a YOU issue. edit: it's really telling how many women have a problem with physically defending a friend but they wouldn't hesitate to …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/12/25 03:31 AM
2

Oh it def is. And it’s illegal. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t a thing that happens regularly
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 03:17 PM

But voting rights as written into actual constitutional text are not written as “privileges” either - they are written similarly to all the other rights we all recognize and enjoy. None of it matters that it wasn’t written into the “original constitution” because that wasn’t about individual liberties to begin with. Whatever the concern about only enumerated rights being recognized like we have the 9th and 10th for that. Obv still a source of contention and a contexualist clearly gonna have word…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 05:39 AM
3

Breastfeeding does not make women have less merit or be less reliable workwise. The fuck are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 04:44 AM
5

My husband got more pat leave than I got mat leave - because he's in tech. And I so applaud them for that even though obv I was a bit jealous. So many companies, firms, whathaveyou promote themselves as "family friendly" so like ..... do that? I've had two kids in the time I've worked for this firm, not 20.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 04:34 AM
11

I love this. Unfortunately in a lot of professional (private) companies (mine included) it's an unspoken rule you cannot talk about salary. What we need is THIS plus better employment protections for EVERYONE. also unions, fucking unions.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 04:20 AM
3

If your business cannot compete, make money, etc., because you need to give certain people - and not all of them all at once! - 6+ weeks of paid leave to have a baby, YOU are the one failing. This says nothing of the employee who needs the leave's merit or reliability.... It's not like it's typically some suprise thing that cannot be planned for. Unless you are some tiny business with very few - which of course, exempts you from a lot of legal restrictions anyway (at least federally), you have z…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 03:58 AM

What do you mean the "original constitution" here? You're weaving it into some sort of "rights versus privileges" argument here but I'm not following. The "original constitution" - at least as I'm familiar with it - was basically and primarily a framework for government. Different branches of gov, checks and balances & associated roles/power, supremacy clause, etc etc. Very little had anything to do with individual "rights". The Bill of Rights wasn't even ratified until several years later. Yet …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 03:27 AM

Fair. The things I’m pointing to are arguably not even capitalistic in nature. True capitalism would mean we’d just let those companies fail or go bankrupt (no Texas two step bullshit) into oblivion.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 02:03 AM

The flip side is we end up subsidizing a lot of shit that is caused by them too though - whether unlivable wages for their workforce or bailouts or paying for the costs of their negligence to injured individuals
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 01:41 AM

Docs prescribe antidepressants off label for a number of non mental health related issues too. Lots of chronic pain conditions, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/12/25 01:22 AM
2

No dear I’m not a psychiatrist I haven’t studied this shit I’ve just been privy to her behavior. You’re the one that brought up sociopaths I thought it was interesting and relevant to my own recent experiences, hence my comment. Which again, NO that’s the whole point. You’re using people like Bundy actual fucking sociopaths to make your point. They ARENT easy to detect that’s the whole point. They ARENT your run of the mill abuser/misogynist whathaveyou. It’s NOT a good comparison to make. This …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 07:05 AM
1

The sociopath is a woman. You’re not explaining how whatever it is you’re labeling as the “creep detector/misogyny detector” is anything different from just intuition that someone’s a bad guy. Maybe it’s wrong maybe it’s right clearly not a science here. But it’s not based on some oh all attractive guys get a pass and all ugly guys get labeled thing either
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 06:36 AM
2

Yeah I mean you are saying they can’t pick up on abusers dude. You’re just using more language. Nevertheless it was the fact you specifically said sociopaths that triggered my interested because of recent experiences I personally have experienced so frankly my rebuttal comment is kinda only tangentially related to that overarching point as it is
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 05:56 AM
4

Actual sociopaths are incredibly rare and not people most people would have actually experience in vetting. It’s not a fair comparison to say oh well women didn’t pick up on sociopathy so clearly they can pick up on your run of the mill asshole or abuser. This whole topic frankly is wrought with a bunch of variables and what ifs I’m not surprised folks tell op they can’t really fully explain it or they don’t want to take the time to because it’s complicated and nuanced etc. Myself I’ve only met …
/r/PurplePillDebate09/12/25 04:27 AM
3

Is it all you know how to do - suck your own dick? Is that literally all you have? It seems to be the only way you argue.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/12/25 04:09 AM
5

Bitch I don’t even practice whatever area of business you happen to be in that you think apparently runs the world and everybody else cares about. Nobody knows who you are dude. And more importantly, nobody cares. You can continue on with this whole omg I build all these things I’m so independent I’m the second coming of Jesus bit or you could actually learn something. You aren’t special. You aren’t amazingly brilliant. You aren’t making the world go around. Neither are your fellow male compatri…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:14 AM

Speak for yourself. Are you in law or accounting? The fuck do you know? Here’s what I know: you’re a hypocrite who has decided you can judge what others do in highly skilled professions without actually knowing anything. Someone who nevertheless is beholden to processes and policies and does NOT make all his work decisions on his own yet thinks this a big difference between men and women. You’re a hypocrite
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:23 AM
9

You just told me legal doesn’t even think for themselves. Make up your mind. Edit: lol “strategy sessions” meanwhile everyone else is just “not free”. You are such a hypocrite my dude. You ain’t independent, you are the one lying to yourself not women
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:15 AM
8

So you had to have multiple executive meetings plus whatever it entailed to have individual staffers write history the way that fit your narrative PLUS daddy lawyer needed to sign off before you could make those decisions - however illegal they might be? So independent. Much autonomous decision making.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 04:30 AM
7

Where are you getting your claims?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 04:12 AM
5

Hall pass monitors in my office don’t ya know 😂
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 04:11 AM
9

You’re conveniently ignoring a lot of the points that person made about military/law enforcement jobs. I guess the ways their freedom is restricted doesn’t count or something. Almost any professional job expects employees of either gender to handle their own shit. Not every job - and certainly not every job a woman works - requires layers of approval and discussion for every decision let alone most of them. It would be completely inefficient if that was the case. I’m in law. I’ve worked for mult…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 04:08 AM
7

Where are these numbers you speak of? Law enforcement + active military service has to outnumber HR personnel.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:55 AM
13

Respond to that comment then about all the men who choose very hierarchal jobs that require a lot of submission and adherence to policy like military or police. Hell even most stem jobs - also male dominated - are just as beholden to corporate policy as HR jobs. Your average man out here ain’t a ceo or doing some wild Wild West cowboy shit is he Meanwhile women have made a lot of strides in terms of yes getting those higher level jobs that actually may provide more autonomy and income (see med s…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:50 AM
8

How many kids you got and who stayed home with them when they were young?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:40 AM
11

Why are you assuming boss is an asshole? My boss isn’t an asshole. And I’m also the boss of many under me. AFAIK they do not think I’m an asshole. Thats also frankly a weird thing to proposition - the benefits of making my own money, also money for my family!, and gaining experience and competency in a marketable field so I can essentially choose any future employer are not wildly contingent upon whether my boss is an asshole or not. They don’t turn into disadvantages just because boss is a dick…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:25 AM
11

Your whole writing exercise over here is not at all solely focused on “why do women choose certain jobs”. Yes you’ve devoted a part to that sure. Certainly A topic raised in your post but not THE topic. Nor does everyone necessarily agree with the positions you’ve even taken with respect to that. You do rely on a lot of assumptions there. “Least free jobs ever in existence” like do you actually believe that. Also I was commenting to other dudes comment. Of which my comment directly responds to i…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:17 AM
14

Ok that’s def a worthwhile conversation, but it’s besides the point of the one we were already having It’s also a little rose colored glasses here my dude. Retire by 45? In this economy? And you’re also trying to make this a woman thing? Like do you even know how men spend their money?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:05 AM
18

My husband does work. what world you living in here where a dual income household is just like a passing suggestion and not a near necessary reality in this economy. Of course my job gives me independence. Slave to the job market? Even phrasing it so biasedly sounds like a lot more options than slave to my husband. But if there’s one thing I’ve learned over the past five or so years - as you gain experience and competency in your career, you naturally will have MORE leverage in the market. This …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:03 AM
19

Yo you are missing the point. The VAST majority of people - male or female - would agree that working sucks and if we are suspending reality where you do NOT have to work and still can get everything you want, MOST people would retire, work less, quit whatever mundane job they have to pursue something more aligned with a hobby or passion (without needing it to financially sustain them). Etc. This is not some woman specific thing. However, based on real world realities, women, like men, would rat…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 02:41 AM
11

No it doesn’t, people say that when choosing options based in reality, not like hey in unlimited money land where I have everything I can dream of and I don’t NEED to work yeah I still wanna work full time.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 02:30 AM
22

Do you mean everyone? Everyone would prefer to do that if it was an option.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 02:15 AM
23

Also “woke when she wished” 😳 Homie has no children let alone children he was the primary caregiver for if he thinks this is a thing that happens with children. Maybe when they become mini adults.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:26 AM
8

Ah ok fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:21 AM
6

What’s the 2025 fantasy?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:19 AM
34

Setting aside the hyperbolic prose and metaphors here, I do have some news. You can work and also have kids. Many, many, many women do it. As do many men. Wild, I know.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:18 AM
18

A job provides financial stability and independence that is YOURS. You’re not dependent on his job, his ability to maintain said job, and his control of the household funds. A job is replaceable. You’re not happy? Go get another one. You’re not going to feel as trapped by a shitty job versus a shitty spouse you and possibly your children are solely financially reliant upon, especially if you’ve spent years at home rather than developing a compensable skill set. A job you leave every day and then…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 01:14 AM
1

can you answer a single q tho. or provide any answer to the ones I proposed?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 05:08 AM
1

omg what. Manufacturers of drugs changing the def of cruel and unusual punishment - what? Judges changing the definition of cruel and unusual punishment? who do you think provided any definition to the 8th amendment?? Legislatures? No, it likely wouldn't survive today, if challenged, and shouldn't pass now. But technically the jurisprudence and precedent still exists. It has not been overruled. Love how you think I haven't thought about it for three seconds. What exactly do you think I'm proposi…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:29 AM
5

ARPALT
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:14 AM
0

It def passed legal muster in the US. Sterilization was not an unheard of "treatment" back in nazi era days when eugenics was a predominate theory (even in the states). Buck v. Bell hasn't even technically been overruled.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:13 AM
3

red pillers are misogynists so should be avoided at all costs. It's literally central to the dogma.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:09 AM
3

Chemical castration as a punishment to sex offenders has generally been voluntary in more modern times. But yeah, def a push historically, idk how many were actually affected, I think at some point in time some states had it like a requirement for parole whathaveyou, but it wasn't surgical castration, it was chemical. The idea is pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, it's a psychological pathology...... Surgical castration legally speaking has a dark past related to eugenics in the era of nazis, s…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:06 AM
1

Violates 8th amendment unless voluntary i guess. This has never been some sort of standardized law historically from my understanding. You know what has though? Capital punishment. In what 2010ish that was outlawed via SCOTUS precedence. States now are trying to bring that back though. It's SCOTUS precedence CURRENTLY however that you cannot be sentenced to death for even child rape (must involve death) unless the current SCOTUS undoes this like they did in Dobbs.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 04:00 AM
9

yeah I know. I responded to your comment. Obv. Like. You're not really arguing anything here other than yeah men are actually worthless but for money. No?? That's not true at all even if some men like somehow convince themselves of this. I know FIRSTHAND men can be very significant caregivers FROM infancy. There is not woohoo magic "biology" holding them back, just intent and motivation. Get with the times dude. Millenials+ are not abiding with this boomer logic of men only good for money can't …
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:51 AM
5

red pill is not a movement anyone should be proud of being associated with
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:46 AM
4

Ok but you said men don't care when they are infants. Like do you have any idea how much that throws me off if that's not what you apparently mean? What a bizarre thing to say of fathers if you were actually intending some other thing. You then threw in that this was biological? You also tried to throw in some sort of idk personal attack "I don't believe you actually care to understand" as if I don't understand. I have two kids. With an active husband. Who, i guess surprisingly to you, cared abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:34 AM
0

No. Those men have a higher chance of being red pillers, as one example, so no they aren't safer. In fact they might actually be more of a risk.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:26 AM

Well it's not your post is it? You policing this man for what he can and cannot ask women? You determining alone what is or is not "mentally healthy" for fellow men now? Maybe other men are not you. Like wow just a thought. God other people even exist.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:21 AM
7

Brainwashed? Your argument is that men who contribute substantially in taking care of their children during infancy is the result of brainwashing? Besides breastfeeding, what biological reasons exist that stop fathers from taking care of infants in terms of similar effort to moms?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:13 AM
-2

Men who actually hate women run the gammit. Attractive to not attractive. There's a lot of rhetoric on this sub that assumes or outright suggests women would be better off going for unattractive men if they don't want to be abused. The truth is like that's not the best vetting mechanism for abuse. Unattrative men are not necessarily less abusive. It's never a great idea to suggest women should specifically go for men they aren't attracted to regardless so it's a bit of a like what do you want he…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:10 AM
4

What do you mean you can just ignore infancy when it comes to childcare? I don't even remotely understand how you're justifying that with some sort of argument about single mothers "ignoring the children eventually become adults" what are you talking about? Also I never said fathers weren't important or interchangeable with mothers - which is what your links are speaking of. I said it's not that disparate, let alone disparate because of biological means.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:02 AM
8

I’m not arguing it’s one to one. Similarly I would not argue US conscription is one to one to Ukraine (obv it isn’t, yet I guess to you it is, in the US it’s far more theoretical and I know you know that, you’ve already acknowledged as such). I’m just surmising maybe there’s a parallel. I don’t live in Ukraine so won’t even pretend to know what that shit is like. But I do live in the US where conscription is theoretically possible in the future but unlikely to ever actually happen again. And abo…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:45 AM
4

Omg are you kidding. You can’t “care” about raising children and ignore the whole children start out as infants bit. wtf. That’s not consistent. ?? There’s zero biological reasons why men would not contribute to child care of infants. Breast feeding is not the ONLY thing that takes place when caring for infants damn. “Playing” doesn’t come until later my dude. And frankly mens interactions with children isn’t necessarily let alone biologically vastly different than women’s. Like what?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:38 AM
1

Banning abortion kinda achieves that in some respect no?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:32 AM
11

I mean most men statistically speaking will have a kid eventually in their lifetime. Who are these men you think would make awesome attentive contributing fathers that are apparently not “chosen”?? You do realize that many women ARE with men who have “character values and stability” at least when it comes to participating in raising children, correct?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:24 AM
4

I’ve never seen a conservative use falling birth rates as some sort of argument against abortion….
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:10 AM
0

Plenty of people do…do y’all believe abusers somehow are 100% successfully keeping every relationship they’ve ever been in or tried to get in? Do you think currently “lonely men” have necessarily never been in a relationship? Do you not believe amongst the gazillions of people out there that there might be folks with better intuition here over others and that’s maybe maybe something related? No one is applying this concept to only “lonely men” that’s y’all doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 02:01 AM
2

It’s not “lonely men” per se, it’s men like red pillers/classic incels and the like who are in fact misogynists. People who internalize that type of thinking may present red flags for it, so to speak. Which doesn’t negate that it can still be hidden or disguised, or that some women are naive/blind to it. But it’s not just linked to oh “lonely men”
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 01:43 AM
6

This post is literally asking women alone to do just that
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 03:12 PM
2

No it isn’t. Oh I know girls who have found a hot teacher hot is NOT similar
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 02:41 PM
2

Setting aside the fact that ok maybe that’s your experience but it’s not mine (and I moved a lot too), that’s not even remotely the same thing as what you’re trying to compare it to
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 02:29 PM
5

No...... maybe in law school, but we were all 21+ then. That's also NOT THE SAME THING.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 05:35 AM
4

What is Chat GPT telling you about these cites it's giving you???: 827 F.2d 684 is an 11th circuit case from 1987 captioned: Smith v. Board of School Commissioners of Mobile County. It is about textbooks and the establishment clause. 72 F.3d 1421 IS a 9th circuit case from 1995, but it is titled: US v. Blackman, and it involves whether attorneys are excempt from IRS reporting requirements where they receive legal fees in excess of 10k on the basis of atty-client privilege. 947 F.2d 919 is an 11t…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 05:34 AM
5

I find it incredibly hard to believe you have experienced anything remotely similar wrt women and male rapists/statutory rapists. "Oh wish it was me" "oh how lucky" referring to the victim. Who even are these "hot male sex offenders" you apparently are talking to a lot of girls about??
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 04:42 AM
6

Who is saying this then for all to hear if they “keep it quiet” who are they speaking to??
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 04:31 AM
4

You made claims that I asked you to at least tell me where those ideas come from. Either support your own words or don’t. Like you could just discuss in good faith or you could continue with whatever this mr aggressive man routine it is that you apparently think is effective. 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 03:32 AM
7

What are you basing this on? We have rape shield laws specifically because defendants so often tried to introduce evidence of an alleged victims promiscuity as a way to shift blame or discredit the claims of assault/rape. Including how they dressed/flirted/dated and the like. This statement exists nowhere in legal history - is that your position and if so where is your source?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 02:27 AM
6

Shit like that is a reason rape shield laws even exist though. If it’s just a figment of imagination we wouldn’t need to legislate against its introduction in criminal court. That being said I hope these types of questions and the entire line of thinking itself has gone down in more modern times
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 09:30 PM
2

Falsely reporting an incident is a separate crime from perjury though, and would be more applicable in the case of a false accusation of sexual assault. That being said, it too would have distinct elements that must be met including by and large that it be made to police or the like (in order words, just posting something on social media or calling an employer likely wouldn’t qualify). The standard of proof (BARD) wouldn’t be “lower” but the elements might be less burdensome to meet than perjury…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/12/25 05:24 PM

Meh you can’t really. Just gotta shoot your shot when the opportunity arises I guess and understand there’s gonna be a lot of rejection. Women that young aren’t generally attracted to men your age or older. There are women who are into older men but a lot of them might actually be more interested because they assume older men are more financially stable or will be willing to spend more money on them. Maybe there’s some app or something that’s designed for younger women seeking older men idk. See…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 01:20 AM
1

you’re making a lot of presumptions in order to convince yourself that safe haven isn’t ever an option that men have when it actually is.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 09:42 PM
1

A woman can’t do it unilaterally either unless dad has also abandoned the kid. If he doesn’t know the child exists she can. That’s really the only substantial difference here and it exists obv due to biological differences not because the law discriminates. My point is and has always been that it’s still not only available to women. It’s not a frequently used or necessarily an easy option for anyone.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 08:22 PM
1

Yeah it’s really only possible if the other parent has abandoned the child yes. It’s not used very often for obvious reasons. But that doesn’t mean it’s only available to women
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:12 PM
1

Yes I literally said this above. Ie it is available to men too or whomever has legal custody. That doesn’t mean a bio dad CLAIMING the child is like nah go away.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 06:14 AM
2

Dude yes it is. Having to establish paternity may be the additional step but that’s a logical requirement and also not something that always even happens when people decide things out of court Biological fathers have innate legal rights just by being biological fathers. Proving paternity may be a requirement that isn’t imposed on mothers but that’s for obvious reasons not to shit on men
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:31 AM
2

No, you are wrong. I’ve read caselaw. I’ve done the research. I also understand general principles of contract law, which you do not. It does NOT work that way. NO contract is “bulletproof” that’s never been a thing. Nevertheless prenups are routinely UPHELD not judicially found invalid. Again, assuming they were properly executed.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:15 AM
1

No this is not how it works, generally speaking. Duress is not an easy standard to meet in most jurisdictions and judges do not just throw whole contracts out because “unfair”. Laws don’t work this way
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 05:02 AM
1

Prenups are normally upheld if they are done correctly. Prenups are not just “thrown out” because a woman is requesting it and it’s in “today’s time”.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:56 AM
1

This isn’t how it works. Biological fathers absolutely could prevent a mother from safe haven surrender. They also don’t just forgo custody altogether - there may be a secondary step if it’s contested because it’s not the same as giving birth, but that doesn’t mean they have no rights automatically bestowed upon them as a parent. Your more problematic situation is where he doesn’t know about a kid that’s his. Which wouldn’t put him on the hook for child support regardless so probably not a conce…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:52 AM
2

No I don’t. I also recognize that wasn’t the basis for holding abortion rights constitutionally protected to begin with. Women have never had that as some right either. So while I do believe sex itself isn’t some consent to becoming a parent I also recognize it’s a distinct possibility - regardless of individual consent. This isn’t even as simple as you apparently want it to be in terms of the discourse. It’s not a legal right for anyone nor has it ever been so THAT basis isn’t going to get you …
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:47 AM
1

Income is always relevant here. You’re talking about theoretical LPS, ie the relinquishment of financial contribution aka child support. If the mother has a good income it also means less contribution mandated by father at least by law. So it’s always relevant. That’s not the same thing as saying legally children must always have two financial contributors or wherever it is you are going with this.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:41 AM
1

Ok fair. I thought this whole thing might have something to do with actual legal rights (or what they were anyway). If that’s a no to you ok. Seems a bit hard to draw some sort of distinct line tho.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:27 AM
3

Who told you accrued child support only goes to the past three years? I also don’t understand what I’m assuming your argument to be regarding child support amount - these are legislative calculations not negotiations between mom and dad if it goes to court and/or the admin system.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:24 AM
5

You’re not wrong that that’s a reality and a reason why women get abortions but it’s never been the premise for why abortion was a legal right to begin with. Which doesn’t even exist anymore but still. There’s never been a constitutionally recognized right to opt out of parental responsibilities.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:17 AM
1

Men can utilize safe surrender too - it’s anonymous and not gender specific in most jurisdictions. It’s just not viable when one parent wants the kid. There’s ultimately no abortion equivalent available to men because obviously they can’t get pregnant so the factors are not the same
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 04:13 AM
2

Fairness would mean presex waivers that both parties agree to. Not last minute opting out by men after the deep is done. Or restraining orders…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:48 AM
-1

This is not exactly accurate. If a woman abandons a kid and dad or some other legal guardian steps up - she’s on the hook for child support assuming someone files for it. Adoption is of course a different matter but that also cuts off dad’s rights and obligations so no child support for him either. In the scenario she keeps the child on her own - and she qualifies - yes she can get government benefits, same as a single dad or grandparent in that same scenario. It’s not only available to impoveri…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 03:13 AM
6

You are right unless he heavily commingled and can’t trace it back. Premarital assets are not marital assets subject to equitable/community splitting. Assuming this is US
/r/PurplePillDebate27/11/25 02:37 AM
5

Oh! A video 🙄 You’re not shamed for being single. Go be single. Enjoy your life.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:17 AM
9

If you were all that in the know, you’d recognize that the men who are higher in demand by women are not big time red pill/manospherian types.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:14 AM
7

Men aren’t shamed simply for being single. You’re a bit dramatic here
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 06:10 AM
1

Of course men want that too. What do you even mean? Men have pursued money and power from the dawn of time
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 05:10 AM
1

Wait how does so much of the gendered hate occur because both men and women are pursuing higher powered more lucrative careers
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:05 AM
-1

Great. Don’t marry if you don’t want. It would also be great if there wasn’t a ton of misinformation about divorce law
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 04:03 AM
5

Nobody cares about men who do their own thing and don’t pursue women who aren’t like raising a fuss about it though. Like what is this shaming you are even speaking of? Also there’s never been some dominant narrative that men are only or more dangerous when single. That’s something you’re inventing. Again, while nobody is specifically claiming oh relationships are the issue here that doesn’t mean there isn’t talk about DV within relationships or various support avenues for those who might or do …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:59 AM
8

I’m not sure what you’re really wanting here. You think it’s unfair that people warn that incels can be violent while partnered men are also statistically more violent towards their partners, I guess. These are completely different scenarios and different warnings needed. Women ARE also informed that there are resources, you’re not alone, you can leave, etc, when it’s DV. The message is different - not non existent. No one is gonna be like hey women it’s relationships with men that are the real …
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:31 AM
16

Economically viable men are not eschewing women tho, or marriage.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 03:02 AM
2

Get it girl good luck!
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:38 AM
1

I know more single male lawyers and I have a very large network so 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:34 AM
2

So don’t trust red pillers to give you any realistic perspective on divorce - 9.9/10 times they are wrong on top of being dramatic. That being said - if you do choose to believe them. Don’t marry a low income low potential spouse or a SAHM, get a prenup, or just don’t get married at all. Like these are all options and don’t require eschewing long term relationships altogether.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:30 AM
-2

I mean I also did that as a millennial woman. Believing this is how it works as a young person in my chosen career. I can’t say it didn’t pay off though. Still sucked ass though at the time.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:26 AM
2

You can try and balance it - I know I did. Generally speaking you won’t have the same level of responsibility in your 20s when you get older - might as well live it up while also pushing hard to achieve future career goals
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:20 AM
1

I’m a female lawyer and most of my female peers are married or paired up and not single.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/11/25 12:16 AM
14

That dude made an argument tho
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:40 AM
13

Do you think that if the women who have a greater threshold for a man’s desirability to make them want casual sex, were more open/forthcoming/honest about it, that it would help to recalibrate young men’s standards and boy’s future expectations of what they are likely to experience in sex and dating? What? What does this mean? What are you proposing that apparently is envisioned for boys and young men here? Perhaps fewer men will choose to pursue life paths (try hard during K-12 education, socia…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 06:38 AM
2

You’re in a particular type of blue collar job that is higher level. Not everyone understands that. My husband used to be in one too - as an air traffic controller. This is still blue collar but highly specialized and requires a lot of skill. You’re definitely in a sweet spot career wise and I think you should be proud of your accomplishments and career. As a woman in a high powered white collar profession - there’s plenty of us with men like that. I def don’t think you’re in some sort of dating…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/11/25 05:33 AM
1

Why are you the most obtuse person here?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/11/25 02:43 AM

Dude you are the one here muddling meanings. “Evoking raw sexual attraction” is not the same thing as “being open to the idea of getting sexually closer to you, however small that might be.” Yet those were your words. If you aren’t even open to the idea that maybe women experience genuine sexual attraction in a way that may not be identical to your experience and you’re chopping that up to “women don’t speak right about it” like ok. Do you I guess. But it’s ignorant and close minded to assume th…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:41 AM
5

Women are definitely more selective than men but that doesn’t mean they are so selective that the majority of men will never be in a relationship. Also one woman’s selectivity isn’t every woman’s and demographics are pertinent here. Relationships generally speaking will be based on who you are exposed to — not some ginormous consortium of all the men most of whom you will never even meet
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:06 AM
1

It frankly doesn’t seem like anyone likes dating apps lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:01 AM
4

You don’t have to do things like drugs or alcohol my dude - but this is how young people naturally socialize and meet new people. This is how people get broad friend groups and acquaintances which is how many relationships develop in a more organic way. Fuck meet some like minded people and do a game night or something. Super fun.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 06:00 AM

Men insist looks are paramount because they don’t or often refuse to at least attempt to try and understand how female sexuality works. Looks have never literally “not mattered” but the idea they are all that matter or the primary trigger for female sexual attraction is also false. Extremely good looking people are always going to be a bit of an outlier - you’re going to more naturally open the door so to speak for potential romantic interest to more people. The men who have non-physical qualiti…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:57 AM
1

Yo why aren’t you going to clubs/parties/bars?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:43 AM
3

Regardless of what some sources state often loudly, this is still the most effective way that men meet women and develop romantic relationships of all varieties. It’s also the process wherein women generally speaking will be more likely to be receptive and open once some sort of familiarity is established.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:39 AM
2

Ok not sure I’m really following you, but generally speaking the way to get more female friends (or friends in general) is you’re gonna have to start with being acquaintances first. These days with online dating many people skip that part entirely, but it doesn’t appear many men actually like the process or feel that’s a successful way to achieve their romantic goals so
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:33 AM
1

Ok, I can see how young men in particular could be confronted with seemingly contradicting messaging when it comes to women sex and dating. But I also think generally speaking the best advice would be to stop thinking so much and being neurotic about it and just apply the age old concepts of being kind, honest and doing what is right. Your life isn’t going to be ruined because of one bad approach that maybe wasn’t done in the appropriate setting in hindsight. But you probably will regret living …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:30 AM
1

You have zero women in your friend group? I want to be clear tho - when I think of “cold approaches” I’m envisioning something random and out of place - hitting on someone walking on the street, working out, shopping, etc. not like approaching a stranger you want to meet for possible romantic interest in a more appropriate setting for that type of thing like a bar, party, a more social situation where it’s expected that strangers will be meetings and interacting on a more personal level.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:09 AM
1

Yeah this phenomena of “society” somewhere providing the mixed messages where you’re damned if you do damned if you don’t - for whatever the choice may be - is just what you get with a multitude of opinions and experiences and just the complex and often contradictory nature of human beings. I feel like we all experience this - in the various roles we play throughout our lives be it man/woman, child/adult, mother/father, husband/wife, liberal/conservative, etc etc. like there may be some stream o…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/11/25 05:01 AM
3

Of course he did. Youd need to be deliberately obtuse to not understand that
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 02:47 PM
3

No. I’m not paying literally anything at all to access a wapo article about a study I think I’ve already found that doesn’t support your claims. What? God at least get a free chat gpt or Claude account if you’re going to rely on AI.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:33 AM
3

This isn’t even what AWALT means as a red pill theory, at least as originally conceptualized. But alas ARPALT most of yall just parrot whatever dogma that espouses anger and bitterness towards women as a whole. Y’all don’t even read the original scripture
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:27 AM
3

?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:23 AM
4

That is a wapo link behind a paywall I can’t access. But considering the article date is late 2019, I’m guessing it’s based on the 2019 Dutch study. Which again, did not study the genders of the rescued or the rescuers. Hence it does not provide support for your claim that men are constantly stepping in to rescue strange women which you ultimately alluded was 90% statistically. I’m just trying to determine the validity of your argument dude, I don’t really care if you happen to be correct.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:11 AM
-1

God knows I would lose horribly because I know there’s plenty of women who have been assaulted way worse than me. I’d definitely lose the “competition” you are thinking of many times over. Nevertheless I have my own experiences, and in my life it happened a lot more than that. It’s not ok regardless, as I thought I made clear
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 09:02 AM
5

No - that wasn’t your argument. Don’t pretend it was masquerading as the genders equally need each other
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:49 AM
3

Both genders need each other and it’s asinine to pretend men are so much more important to a functioning society than women, which is the only take away from comments like his. Not only is it not accurate and completely ignorant of reality, it is a blatant attempt to convince women that men are a) superior and b) we somehow owe them with some sort of unspoken rule we must be grateful to random men everywhere - most of whom have had nothing to do with modern life changing inventions or have done …
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:48 AM
2

This is not well explained, written or elaborated on at all. WHAT are women complaining about that men are just freely handing over? WHAT circumstances is this phenomena occurring in relation to? WHAT is it that men are giving to these unidentified women where we have zero context whatsoever? WHAT exactly are women complaining about that apparently gets men to kowtow and “bend over backwards” I’d love to know so I could try that out. Damn.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:37 AM

Yeah you’re going to have to be more specific and provide some actual sources dude. 90% is a significant stat to just say yo take my word for it. And the one study I can find that has that stat did not break down either the intervenor/rescuer nor the victim by gender. Or what sort of type of intervention was taken and what was more effective.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:31 AM
3

You are right. Only opinion that realistically matters tbh
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 08:12 AM
1

It’s far more common these days that where both parties are getting accused of DV and the cops are called that BOTH get arrested. Whether both get prosecuted is a different story, different entity vetting, different albeit often overlapping set of relevant evidence. I have zero idea how to respond to your argument about how it’s all for naught when cops are not involved. No one is getting arrested then? Unless perhaps someone makes a report to law enforcement after the fact and it gets investiga…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:57 AM

If you are speaking of the 2019 Dutch study in regards to your 90% statistic - it did not say all the interveners were men, it did not break that down by gender. There’s also conflicting data on public interventions at least in the us and it’s just not frankly a well studied phenomenon. Where are you getting your 90% stat though if not the Dutch study?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:50 AM
0

Omg. Like shit I’m so sorry that happened to you I guess I just grew up in a time when that seems low af. I don’t even think I could try and count the number of times some dude - stranger, acquaintance or alleged friend - slapped my ass. Well beyond 4 times.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:36 AM
4

She literally said it was assault tho, but was trying to explain why it may be downplayed as such. Which doesn’t seem inaccurate to me? It doesn’t make it right morally or legally, but possibly is one explanation for why it’s not taken as seriously, generally speaking. I don’t understand the problem with pointing out a likely realistic view while also agreeing that it’s assault?? I also don’t understand with frankly anyone taking the view that it’s abnormal or not natural to see differences in t…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:33 AM
4

I mean a light slap by a woman probably also doesn’t register on the spectrum of provocation versus legal assault to many people - men included. Hell I’ve seen women do that to flirt, rarely at least. That doesn’t mean it isn’t assault. If you’re going off the idea that cultural and social expectations are more relevant here - of course female “technical” violence against men will be downplayed and dismissed, especially if you’re looking to historical norms (as would real violence against women,…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 07:09 AM
2

Intent versus damage are not mutually exclusive… if you shoot someone in the face but didn’t “intend” to shoot them there - the damage is still based on an intended act. Even if you didn’t intend to shoot them in their body at all but did - in the face - if you were negligent and should face serious consequences. Similarly, if you’re a man punching a woman in the face and causing severe damage you can presume the damage incurred is more intentional than some twig of a women who slaps a man once.…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:55 AM
4

It’s still also technically assault if it’s intentional - similar to a light or normal slap albeit probably more vague - but I think that’s his point here.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:46 AM
12

That’s her point - it’s a cultural and gender bias. It’s a statistical and biological fact that men in general just with the bodies they are born with can inflict more physical harm - particularly against smaller people be it smaller men, women or children. It’s also a statistical fact that men are more physically violent. That doesn’t mean violence inflicted on men by women is trivial or incapable of serious damage or even death, and should be taken less seriously. It’s a stereotype and probabl…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:43 AM
3

It’s much more common these days that both parties get charged and/or that a woman accused of being the aggressor gets charged. The days where it’s automatically assumed it’s on the man and he default get arrested are probably not completely gone, but it’s not the norm anymore. The bias is not 100% gone and maybe it never will be. But it’s been heavily chipped away at least if you’re looking at more modern trends in arrests and investigations and taking things more seriously. So, progress? Which…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 06:29 AM
2

Yeah true, but the fact you’re referencing a video where she did get arrested shows progress. These days, it’s much more common for both parties to get arrested for alleged reciprocal DV or where it’s just unknown, or for women to get charged and arrested when she’s alleged to be the aggressor. This system isn’t perfect, and it’s never been, but it’s progress where men aren’t just default assumed to be the violent party and women are subject to criminal charges too in this respect. Side note and…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/11/25 05:41 AM

Unfortunate ugly women by and large also don’t want nor find it some blessing to be able to have random casual sex with strangers. The fact you cannot even fathom that this is not some magical gift that women should feel grateful and humble to have speaks volumes to your solipsism
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:40 AM

Digging your heels in doesn’t make it true
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 03:26 AM

And my point is that men don’t understand that it’s not a privilege to women just because you might find it to be one as a man, men don’t get to dictate that for women, sorry.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:59 AM
8

Are you kidding? Confidence is not a “scare resource”
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:42 AM

Just because a man considers it to be so doesn’t mean it is either. It’s almost like that’s the whole point of the comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 02:22 AM
19

You can’t just declare confidence and having a dominant personality is evil and build your whole claim on such a flawed obviously questionable premise.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 01:14 AM

This is irrelevant in this context - op is asking about something that men don’t understand that could potentially make dating better if they did. This is one of those things - men do not understand why casual sex is not the prize to women. YOU don’t get to say well too bad men’s perspective here is all that matters. Let alone continue with some argument that only that perspective is valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 01:10 AM

Fair - but when it’s based upon not having multiple random strange women not immediately jumping upon your dick the instant they first meet you - your perspective is off. Like way off.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:21 AM

I mean the older you get as a man the more likely you will ALSO come with serious baggage and the other issues you are also identifying
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:18 AM

Most women simply do not want let alone covet or prioritize cheap meaningless casual sex from strangers or relative ones. Whereas some men - many who are vocal here - seem to believe that’s the end all be all literally if that’s not easily accessible to them no woman can ever be attracted to them period. You’re right that there will not be a mutual meeting of the minds here in this respect.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:16 AM

We wouldn’t even know if you aren’t advertising that. This stems from sort of the same kindof idea - women are not running around thinking about men’s sex lives. That’s far more of a man thing
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 12:05 AM

The ability to get casual sex is not a huge prize to women and you’re not going to convince women you’re so oppressed and they are so privileged and entitled because they can generally get dick with little effort
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 11:15 PM
12

No, I have quite literally tried to explain to you that legally, no, that does not mean "only 6 states do fathers have the same legal access to their own children as mothers do." If you do not understand what gender neutral laws mean, I suggest you read some. Re: discrimination. Way to apple and oranges shit. You are not being illegally discriminated against because there are custody laws that give more residential time to the primary caretaker given a) this is gender neutral - precedence expres…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 06:01 AM
1

No? This was never some sort of primary objective or motive here. It was a reaction and backlash to the historical FACT that law enforcement very commonly treated sexual assault reports with immediate, unwarranted suspicion and incredulity of the victim, rather than actually taking it seriously and investigating. Your use of 'many women' is telling - who are these 'many women' and how 'many' are we talking? You can't say well I saw 3 women online saying it LITERALLY means we should just convict …
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 05:08 AM
3

It was a reaction to the very real phenomenom of the victims of sexual assault not being taken seriously. Like come on - yes it very much was a much more common "norm" for these claims to be not taken serious or brushed under the rug. "Boys will be boys" "what was she wearing" "she asked for it" "she was a slut" etc. Like you cannot pretend you haven't heard of these phrases either which demonstrate the very common views and/or rhetoric surrounding sexual assault and how it's historically been v…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:57 AM
6

Yeah it's not just because women "date up or at a similar level" my dude. I mean think about what modern alimony laws actually aim to do. A little more critically for a minute.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:37 AM
7

Yo I am not the reason "why this topic is not being researched" nor am I "hell bent" on mischaracterizing anything - holy hyperbole dude. You are not being unfairly criticized because I said, think, and STILL DO think, that you are diminishing men's voluntarily chosen role in not seeking more custody of their children.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:24 AM
9

Your overarching message has merit here, but you are doing yourself a disservice with your lack of objectivity. First of all - every state has a presumption of legal joint custody - that just doesn't always mean 50/50 residential custody. It's now up to 5 states, however, that DO presume 50/50 physical custody, with another 20ish in the works legislatively. Secondly, your sentence "men do not have the same right to have access to their kids as mothers do" is not accurate. Men have the same right…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 04:16 AM
6

Y’all I don’t even disagree that there’s still family court bias against dads especially with respect to custody battles and especially in red conservative states. While I may not always agree with the crazy claims made by men here about it or the extent they claim exists - I have seen it I have litigated against it, first hand. That being said, please stop using lawyer blog posts that don’t even source their claims where they are clearly trying to get your business.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:56 AM
4

I mean you appear to be just hand waving it away - I don’t even disagree that there are other factors, as I expressly said, I just don’t think it’s honest to ignore that one, whcih IME is a rather big one. If I’m wrong and you ARE presuming that is a decent sized reason why men have less custody feel free to clarify that
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:51 AM
3

But there are not laws or regulations that FORCE men into dangerous jobs and specifically keep women out. I don't understand what "legal protections" you claim in your OP somehow "shield" women from these jobs. I also don't understand where you're claiming in the same way we need to advocate for "shared risk", which I assume means you want to advocate that more women take the dangerous jobs and less men. How does that make any sense at all? The answer there is better safety standards and more co…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:36 AM
3

Yo this is not how it works. Every states has temporary orders in place specifically to address what happens during divorce proceedings. This includes temporary custody orders. While it is 100% TRUE that judges (and state law) favors not disrupting the status quo for children, particularly young children, this is exactly WHY lawyers will advise both men and women contemplating or seeking a divorce to understand their decisions - like who moves out and who the kids primarily reside with - could i…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:24 AM
9

Family courts follow state legislation that lays out the criteria for who qualifies as the "caregiver" -- this isn't something that judges just willy nilly declare without any legal justification or backing. See, for example, W.V. Code §48-1-210. (Note that WV has since enacted legislatively a presumption of 50/50 residential custodianship, as have many other states). Additionally - you know who the most biased judges tend to be towards fathers and in favor of mothers in family courts? Old white…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:09 AM

One piece of contention - I hate when antidepressant rates are used as some definitive proof of women being unhappy - while I’m sure usage for depression has risen, along with mental health awareness, diagnosis and treatment itself, antidepressants are prescribed off label for a variety of different issues that have nothing to do with “women being sad”. Y’all never actually examine the data points you believe are somehow hook line and sinker
/r/PurplePillDebate19/11/25 03:49 AM

Yo did you read this post? Im fucking with him. Obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 06:04 AM

Great, still, most men are still fat, not rich and have poor bone structure so
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:39 AM

Most men are fat, not rich, and have poor bone structure too my dude
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:25 AM

Yessss tall over all the things only 🥰🥰🥰
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 05:20 AM

No young high school girl in your middle class upbringing is intentionally trying to date felons or “older guys in the drug trade”, let alone a slew of girls enough to create some pattern. You are lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 01:11 AM
1

No? Everyone is fucked up - there’s no human biologic “pair bond” mechanism that specifically and scientifically gets fucked around with, with any of this shit.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 04:24 AM
7

No y’all are crazy. The fuck science exists to say men masturbating means they can’t “pair bond” There’s not scientific data on this at all. We aren’t prairie voles. Men being fucked up or having fucked up expectations, sure, I assume that could happen. Men “not being able to pair bond” no - what the hell does that even mean. Men needing to get over some porn addiction doesn’t mean they are ruined for life. Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 03:36 AM
1

Why are you automatically discounting it? What is so brilliant about the Kornich study? Why are you using that as the benchmark? If your answer is: because them Kornich study is fully publically published and I can read the methodology, that's a far cry from: this is the best study out there. So what is it? If that's the ONLY reason, just tell me
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:50 AM
1

Nope, I'd still like to know, BEFORE I post it, what your assumptions are and why you ASSUME the study based on outdated NSFH data 20+ years ago is automatically superior. Please just answer the question. If you can.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:40 AM
1

Why are you assuming the methodology is so superior you can just ignore the data from a much more recent study? I went ahead and downloaded it - so happy to copy it if need be, but interested in knowing why you just assume things that don’t jive with what you want are automatically wrong, even when you’re relying on 20+ year old data?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 02:27 AM
2

If you think men work and earn money strictly for meeting and retaining a female partner you’re either extremely young, naive or just some sort of shut in.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:52 AM
1

There’s no free full source that I can find - if you have a pubmed subscription go for it, send me whatever you find. What data are you relying on for your proof that men who do chores have the least amount of sex and why do you assume that survey data is somehow better than the more recent data we have?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:30 AM
4

It’s all survey data - including whatever outdated data you may be relying on (if you are relying on data at all). You’re providing a cop out response when faced with someone more recent that contradicts whatever it is you’re basing your beliefs on
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:06 AM
7

Sharing domestic work does not make women lose attraction. Modern women leave men for not pulling their weight domestically
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 01:04 AM
9

Most woman are doing that anyway?? You’re still not explaining how it’s harmful for a man to do both?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:50 AM
2

No they don’t. Unless you’re basing your claim on outdated data. Egalitarian relationships have greater sex now. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jomf.12313
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:48 AM
5

Ok but that doesn’t explain why you can’t both provide financially and domestically.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:32 AM
3

This isn’t indicative of reality. I say this as a woman who “provides”. In modern times most couples can’t do the whole SAHP thing, so the expectation is that both share the load - domestically and financially. This is more than reasonable yet most of the arguments on here are premised on some opposite set up where it’s normal one person is a sole provider and the other just stays at home - this isn’t normal. In the rarer situations where there is a SAHP and a sole provider. It’s also not unreas…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 12:22 AM

No they don’t. How many men have you dated in more modern times who have remotely told you they wish they could pay for everything while you stay home?
/r/PurplePillDebate13/11/25 03:10 AM

Most people aren’t seriously dating let alone having sex before high school wth
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 06:15 AM

7th/8th grade what?? That’s early as shit, wayyy too early to believe oh if you’re not getting romantic attention just fuck it completely
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 06:11 AM
-1

It is though nobody is rallying behind oh jealousy being toxic is such an issue we need to eradicate for men anywhere else.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 05:35 AM
1

Yuck. Not attractive to me
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 04:54 AM
-1

Nobody who matters is paying attention to these kinds of esoteric complaints made by men here on this sub…. Y’all aren’t gonna have any influence whatsoever on this topic by complaining about it here
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 04:10 AM
4

No but I’ve also never dated like super handsome men in the conventional sense of what you are imagining
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 03:28 AM
1

I mean I was a young 20s girl over a decade ago and not finding men that much older attractive at all definitely was a thing. Having experienced it myself, I think it’s just those guys don’t do much attraction wise when you’re that young as a woman. I certainly wasn’t thinking about marriage at that age - just guys I liked who I thought were cute and thought we could have a fun time with getting to know each other for possibly something long term. At that age it’s pretty much only your peers may…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 11:16 PM
13

It’s more so that young 20s girls aren’t attracted to men that are like 7+ years older than them. Like they even LOOK old by and large to that demographic.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 08:53 PM

Do you think those rare types of people don’t already get publically shamed??
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 05:06 AM

*jury. Jury would convict or hold liable - assuming defense didn’t opt for a bench trial. Civil burden of proof is called a “preponderance of the evidence” and 50.1 gets you over that threshold. But yes - cases that don’t meet the high standard for beyond a reasonable doubt (I’d say much higher than 95%) should not meet the level to convict (same standard applicable for sexual assault too).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 02:14 AM

Defamation isn’t typically a crime - it’s a civil cause of action - so you could hit someone with a verdict possibly even a large judgment but unless they have the assets (current or future) to pay it’s kinda a lost cause. Reputational damage otherwise isn’t a crime that I can think of unless maybe you have some sort of fraud claim (which criminal fraud is also not the same as civil fraud) so it’s not gonna come with the same penalties. That being said, falsely reporting an incident (like a crim…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 02:10 AM
8

Most people don’t have remotely that level of insight before approaching someone they’ve never even met before…. If you were at least speaking about relative acquaintances that would make a bit more sense because at least those folks have met and seen each other interact with others etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/11/25 06:17 AM
2

Yeah the data is abundantly clear that women fair worse financially then men post divorce. But let’s just assume - for “reasons” that divorced women are statistically happier than divorced men (by a large margin) because of some alleged financial windfall we both know they don’t get. Let’s pretend that men being married or not alone has no bearing on men’s happiness or vice versa…. …that truly only makes sense if you are determined to see things through a biased lens based on preconceived notion…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 09:55 PM
2

The OP is based on Griddy’s comment in another thread where she lays out the data I think. Nevertheless, your suggestion that alimony is some big factor at play doesn’t really make sense where the vast majority of divorces don’t involve alimony at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 09:05 PM
2

It seems deliberately misguided to hand wave away marriage itself as a factor in men’s happiness where married men are at the tippy top of the happiness scale and divorced men are at the very bottom if you’re comparing to single/widowed/married/divorced men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 08:04 PM
3

Ok but the fact the data says divorced men are at the end of the happiness scale kinda negates whatever leg up they may have had to begin with - those men were married once too. They also have the upbringing and qualities you’re alleging are what make them happy instead of marriage
/r/PurplePillDebate07/11/25 12:24 PM
7

You are the one arguing that women getting jobs like that are doing it to compete with men then throwing around words like indoctrination. Come on man. Really?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 08:01 AM
1

I mean yeah same with being able to find a BF as woman. That being said celebrity examples are never great to extrapolate to the general population.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 07:50 AM
8

lol y’all are the ones worrying about another gender “competing”. Women aren’t by and large getting higher paying more prestigious jobs to “compete with men” they are trying to make bank and earn a living. Hardly something to snub your nose about.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 07:44 AM
6

Fucking reality dude
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 07:41 AM
6

Being a teacher doesn’t mitigate financial risk - teachers make shit pay what are you talking about?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 07:40 AM
-1

Yeah cuz uglies never get relationships at all let alone with fellow uglies /s
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 07:20 AM
9

No you aren’t. You’re making all sorts of assumptions about this persons mother actually being the problem - “good thing she’s not burdening someone else”, “punching well above her weight class”, “looking down” on him, etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:15 PM
7

Wow for someone who is all up in arms all over this thread with people who are making personal assumptions about you, you sure don’t have any issue whatsoever making all kinds of personal assumptions about this commenter’s mom….
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:08 PM
10

I find that really hard to believe do you have a link?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 04:10 AM
2

This is like what red pill is on paper - it sounds good I suppose but end of the day it’s just a bunch of mouth words. Real life doesn’t work like this, real attraction doesn’t work like this. Most women are not engaging in the behaviors the red pill loves to ascribe to them - those are caricatures you’re talking about, not real people. If you have to be all clinical about because um red pillers love to assume their dogma is based in “science” at least look up assortive mating and read a bit.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:36 AM
8

Beautifully put So many people here just read like soooo young.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 02:29 AM
2

Come on man. It’s not a difficult concept at all. You can be used or taken advantage of with respect to all sorts of things including sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 01:48 PM
2

Of course you can get used for sex. 🤦‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 01:20 PM
1

No, it looks like most men are partnered. Again, regular every day men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 01:19 PM
2

More recent. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/01/08/share-of-us-adults-living-without-a-romantic-partner-has-ticked-down-in-recent-years/
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 05:44 AM
1

They aren’t. There’s some outdated data from like Covid but most men are partnered or married. Regular men Repeat the majority of men - regular men are partnered or married. In fact rates are up (slightly but still) from pre Covid. For partnerships for both men and women.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 05:00 AM
2

Nah - this idea that great kind attractive boyfriends who want to commit don’t exist or are “extremely rare” is a myth. Y’all are so hard on regular men these are regular men out there.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 04:38 AM
0

You can’t compare getting used for sex versus used for a free foodie date because obviously getting used to sex is worse….. Clearly that’s what you meant to say. Like how could you actually say some cash wasted is worse than that?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 04:35 AM
5

Please link your source
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 04:28 AM
5

Few women want that sort of set up intentionally. Why do that when we can get what we want in the same man?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 04:28 AM
2

How old are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 03:58 AM
4

Ambitious, hard working, more neurotic. Versus type b which is chill.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 04:37 AM
6

What does that even mean? Only conservatives are real men or some dumb similar shit?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 04:36 AM
7

Why aren’t men spending more time raising children then? If you think women are doing it wrong or whatever - why aren’t you here pushing men to be better more involved fathers??
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:22 PM
10

People using sperm donations are going to be more well off - it’s the class/wealth disparity issue that drives the negatives associated with single parenthood outcomes - not the fact it’s a single parent alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 05:13 PM
1

IME it’s moreso dudes who have visceral reactions and are certainly more likely to make comments when this kind of thing happens
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 05:10 PM
10

There is Supreme Court precedent directly holding that there is a right to use contraceptives. It’s not about the government “providing access” - access exists so long as there’s supply and demand and someone willing to sell it. But the government cannot ban contraceptives under scotus precedent assuming post Dobbs it survives
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 01:05 AM
12

You can’t expect anyone - man or woman - to just hang around workplaces where random single potential partners might be. That’s incredibly bizarre. Let alone people working trades or at schools like wth.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/10/25 11:36 PM
8

What an ignorant thing to say - that women “don’t ever” experience loneliness.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/10/25 11:34 PM
3

Most men don’t abandon their children though. So by your logic using present versus absent fatherhood alone as the metric, women aren’t prioritizing “the superficial” in men.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 07:45 PM
4

Precisely. The whole dads only truly need to start active involvement being 13+ is absolutely bullshit
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 07:38 PM
2

That’s a shit ton of time (in fact like the most demanding part of the whole timeline) of parenting you’re just dismissing….. Fathers can and should be just as actively involved in the lives of their babies, toddlers, young kids and preteens as you’re suggesting they be in the lives of teenagers and beyond. Fathers can and should share the load in near equal responsibility and effort as mothers throughout the life of their children. (Exceptions of course where father is sole provider and has a S…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/09/25 07:31 PM
5

Yeah same thing is available to attractive women, probably moreso than attractive men, but it’s still unhealthy for the same reason
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 10:01 PM
11

Nobody should be anybody’s “maid” or having to constantly cater/grovel to their partner at their own expense. That’s incredibly unhealthy and not gonna end up satisfying to probably either party. Trust me that shit will get old. Healthy relationships are built on mutual respect, effort and reciprocity not this bullshit.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/09/25 09:47 PM
1

You are making some inaccurate assumptions here. Of course we are doing lots of activities with the kids that don’t involve sitting around the house. But it’s mainly on weekends. By the time work is done and kids are home it’s 5 pm. We eat at 6, then kids usually go outside with dad for a bit in the yard then bathtime/30 min of screen time then bedtime. Lights out 8:30. Weekends are a different story where there’s more time for lengthy activities and excursions outside of our neighborhood. Which…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/25 08:11 PM
1

My kids are 6 and 3. They aren’t running around without a parent. We both work full time. I don’t know where you have all this free “me” time but I certainly don’t. Maybe I will when my kids are teens but I mean that’s a long ways away. Until then, yeah there’s plenty to be done on a daily basis that doesn’t mean one is “obsessed” with doing chores unnecessarily
/r/PurplePillDebate16/09/25 05:42 PM
1

No it isn’t. It’s true if you’re an adult with a household to run. I too cook with a sou vide sometimes - or I’ll braise - both methods that take a while but are easy to prep and just walk away from as they cook. That doesn’t mean I’m just like wow multiple hours of free/me time. We hire a house cleaner to do the main cleaning, and we hire a lawn person. Clearly we aren’t “obsessed” with chores. There’s still plenty of daily shit to be done. You probably don’t have children. 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate14/09/25 12:30 PM
3

Ah. Gotcha. It’s pretty uncommon here.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 12:47 PM
5

That’s not the point at all - follow the logic. More efficiency = higher expectations for more being done. That’s it. You can do laundry in a washer/dryer rather than hand washing everything and hanging it out on a line? Great, now you have time for xyz. You got so hung up on analogizing it to an employment situation you’re failing to follow the logic. Instead you’re derailing to some weird fact pattern that definitely doesn’t apply to most women (let alone me)
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 05:14 AM
13

Who in their 30s isn’t working full time? Where are all these 30 something part time workers being provided for by hubby? I certainly didn’t know many, and still don’t know many now as I’m approaching 40.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 05:05 AM
9

This is silly. More efficient tech just means more work and productivity expected. The expectations for “running a household” aren’t equivalent for what they were when the caretaker had no tech to efficiently do things - they are much higher now. Not to mention higher parenting standards. It’s the same with work - say you find some great super efficient thing that lessens your workload dramatically - do you think people are like great take a load off enjoy that free time? No. They just pile on m…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 05:04 AM
2

“Society” doesn’t expect that anymore. Certain people do, sure, but I mean you can break that down in terms of conservatism versus progressives, religious versus non religious, trad versus non trad, mostly. Most modern progressive thinking people aren’t believing this.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/09/25 04:58 AM
5

I regret a lot of things, but not in particular talking to you. I’m not such a poor sport about it, nor does it bother me that much when you’re being obnoxious. But do you dear.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 03:18 AM
4

Is it stealing or not? Like the fuck? It’s not a particularly hard question to answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 03:10 AM
5

Ok but you didn’t answer my question - is it stealing when corporations do it or just poor people? Because it’s also not capitalist to rig the system in favor of the elites and to constantly find ways to keep corporations afloat even when they are in trouble if we are boiling this down to “stealing”.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 02:46 AM
5

In America they do - constantly. But few who are adamantly against so called socialism even recognize it as the same damn thing. So it’s frustrating.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 02:43 AM
7

How do you feel about all the breaks and bailouts that like corporations get? Obv I can’t speak for other countries but here in America that shit is rampant - in so so many various forms. From literal bailouts to tax loopholes to bullshit bankruptcies so big corporations don’t have to pay people they’ve intentionally or negligently harmed. Is that also stealing?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/09/25 02:21 AM
3

What would those degrees be IYO?
/r/PurplePillDebate08/09/25 11:18 PM
11

The majority of men do not need to do super dangerous things - period - even if it’s not white collar. Every woman - white collar or below - still faces dangers and health concerns with pregnancy and child birth. It’s not a 1 to 1 comparison like you’re trying to make it out to be. Men’s health issues regarding jobs is a definite thing - which I’m all down for addressing, I’m a god damned personal injury attorney. Y’all’s issue in many states is due to stupid tort deform wrt workers comp. But I’…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 02:21 AM
1

I’m on salary. I work many weeks over 40 hours and still get paid the same. That’s how salary works…. Nevertheless most full time people work 40 hours a week so you’re a little off base here. Not really the point here tho. Even when I’m working fucking 80+ hours I’m not gonna be like oh I expect my also full time working partner to do everything. Like what a dick move.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 02:00 AM
5

But you’re doing sex based comparisons right now. In that very comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 01:56 AM
5

It is not “quintessential” to being male, let alone being a male with a family, nor is it as expected as a man as having children as a woman (which is also dangerous). You can choose to do many many other things.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 01:37 AM
5

Meanwhile there are plenty of us workhouse mothers. Like keep up? This is the new norm
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 01:33 AM
-29

lol Ok. Most households aren’t like this a). B) the fuck are you making that you deserve all this without any reciprocity when it comes to domestic work? 40 hours a week? Get over yourself. Taking care of the kids and the house is 24/7. Your 100k paycheck for 40 hours a week is fucking peanuts so stop. Y’all need to premise this shit with real numbers and real hours before you start pretending “oh wifey at home does nothing taking care of our 2.5 kids and all the chores meanwhile I work 40 hours…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/09/25 01:31 AM
3

No this isn’t court - again. Nobody is applying the standards you apparently assume need to exist. They don’t exist here. You can either except that or keep fighting over something stupid as shit. People make judgments all the time that aren’t subject to some legal standard of proof. Clearly - you have too - so insisting that someone needs to default “men good woman bad” isn’t a great mentality
/r/PurplePillDebate01/09/25 12:33 AM
4

This isn’t court - there’s no standard of proof here it’s gonna be based on feelings to some extent - same with men who believe they’ve been led on or used. I’m not assuming anything by default. But I’m not naive enough to believe this phenomena of men leading women on to get laid just barely ever happens. Of course it does. Probably more than just men “changing their minds.”
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 05:31 PM
10

Yeah I’m not talking about that. Just like I’m not talking about women going on a date and not feeling it and it ultimately going nowhere. Men leading women on to get laid is a real thing - and is often intentional.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 12:39 PM
11

I didn’t miss it. I just don’t see men on here claiming men who are alleged victims of foodie calls should know better, etc, the way I see comments like yours claiming women should know better about being used for sex. And it’s hypocritical. My whole point is, again, leading people (men or women) on is wrong. For whatever gain you’re looking for. If you can agree with that right on.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 03:43 AM
13

Y’all literally talk about how foodie dates are so wrong and fraudulent and deceitful but here you are defending men leading women on to get sex with the same logic? Leading someone on is wrong. Period. Regardless of whether it’s sex or a free fancy meal or whatever. It’s wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/08/25 02:46 AM
3

You were tho. You’re taking about legal rights and responsibilities so ya know, maybe understand the laws you’re speaking to? I understand you thought it was something other than what it actually is. And I don’t blame you whatsoever. Everyone does that. Not something to feel bad about. But I’m telling you it’s more complicated than that and it’s not just “who gets to decide to be a parent”.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 05:07 AM
2

You made no point other than “you’re wrong”. Either answer my question or don’t. Explain your commentary or don’t. I don’t really give a fuck either way dude.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 05:00 AM
1

No? What? A sahd is married not divorced most often. There’s not custody order. What?9
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:55 AM
3

Nobody wants that sort of control. Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:48 AM
3

Of course it does - I’m not blind to the realistic effects of abortion outside of the legal justification. But you argued what the “principle” was and that’s not it. Even if we take that principle as being tantamount you cannot fairly say a man and a woman bear the same burden
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:44 AM
11

Basically forcing women to have children - regardless of whether some man is required to support her and said children- is NOT helping women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:41 AM
1

Ok so ugly or unattractive men are just as likely to be shitheads yes or no?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:27 AM
6

Safe haven is a talking point men use for this type of argument but they ignore the actual law and the actual reality which is that it’s very infrequently used in the us. Nevertheless if you are going to bring it up then I am going to bring up the fact that in most states, it’s rarely used and also gender neutral. So fight that or don’t - up to you. I don’t give a shit what “paralegal” course work you’ve done. Read. The. Cases. Roe, Casey, Dobbs. If you wanna start somewhere. Given your extensiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:26 AM
8

Then con law giving women the right to abortion wasn’t premised on “the fundamental life choice of deciding whether or not to become a parent”. That’s not the basis of the right (which is now overturned) to begin with. Also men have safe haven rights too??
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:14 AM
2

I mean you can narrow your commentary down to meaningless but you said what you said. That’s how it reads 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:11 AM
10

Bodily autonomy. Read the opinion. And Casey too.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:10 AM
3

Your bodily autonomy is being affected if your BODY is being infringed upon or regulated - not just your paycheck. Nobody is saying, for example, you can’t get a vasectomy or use birth control.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:09 AM
3

No. Men do not have any “bodily autonomy” rights wrt abortion because duh it’s not their bodies. As for “in the eyes of the law” - that was about bodily autonomy and “marital privacy” - so yeah women. The folks who get pregnant. Yall need to read the actual opinions here. Roe, Casey, Dobbs. Starter pack please.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:07 AM
12

No. That’s not what abortion rights were grounded in. Roe was not about hey let’s give women an out to be mothers.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:03 AM
6

Make it something that men have to obtain before sex. Get agreement (in writing) from her before sex (and burden is on the man to get the agreement). Fair.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 04:00 AM
6

Well that’s not true at all. Impoverished single dads have the same options for welfare that impoverished single moms have - there are just far less of them. It’s not gender specific but it IS kid dependent.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 03:55 AM
4

Because that’s insane??
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 03:53 AM
7

You are comparing two different things. Roe v wade was not about avoiding paying for children. The holding was not related to the financial cost of having to support a child. So these things are not the same.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 03:51 AM
4

Ugly/unattractive men are not exempt from being assholes. Your commentary here seems to imply only attractive guys are jerks while the lesser attractive men are more the good guys. If that’s what you believe, it’s not the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/08/25 03:17 AM
2

No of course that’s not true
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 12:20 PM
2

Oh Christ kill me another child
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:44 AM
3

So low level nurse nobody should get alimony after two years because anyone can become a low level nurse within two years? Is that what you are arguing? How much does a 2 year no bachelors nurse even get paid on average?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:41 AM
2

No that is false but I would need a venue to specifically see if it’s publicly available to non VA attorneys
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:38 AM
2

What
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:34 AM
3

If you’ve already had a 4 year bachelors?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:33 AM
3

Maybe but do you think that’s a legit comment? Like all people seeking alimony just nursing degree that shit?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:33 AM
2

I’ll have better luck than you probably but I need at least a name and city and state. Which again you could pm me I’m not gonna post your buddy’s info in main subreddit but frankly there’s no way I believe your synopsis. There’s either more too it he didn’t tell you/you are leaving out, or he’s lying.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:09 AM
3

That insane. First of all I think nursing school requires a 4 year degree first you can’t just say it’s 2 years total and call it a day - there is now bachelors required? There’s no residency type period? Second you can’t just uniformity base ALL alimony in what it could possibly take to undergo some sort of low level nursing degree like what???
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:07 AM
3

Ok. Crazy busy. But making bank. How are you?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 02:00 AM
3

None of that has to do with whether you are using ipso facto or axiomatically incorrectly. Of course I impute my opinion. On many occasions. But not when I’m using terms that mean different things? The terms you are using are like similar to if 1+1=2 than 2+0=2, not “alimony is immoral”. That’s inherently not an objective logical conclusion it’s your opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:59 AM
2

Then send me the case number/name/and jurisdiction. I don’t care what you think you’ve seen plus what your buddy told you. Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:56 AM
2

I don’t care. Case number and jurisdiction or he’s lying. You’re the one who suggested you were right because you saw a court order. Ok? Prove it. They are public mostly. Can’t imagine why an alimony order would be sealed in whatever jx yall are in so? Prove it. Send it to me privately idc. Otherwise to me, a practitioner, he’s a liar.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:53 AM
3

Yes you are. Same as when you used axiomatically. That’s not the right use of those words. You’re trying to impute opinion.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:50 AM
1

Yeah ok send me the case number
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:48 AM
4

Many verbal contracts ARE enforceable. Statute of frauds doesn’t apply to everything. No. Marriage is not a contact PERIOD. Anymore than youd say employment law is.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:42 AM
0

Yeah he’s lying
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:40 AM
4

Why are you using ipso facto wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:36 AM
6

No. You can’t just be like oh vows are also a contract when you’re speaking about a specific legal term. No. Vows are not a contract. You can’t just mix the two. Vows are a promise with no legal validity or enforcement mechanism whatsoever (outside of maybe those rare occasions that account for annulments I guess)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:34 AM
3

Which most women do? And those who don’t are usually doing so with agreement from the husband and/or wife? So what’s the fucking problem here
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:30 AM
2

Divorce law is legislative. So state by state (although most follow some version of the uniform recommendations). Family law isn’t based off contract law, it’s based in equity. The state legislators you vote for decide how divorce works in terms of things like child support, alimony factors, equitable versus community property states. Judges look to whatever factors the legislation provides when they have discretion and then base it on equity. It’s completely different than contract law.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:20 AM
3

No it’s not. It’s a status recognized by the government that conveys rights and obligations. You can analogize it to employment law better than contract law. If you want contract law in marriage - get a prenup. Bo that’s what generally applies (less legislation specific to prenups).
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:15 AM
6

No they wouldn’t. Marriage laws are not contract law. PRENUPS are. But not standard marriage laws. Contract law does not penalize breach when it’s in the best interest of the breacher. They are not the same
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:13 AM
8

Florida only had that for so long because so many older folks retire there. Lifelong alimony makes complete sense for old folks divorcing where wife cannot work or has very few working years left and hubby has his pension whathaveyou even in his twilight years. Lifelong alimony was already rarely granted in modern times except for old or disabled women. None of the people who complain about lifelong alimony really understand this. (I know you already know this)
/r/PurplePillDebate28/08/25 01:11 AM
1

Y’all don’t date men. The amount of men who throw a fit if you try and pay… And then turn around and make it like you owe them something like they know what they are doing and it’s gross.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 11:37 PM

Nobody gets pregnant to “save humanity from low birth rates” that’s not even like a fair question (yes I know red pillers still pose it but the whole concept is just asinine)
/r/PurplePillDebate24/08/25 11:34 PM
2

Almost all men (except close friends and like co workers/bosses) flirt with me and most mean nothing actually serious. Like I’ve just learned to live with it, it’s how most of my male peers operate in front of pretty women. No big deal at all they are perfectly decent men for the most part just having a little fun. Genuinely nice and polite and actually not intending anything. *I am not talking about like random men on the street/waiters/service workers and the like, but like men who socialize w…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/08/25 09:51 PM
16

Girl this is not the one…. She’s not even speaking about like being harassed it’s just..you shouldn’t be able to look at women for “free” because it’s hot out and they might be dressed for hot weather. Like what?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 02:51 AM
3

Mr I allegedly have figured out how not to pay taxes - if true you are getting your own form of welfare.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 02:44 AM
3

There’s no way you’re just avoiding paying taxes altogether unless you’re completely under the table. In which case you’re probably making a shit income as it is so who cares
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 02:39 AM
2

You’re not going to starve in jail because our tax dollars pay for that. That’s not a “blue pill thing” republicans aren’t all like hey let’s throw people in jail and then not feed them.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 02:35 AM
3

How are you avoiding child support exactly?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/08/25 02:32 AM
3

The premise is on whether it’s a “need” and OP keeps going off of what will expand your lifespan. Whether it’s some sort of “biological imperative” is irrelevant. Your apparent evo psych lecture notwithstanding. Nobody cares. You’re not following the prompt so.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 03:22 AM
1

So you’ve dated a lot of men then?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 02:48 AM

I can’t imagine it would affect the whole market very much. It’s a tiny percentage of people either men or women.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 01:47 AM
3

So? That’s not the premise of this thread.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 01:36 AM
7

Because you’re comparing it to having homes and health insurance. If you weren’t hellbent on doing that, youd probably have less people jumping on the whole well don’t expect this to be provided to you.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/08/25 01:34 AM
1

Nobody cares about you salivating over a celebrity sports star’s wife. Gross and not making your point whatsoever
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 03:55 AM
1

No they aren’t
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 03:52 AM
0

Because you’re bitching about it?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 03:06 AM
1

No, that’s red pill dogma. It’s wrong. Like meet actual people. Chronically online red pill men who buy into the religion are just sad. So maybe don’t do that. High value women with high value men are not wilting flowers bending the knee left and right to their main. That’s not how that works. They aren’t per se stay at home moms and the men aren’t per se sole bread winners. This is 2025. Not 1950, grandpa
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 03:05 AM
1

Can you answer anything or respond to anything stated in the first comment I made? Otherwise stfu
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 02:23 AM
1

Who cares what you think? You have no idea whatsoever about what high value men or high value women might be. You have not answered my question to begin with so don’t act all high and mighty that I’m not answering yours. You reap what you sow, dear. Go home grandpa.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 02:01 AM
2

Obviously no one you’ve encountered. Why on earth do you expect a high value women to be running around making sure the man is like fully taken care of like a child? High value in demand women don’t need to do that, and aren’t doing that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 01:32 AM
1

So you’re dead too? As well as a worthless man who can’t cook?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 01:23 AM
1

I mean if you can’t even cook you’re kindof worthless as a man these days like learn some shit. Cooking is fun as shit. Grow up, dude. It’s frankly pathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 01:13 AM
3

So you’ve been programmed to be a worthless dick? In other words?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 01:07 AM
2

A man not also pulling his weight to show he’s a good husband especially if he isn’t showing 50/50 isn’t worth a damn. I don’t care that you asked her out and paid for the first few dates that’s so trivial long term. Why would a high value woman ever commit to a man who is just expecting all the work without any reciprocity? What a child.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 01:06 AM
1

You’ve definitely never dated a man to think it’s that’s fucking easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:46 AM
1

So are you the cook in your household?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:45 AM
2

Why would a woman with options need to do that tho? Like why is it this constant power pull can’t they both put the effort in? Can’t he also show that he’s also trying his best to earn her commitment?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:39 AM
8

Yeah? What’s wrong with that?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:36 AM
1

Of course they are. still. Don’t be so naive
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:30 AM
2

Then you fucking cook. Christ. Who cares why she doesn’t like doing it. You DO IT then.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/08/25 12:28 AM

Who says an assertive man is threatening? There’s no way you believe being assertive is judged more harshly in men versus women. Like that’s delusional even in 2025z
/r/PurplePillDebate16/08/25 12:02 AM
4

I don’t know who all agrees that pregnancy is such a “beautiful experience.” Pregnancy is the fucking worst. So is childbirth. It sucks. It’s just worth it for the outcome. Romanticizing it, however, at least in my experience, is probably a lot easier for a man to say.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 12:49 PM
5

No he’s saying women exaggerate then somehow backing that up with a claim that men have it just as bad. Like yo, there’s no logic there. Women aren’t exaggerating anything just because you think men are subject to a similar threat. Obvious is obvious
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 03:02 AM
9

OP is making a fuss about it for men…..
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:42 AM
9

No one is saying men can’t feel unsafe walking home at night or in shady areas too. Your whole premise that women “exaggerate safety concerns” is belied by the text of your post which has nothing to do with women “exaggerating” and everything to do with “but men too”. You’re literally not even arguing women exaggerate….
/r/PurplePillDebate14/08/25 02:36 AM
1

Yeah because it’s not something you can clearly define with “step by step examples” like that may be hard to swallow but it the truth. Confidence isn’t a science. It’s not describable the way you seem to require. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist or isn’t attractive. It’s kindof beautiful that way. Like I’ve also had men say being “intriguing” is attractive in women. Also vague, also not something you can write a script for.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 03:39 AM
1

I mean if you want to ignore female attraction go ahead??? Pretend it’s 100% looks like what do I care. Have fun believing that fallacy
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 03:24 AM
2

The only way to describe it is to act more confident. I cannot give you a “step by step example” that’s now how being confident works, sorry. There are dudes you wouldn’t have even noticed but for their confidence and charisma but like there’s not a “step by step” guide for becoming one.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 03:18 AM
2

No, I am not automatically attracted to a man “2 points above me” whatever that means #1. Personality and behavior is relevant to (my) attraction to men 100% of the time. I have only ever dated guys that people have told me are “below me” at least physically. (Not that I think that’s the case). But no I cannot give some sort of step by step guide to what confidence looks like or how it translates to being attractive, I doubt anyone could truly do that honestly. I also never said anything is 100%…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 03:07 AM
1

Confidence probably isn’t going to help like the completely not going to ever happen guy who unfortunately looks like a toad, but it’s absolutely attractive for the maybe just never really thought about it guy who is just not really on the radar. Women’s attraction is kind of fickle, but at least for me confidence is super attractive (and not just for already super hot guys but not for already completely ugly men). Like most men are not either super physically beautiful or super physically ugly …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 02:54 AM
3

You can also ask women - many of which have tried to do a polite rejection only to be met with aggression, interrogation, and venom. Like I think I can safely say most women have experienced some shape or form of the above.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/08/25 02:48 AM
0

What is the alleged insecurity regarding women liking tall men? Like what is the logic behind a women preferring a tall man? That she’s too big or something? I personally prefer tall guys because I think it’s more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/25 03:10 AM
1

Most women are not reliant on public benefits….
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 05:02 AM
6

How is taxing the rich at higher rates than poorer people not akin to slavery? Is that really what you’re asking me?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:18 AM
12

No it isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:10 AM
11

Well you can complain about unrealistic beauty standards outside of specifically whining about guys not wanting to date fat girls, one. But fair, we can equate those women to the dudes all pissed that women prefer tall men, I guess. I don’t think the crux of the “liberal woman’s” platform is somehow let’s get all these men to date women they aren’t attracted to in the name of “equality”. Either way, dating is and always will be discriminatory. Because frankly ideally it’s based on choice and leg…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 04:10 AM
13

Ok woah woah woah you are all over the place. First of all, there is no group, and I mean NO group, that has tried harder historically and present day to regulate or “ban” porn than conservatives. As to the rest (most of which I’ve never even heard of), I have yet to hear some large screeching of allegedly liberal women that believe and outcry that dating somehow is like illegal discrimination and should be regulated like we (attempt) to do so constitutionally when it comes to jobs, housing, edu…
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:58 AM
35

How dare you
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:51 AM
8

It’s absurd
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:49 AM
10

Of course it’s discriminatory. Dating is and will always be discriminatory. Who is arguing otherwise?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:44 AM
12

While slavery is still legal in one specific form in the US, higher taxes on the top 10% ain’t it (nor “akin” to it).
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/25 03:41 AM
2

No you are wrong
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/25 01:52 AM
8

No that’s not what that means dummy
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 04:15 AM
3

No that doesn’t mean there’s genuine attraction. Like that’s the opposite of proof here dude
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:48 AM
2

No. And stop following me around
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:46 AM
2

No they can’t. You are wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:45 AM
1

Nobody is admitting that by saying not all options are attractive. 80/20 is not and has never been real, no matter what fucked up interpretation is you are working with
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:45 AM
1

What? No it’s not.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:14 AM
1

You may be. But you’re ignoring my point altogether. Not surprising.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 03:13 AM
1

Are you fucking kidding me? None of what you’ve linked is directly correlated to your claims at all, a. B, the fuck are you saying child sexual abuse that occurs within religious sects is somehow affecting far less cases. You have zero idea what you’re talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 02:59 AM
1

Yeah. Feel you.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 02:21 AM
3

No we don’t know that. At all. What we do know is the church seems to harbor an awful lot of child sex abusers. And cover it up. Like bravo?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 02:17 AM
2

Maybe the church should address the rampant child sex abuse that goes on within its own ranks before blaming the lgbtq community for all the gay kids… Just a thought.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 01:35 AM
7

Like only one of these is an actual “bargaining chip/leverage” and if the other person doesn’t give a shit, it’s not leverage at all. This seems like wishful thinking. Bad options (or as we are really speaking to, unattractive options) are, at the end of the day, bar options. Finding some silver lining here or there doesn’t mean those bad options are gonna be some sort of actual valuable leverage to get you good options (aka dating options you are actually attracted to)
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 01:24 AM
6

How so?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:57 AM
2

Not following you dear what’s the third rail?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:44 AM
1

You’re responding to an unempathetic comment regarding men on this sub tho. As if empathy should be expected here. It’s not. It never has been. This is PPD. Also I don’t know where you get this wild assumption about men in therapy - but I’m open to hearing more - has that in fact been something studied?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:42 AM
7

This is a terrible comparison. You’re missing the point altogether. A woman with options of only men she’s not attracted to is not the “rich person” in your analogy.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:37 AM
1

Within that comparison is straight men not finding gay men who would otherwise be into them as valid options tho. And it’s not just about appearance I don’t know who said that at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:35 AM
0

Nobody should be expecting any sort of therapy or real life support here on PPD. This is not the place. And you know that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:33 AM
5

Women also can’t choose to be attracted to men they aren’t attracted to. Like duh that’s the whole point of the analogy
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/25 12:30 AM
6

Fucking men and sportsball like for real women are supposedly superficial in their hobbies?
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 12:49 AM
1

Fuck me as a young woman just starting my career like that’s all I had - career. No time for hobbies. As a younger woman before I started my career sure I had hobbies but they were more social. Like playing pool. Because I had time and that shit is fun as shit when you’re good at it
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 12:43 AM
2

lol “most men” do these things are you nuts? Most men’s hobbies are like fishing, sports, cars or drinking. Literally fuck off with your whole men are so much more enlightened with their hobbies bullshit. You are so biased. Sorry we don’t care about your in depth knowledge of D&D or magic the gathering.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/25 12:39 AM
0

All of that is irrelevant regarding commenting on parenthood etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 01:49 AM
0

None of y’all should be allowed to speak until you have kids. Maybe even make it two.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 01:10 AM
1

Are you kidding?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 12:53 AM
3

Um no the fuck are you on about. I will never accept that. Mother of two btw.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/25 12:52 AM
1

Nobody here is calling that “empowered”
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 12:10 AM

That’s not a “classic saying” Lol it’s just red pill religious bullshit
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 12:09 AM

This is a completely delusional take.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/25 12:07 AM
-2

What makes you think the men we meet don’t have much interest let alone a similar measure of interest we do? What are you supposed to do even if faced with your weird hypothetical? Like get mad? Do what? Cry?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/07/25 12:53 AM
10

Lol really? It’s gross
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/25 03:38 AM
5

Are you daft?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 02:48 AM
10

Men who aren’t going to approach, duh.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 01:33 AM
9

Most people aren’t claiming that period. You’re also missing the point
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 01:32 AM
6

Not really tho what are you missing out on? Men who aren’t interested?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 01:00 AM
9

But she said she doesn’t do that so who cares
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 12:57 AM
17

They do but that means getting to know someone first. Women aren’t going to by and large just approach random stranger men on the off chance their personalities are attractive. Like that’s not how that works.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 12:57 AM
13

Women already do approach when they want to. Y’all just aren’t happy because it’s not enough men or whatever. Women DO approach. But on their terms so
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/25 12:54 AM
1

The women sleeping with incarcerated men aren’t the women y’all are trying to sleep with/date. Just saying. That’s not to say that autistic software engineers are all getting with supermodel model citizen women either but those are really the extreme ends. Normal average men tend to get with normal average women, even if they aren’t pulling a bunch of lower class women fucking around with known criminals and drug dealers.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/07/25 12:52 AM
2

A month or two does not a monk or nun make. Way to exaggerate. If you’re unable to wait 30-60 days to get to know someone, it’s not like sexual compatibility isn’t important it’s like sexual compatibility with a stranger is ALL that is important. Christ. PS most women would probably have better sex and therefore sexual compatibility with a dude they’ve connected with, so 30-60 days of dating, however tortured you may be, may equal better results. That is, if it’s better sex you’re seeking rather…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 01:06 AM
0

Yes
/r/PurplePillDebate16/07/25 01:02 AM
2

I can only speak from my own experience here. I’m a trial attorney and seeing how you went to law school I assume you understand that’s a demanding job. I def will take the job. lol. I would never want to be a homemaker with kiddos. Young kids are VERY demanding.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 04:43 PM
4

It’s a ton harder with kids. Husband and I have two young ones and both work full time. If he didn’t share in the domestic work at neat equal levels I’d lose my mind lol. Hoping it will get more manageable as they get older 🤞
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 03:01 PM
2

Why does it matter one way or the other if she wanted to be a homemaker rather than having a career? The homemaking labor has already occurred? And let’s not pretend men in these types of marriages did not also want their partner to be a homemaker
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 02:59 PM
3

That is not how divorce works. You only get half of the marital assets. If dude could trace the majority of the funding for the house to his premarital property (extremely likely in the strange hypothetical you posed). She’s not getting anywhere near that for a three month marriage. And 50/50 is only guaranteed in community property states. Most states are equitable property states and weird circumstances like the one you’ve suggested could very easily come into play to change the split. But I m…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/25 02:53 PM
4

wtf are you even on about
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/25 03:28 AM
-1

I’ve never heard any woman speak of these things irl
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/25 12:03 AM
3

No they are just lazy and fine to keep with the status quo. They aren’t “fulfilling duties” like what are you on about
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 04:20 AM
2

Lower class/uneducated people have more sex so I’m not sure that argument tracks. Also men do care about women’s jobs/careers. Maybe not as much as the reverse but I hate these absolute “men don’t care at all” statements like no
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 04:10 AM
0

Good, smart. Don’t respond if you’re not wanting to get into politics but given that you are (apparently) conservative, I’m wondering how you feel about all those so called “states rights” republicans trying to go wayyyyy beyond that wrt abortion. (Again, if this is icky conversation please ignore me)
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 03:54 AM
5

Omg are you arguing that men not raping women left and right is some sort of amazing proof of how self disciplined men are?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 03:48 AM
2

So like you’re pro choice then I assume?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 03:40 AM
14

I mean I’m with you with the whole don’t make it your primary purpose/life mission thing. But Romantic connections are not rare at all. Most people will have some level of success here. Yes people complain about their SOs but that’s also just a part of being human. Maybe it’s just me but I’m firmly in the “romantic love exists and is achievable for most” camp. That’s what I’ve experienced and seen so. Whether it’s maintainable I guess is a more nuanced question.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/25 01:38 AM
9

No. You’re missing the whole point
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 02:59 AM
12

No that literally IS the point. Looks aren’t the end all be all.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 01:49 AM
1

Your literal first graf defeats your whole argument. ???
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 01:16 AM
4

No it’s not. Because men still appreciate that and will still often fuck those women.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 12:53 AM
18

But it’s not uncommon. I too would never feel visceral lust based off looks alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/25 12:52 AM
4

No they aren’t describing the “full role” for females. They aren’t even describing child birth or child rearing. For one. Secondly, you’re not accurately describing the male role either. Most men aren’t making all the money that’s just reality. Whereas far more women are doing the bulk of what she is describing even in 2025. So.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:39 AM
6

Wanting a confident man while also believing women can and should be confident and be in leadership roles (and jobs) isn’t hypocritical in the slightest. So agreed there.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:21 AM
4

Very few men make “all the money” these days and it doesn’t matter she’s still expected to do more childcare/domestic work even IF she makes more like there are stats on this. So candidly you are the one leaving shit out
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:17 AM
1

You can’t unravel the two tho. Men bear more burden during dating sure. But it’s largely benign. Women bear FAR more during marriage typically speaking so like the men can shut up IMO. Omg you had to ask her on a date and pay for a dinner at chilis like chill tf out. Go birth a few kids and be the default parent then tell me how it’s sooo much harder on men in heterosexual relationships. Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:15 AM
1

This is retarded. A lot of that is just cultural tradition. Like expecting women to bear your children and care for them predominantly and learn to cook are also expected gender roles yet no one is like wow all these backwards men where are you supporting surrogates and private chefs come on. MEN ALSO support gender roles if not MORESO even when they claim not to.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/25 01:12 AM
3

That is not the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 04:03 AM
2

Girl I am blue pill and I’ve been here a long time. I’m against red pill. This wasn’t a red pill/blue pill thing in my mind
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 04:01 AM
2

No there’s no grand cohort of women claiming to be experts at male dating apps. It’s not peculiar at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 03:11 AM
4

I’m not even talking about men I’m just talking about life lol
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 03:09 AM
4

Do you realize what an esoteric and random business model it is that you’re peddling that somehow you’re expecting women to flock to? It’s bizarre
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:31 AM
4

Idk what that even means but I think you’re reading too much into these comments. Putting your best face forward and not immediately declaring and showcasing all your flaws isnt some sort of bait and switch it’s just human nature. It’s perfectly normal and you’re making it out like folks are just frauds and liars when that’s not the case. You’ve literally never tried to make a good first impression ever like you’re sooooo confident you’ve never ever once tried to impress anyone I find that hard …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:22 AM
5

You seem to think successful women are somehow suddenly interested in men’s success in dating apps and how to commoditize that. Which is a weird fucking assumption.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 02:17 AM
5

This is silly. Of course you have. You’ve literally never tried to “put your best face forward” or make a good impression? You’re consistently showing everyone from meeting #1 all your good qualities PLUS your bad ones. I think you’re being too black and white here. No one is “pretending to be someone else” just because they present their best qualities first.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:51 AM
4

Boss babe/independent high earning woman doesn’t have to mean “equal overlap” in those professions. Like what are you talking about here. Of course there are many such professions where women are breaking into them but they are still male dominated like
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:49 AM
7

Way to ignore the point you can’t even support your own premise nor any facet of it
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:46 AM
5

Independent high earning women are like c suite or doctors or lawyers they aren’t by and large content creators, porn stars or at all concerned with fucking men’s success in dating apps or making money off that.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:35 AM
3

Who is even trying this? Some tiny percentage of the population?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:24 AM
1

“Ad hominem” “Gaslighting” yawn like support your argument or don’t. Yeah your post came off as bitter and your entire premise is asinine. Like I’m sorry but grow up.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:24 AM
16

But this is purely focusing on the physical. Modern life (including modern power dynamics) isn’t focused on this. Femininity/masculinity to far beyond just “who is bigger/stronger and could overpower the other in a physical altercation”
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 01:21 AM
16

This whole post is just bitter. Like your whole premise that women have terrible personalities because they aren’t randomly commoditizing ghost writing dating profiles for men on dating apps is asinine.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/25 12:32 AM
7

Who gives a shit? It’s a cultural tradition that couples are free to ignore all they want. Like I got married at a chapel in Vegas - not traditional. Plenty of people just go to the courthouse. You’re free to be as non traditional as you like but bitching about culturally traditional norms surrounding marriage seems silly.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:10 PM
3

Do you invite them out? I mean im not one to ever let a man have leverage against me lol but I mean first date seems pretty normal to either split or man who asked pays
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:44 AM
6

I mean I started my career during the tail end of the recession too haha so I def didn’t start out at six figures. But I appreciate the response. I respect it. I think expecting some young 20 something fresh out of college or grad school to come into a six figure job might be tiny bit delusional (like we all have to work our way up). But I make a lot more than you tho it took me a longgg time to get there.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:42 AM
2

I hate this stupid argument that crops up time and time again. Omg y’all have to approach and daresay maybe pay for a date or two. The absolute horror. Long term we are the ones who bear children. You’re dating, fine. Maybe it works out maybe it doesn’t. Long term women bear FAR more burden than you ever will so literally stop whining.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:36 AM
1

What personality traits can you cite the studies/science please?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:29 AM
4

Being a self proclaimed “contrarian” doesn’t make you any less a “normie” you understand that right? Like who are the “normies” here compared to you? Contrarian by and large just means disagreeable asshole which doesn’t make you less “normie”, assuming that’s the case.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:26 AM
4

Your comment makes it seem like you’re adverse to paying for any dates whatsoever. If that’s true may I ask why?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:21 AM
10

Curious about the six figure preference. That typically gets crucified when it’s a woman’s preference. So just wondering your take on how you came to that
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:15 AM
8

That’s dumb. Engagement rings are basically a cultural norm. So is the dad giving his daughter away at the wedding. That doesn’t mean you signed up for some stereotypical 1950s marriage. (Also you do h need to spend tons of money or get some sort of “extravagant” ring for most women these days. In fact lots of women are opting for non traditional rings as it is)
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/25 01:11 AM
2

No? Like y’all need to come visit the real world sometime
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 11:11 AM
6

No my H is a software developer who is 100% remote. I’m an attorney who WFH 3x a week. Sounds like she is playfully jealous, and rightfully so. WFH is infinitely better than office 5x a week. She’s not doubting your manhood ffs. Go kill it on your couch. You earned it. It doesn’t make you less masculine christ. Millennials on upward recognize the grind ain’t worth it unless they make it worth it. Plus everyone by this point should know tech is by and large WFH and can still make bank.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 04:42 AM
2

Modern eugenics at least in the US is about trying to keep lower class people from populating.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 04:29 AM
3

This is asinine. What are you talking about? Women only date men who already own, are you joking?
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 04:23 AM
4

And the “elites” are corporate interests. It’s fucking awful. Right now there’s a huge fight to make ALL pesticide manufacturers immune from fucking lawsuits. While also being barely regulated. It’s disgusting.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/25 04:22 AM
10

I like traditional masculinity to a point but if it goes over the line yuck city yuck yuck yuck. That Mayer be vague, happy to elaborate more if it would help. Idk if it’s a “prerequisite” for most women though I think there’s plenty of women who very much like more “feminine” men (and I had a BF like that once who I very much loved so even someone like me can be swayed)
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 11:17 PM
7

You’re not wrong. It’s the same for women too
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/25 03:57 AM
3

I’m not sure what this garbled half attempt at poetry may be, but it’s not an argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 12:38 PM
1

No dear this is incorrect. You’re not even making sense here.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 12:37 PM
4

By and large most men aren’t intentionally going into physically demanding or dangerous fields specifically to provide for kids. Whereas woman obviously are taking physical risks if they intentionally get pregnant. So it’s not the same. And it never will be. The comparison is apples to oranges
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 02:20 AM
3

Yeah if they aren’t red pillers they might be more reasonable
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 01:07 AM
3

No it doesnt. A presumptive father will not be held liable for discreetly doing an at home paternity test without mom’s consent. A test done “at the hospital” if you’re talking about before birth clearly will need the mom’s consent that’s not the same thing. You realize after birth you’re at the hospital for like a day in normal non nicu births. Most men aren’t going to swab kids - nor would they have much opportunity to do so - during the melee that is the day or so right after birth when mom a…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 01:06 AM
5

Well your whole argument about men making this huge sacrifice and it being akin to childbirth is illogical then.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 01:02 AM
2

I don’t need to “tell myself anything” I know better. A fucking patient of yours telling some story is meaningless come on.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 01:02 AM
1

Right and in every other instance when the women are disfavored red pillers are all for it being not unfair/the woman’s fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/25 12:02 AM
1

It’s all that and more. It’s the extracurriculars, it’s the playdates, it’s the constant “parent lunches” and school holidays with gift bags for the whole class, graduations etc. it’s the parent guilt because you’re expected to entertain and educate and stimulate your children 24/7. Like it’s exhausting and I’m only like half assing it myself. lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 11:26 PM
1

Mine is but I still feel lucky. Majority of my age similar married peer women with children still do the lions share of the child care/rearing even when they work just as much and even when they are the breadwinners. I’m early millennial tho so.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:46 PM
9

This is not the same. Men aren’t by and large choosing to go into highly risky jobs because they have kids or kids on the way. There are valid reasons to discuss the phenomenon of why men choose riskier and more physical jobs than women but let’s be honest. A lot of those men had those jobs before they had kids and before they were even married.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:43 PM
1

Girl my H got more paternity leave than I got maternity leave. Which I applaud but wtf my industry is so backwards some time (he is in tech which is far more progressive).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:37 PM
1

The standards for raising children have grown immensely. At least that’s what I think is also a factor here.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:35 PM
3

Also, pregnancy and birth sucks ass. Just adding my two cents. lol (and I have two as well not having any more)
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:33 PM
8

This is not normal most men are not “financially ruined” by divorce and most men who don’t fight for more custody do so because it’s a choice they made IME. Granted, I’m only one lawyer who litigated divorces for a short period of time but I’d say I have enough experience to say your claims are suspect af. For one, like almost all stats I’ve seen show women take a deeper cut financially post divorce. It’s a multi factorial thing but is mostly due to the man being more of the moneymaker during th…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:27 PM
2

Is only fans like always live or is it videos they make where you’re not watching them (and jerking off to them) live?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:15 PM
7

Red pill doesn’t give a shit about equality and sex differences when it’s something that doesn’t favor men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 10:09 PM
3

I mean we don’t use it all that frequently but say my H loses his phone or I simply want to know if he decided to wfh or go into the office on any particular day I mean that’s what we use it for. Completely logical reasons that have nothing to do with like constant tracking for infidelity lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 09:55 PM
7

If you have any sort of legal custody ie you’re the presumptive father you absolutely can dna test your own child privately without consent from the mother. That’s legal. Now you can’t just be some random person off the street or be like a friend of a friend and not have the parents consent. A man who believes and who has been told by the mother he is the father and who is helping raise that kid can absolutely dna test his own alleged child without her knowledge. OTOH if it’s like those situatio…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 09:40 PM
5

Are you talking about linking your phone up with location on with your partner’s phone and vice versa? Because yes there def is. I have like my mom, my sister, my husband and my child’s AirTag (that is stitched into his backpack) all available to locate on my iPhone
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 09:29 PM
7

Yeah but did you share your location specifically to assuage her fears that you were cheating (without any reason to suspect you were)? Because there’s plenty of logical reasons for enabling location sharing on you and your partners devices other than to monitor them for possible infidelity.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/25 08:48 PM
1

You fell into a trap like it was obvious
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/25 01:49 AM
14

Literally lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/25 12:41 PM
4

Y’all always stereotype women based on the most rachet behavior ever so yeah, it’s inaccurate. Either that or some very sort instagram model type behavior that only exists for a small minority of women. Y’all don’t seem to understand or even recognize normal women. Every woman is a single mom trying to baby trap a man or commit paternity fraud. Or has an OF account and exists off of the likes they receive in social media DMs. Or cheats perpetually while dating bad boy criminals etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 11:04 PM
1

Oh shit right sorry well here’s hoping you find something similar!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 03:52 AM
1

Happy for you!
/r/PurplePillDebate04/06/25 03:46 AM
3

Well I’m also including being a SAHP of my two kids (both under six) no thank you. I’m one of those ppl who thinks that’s hard and prefers having a full time job despite having a “hard” job
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 08:39 PM
1

My daycare is so cheap I’m so lucky haha but I mean even if it was 550 a week or more my job would still be worth a lot more. Plus benefits come with jobs. Like insurance alone is super helpful. (Obv that depends on the job)
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 08:37 PM
1

Oh yes that’s true but idk why anyone would do that
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 08:27 PM
4

I would never wanna do childcare 24/7 it is very hard lol. I don’t have a physically demanding job but it’s still “hard” and demanding so idk that this is true.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 08:21 PM
20

I dated a cop once when I was younger and in law school. He was the sweetest. But I did hear some stories about how that department behaved which like was clearly unconstitutional. I don’t think I would date another cop, that whole authority thing I think fucks with their heads a lot of the time. Plus I think a lot of them we wouldn’t vibe politically. I’m super big into due process and rights for the accused and all that.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:26 PM
5

Um ok but you built your whole argument based off this woman living a lavish lifestyle and using that to say she is “paid” but then when someone making low six figures points out hey this setup wouldn’t be worth it unless he provided something similar to my exact real life job compensation would plus retirement you’re like hey you are irrelevant. I mean that’s what I’m trying to point out here.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:23 PM
3

Well not necessarily. We can’t assume all SAHPs would not have well earning careers but for their decision to give that up to be a full time parent. It very well could be the case that person could have earned more than the cost of daycare, etc, worked on saving for retirement etc.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:20 PM
5

But she’d be making money too, obviously.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:07 PM
4

This isn’t the point at all. The point is comparing such a situation to one with a decently paying job it is clear the SAHP gets the shorter end of the stick. If a family agrees one partner should be a SAHP like good for them that’s great and all but whomever agrees to do that needs to understand what they are possibly giving up, particularly if things go wrong in the relationship or there’s unexpected factors. No more career, no more career development, less control, no retirement, less opportu…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:05 PM
8

But your whole hypothetical is built on some upper class family apparently who can afford a lot of luxuries. Like you can’t use rich people to make your main argument then immediately say no one can use a person making six figures in their own argument (besides 142k isn’t even rich, your hypothetical family makes a lot more than that).
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/25 06:01 PM

But who cares about what men allegedly think are high value men? like why would women care about that at all?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/06/25 10:51 PM
3

It’s annoying when ignorant men come spouting off shit they know nothing about.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 12:28 PM
3

Literally fuck off that’s so ignorant
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/25 04:18 AM
2

Ah yes if you wanna pretend you haven’t been arguing standard of living isn’t what is mostly important and I haven’t been pointing out no, it’s just one factor in a list of them, that’s fine, but we both know that’s a lie.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 12:26 PM
2

Link the statute you think means only income disparity matters or “lifestyle” with respect to spousal support awards. Idc who you trust or not you’re directly arguing you’re a better source on this. You aren’t. So put up or shut up
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 03:34 AM
3

Dear I guarantee I have more experience than your one case. I litigated these. As a lawyer. For both sides depending on the case. Yes it’s more of a child support factor, generally speaking. I’ve litigated those too. I can’t stress enough AGAIN to read the damn statutes. You apparently are adamantly against doing that. You cannot “assure me” of anything. Because you are wrong. Please.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 03:28 AM
5

So do I, I’ve literally litigated it. I’m not sure what you mean about “combining income” of course joint income versus separate income is considered. But that’s also more of a child support factor (again, legislation). It’s not typically a factor in alimony statutes. Something like the standard of living is. I mean I can’t stress this enough AGAIN this is all laid il out IN statutory law. Usually it is one factor. And there’s not usually some mandate oh these factors mean more than others (alth…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 02:41 AM
2

Because you said it’s the standard. It’s not. It’s one factor. Not sure why that’s confusing I thought I was perfectly clear. It’s not the “major” factor read the legislation. Again, read it. Any of them. One of them? Try? Maybe listen to folks who have more experience?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 02:33 AM
2

Not with current laws, that is the point. Lol. Like you're arguing against yourself at this point. It's also a voluntary risk by MEN to allow their wives to be SAHPs. like duh. Also, according to your logic, an "artificial risk". I mean clearly those women also don't need to let men ride their coattails by doing all the domestic shit and getting nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 02:09 AM
4

Obv, but like all of them. I've reviewed alimony statutes in a number of states, they are ALL laundry lists of considerations for the judge. Go find me one that isn't? I've litigated this before, I'm not a complete neophyte.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 02:01 AM
3

Well I wasn't expecting this. I appreciate your openess and honesty. To be fair and frankly candid, yes, kids are a burden. But a welcome one. And not where we treat them like one. But no joke, yes they are a burden. They are a complete lifestyle change like nothing has ever changed your life. But at least for my family, they are very wanted additions who are loved, doted on, and probably spoiled. Still, a TON of work. Maybe you would be more suited to that. I, for one, am not. I am through and …
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 01:59 AM
3

And men have an inherent interest in agreeing to or even convincing their wives to give up career opportunities so they can raise the children and maintain the house. Like. Also a voluntary choice. Whcih all breadwinner men these days know come with the potential of temporary alimony in the event of divorce. Like.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 01:22 AM
3

Im not sure what you think that is supposed to mean let alone how that’s supposed to be some sort of dig. You obv dont understand my career or industry but that’s ok, I didn’t expect you to. Grow up. Maybe actually try your hand at some of the things you’re so ready to dismiss as “easy” then maybe we can talk. Until then you’re just ignorant.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 01:13 AM
5

You do not know what you are talking about with 1-2 6+ kids you handled for a couple months tops. Obv not living with you. So literally NO. “Do y’all actually like your kids” shut the fuck up you ignorant shit. You’re speaking from ignorance. I hope you can take a moment and grow the fuck up. I can almost guarantee you I have a more stressful demanding job than you do yet I wouldn’t trade it in to be a full time household/kid caretaker. Because I actually know wtf I’m talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 01:06 AM
3

It’s like one factor in a laundry list of factors that is often the only factor any manospherian man focuses on when making these arguments. Y’all need to actually read the legislation y’all are criticizing. It’s not just this one thing about “lifestyle” so I mean educate yourselves accordingly please for the love of god
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 12:25 AM
6

Of course SAHPs devote themselves to domestic labor. The fact tech makes it easier these days just means the expectations/standards/level of work are increased. Like I’m a full time working parent. There’s still a lot of domestic work I do…..do y’all who say shit like this even have kids or a household?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 12:22 AM
0

Is this a joke?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/25 12:19 AM
6

A lot of these theories “remove agency” from the actors including those that claim men have certain expectations like ones you’ve identified (expectations to work labor intensive or dangerous jobs, toxic masculinity) like a lot of these movements are specifically focused on trying to remove social stigma or stimulate self awareness to rid individuals of such “social” expectations so I’m not sure where you’re getting that’s only women. I’m not saying I agree with all of that but I mean men’s move…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/25 01:16 AM
1

Right? Both of these groups of men are just like not people I really think about regularly let alone find the time to either love or hate
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/25 05:03 PM
1

So idc if my partner watches porn (assuming it doesn’t become a problem/isn’t borderline cheating like cam girls or interacting with actual live women online), but I’d imagine the visual nature of watching a different actual living woman/man fucking and getting off to that is different than just reading about it and imaging things for a lot of people. I’m sure there are actually plenty of men who take issue if their woman watches porn too tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 11:45 PM
1

You made a claim and apparently can’t defend it so
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 03:06 AM
2

Obviously men judge women by how they look though like your original comment is kinda dumb.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 02:50 AM
1

Yeah ok so just perpetuating the childish immature petty bullshit I guess. By hey you do you
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 02:48 AM
2

Nobody cares about you specifically. This is what you are promoting for all either own it or don’t. It’s petty and childish
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 02:03 AM
3

No this is your logic that you promoted. Back peddle much?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 01:31 AM
2

I’ll tell you what, when I was young multiple boys called me flat chested made fun of me whathaveyou. Guess under your logic I have permission to attack random men as having small dicks, being whales etc whatever. Your logic. (But sooooo stupid)
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 01:25 AM
2

Why would you take out some nonsense perpetuated by a few people on an entire gender. Are you 12 years old? Like grow tf up.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 01:21 AM
-1

You are the last person to defend generalized negative statements about a whole gender. Your whole Reddit career is all about defending these when the focus is on men. So
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 01:12 AM
1

This is so petty and immature
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/25 01:06 AM
2

Y’all aren’t a cult, agreed, but a red piller that isn’t dogmatic as hell who doesn’t treat it like religion is far and few between so. Your outrage is a bit misplaced.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 03:56 AM
3

For the love of Christ. If your message is only successful because it relies on bias and hatred maybe your audience needs something more than fuel on the fire. You aren’t as dumb as you act here. I know that. So stop.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 02:42 AM
6

Who cares? Why would you even take the chance? The whole thing is premised upon misogyny. Like why would you expect anything but that?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 02:34 AM
3

You’re missing the point.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 02:32 AM
3

If it’s only “heard” due to specifically denigrating 50% of the population I mean that should tell you something…. Ps plenty of men don’t need it so that should also tell you something
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 01:59 AM
5

That’s not the point. The dogma in general is misogynistic. Like that’s a central point it couldn’t exist without that.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 01:57 AM
9

Women in relationships are still with men they desire. Christ.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 01:11 AM
2

Idk that’s not the question, but it’s not TRP
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 01:04 AM
5

Yes because those men are interested in hearing messages specifically about how women are awful
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 12:56 AM
3

You’re not wrong, but TRP wasn’t ever meant to help perpetually “loser” men like lost causes it was meant for your average frustrated chump. Not the bottomest bottom of the barrel
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 12:55 AM
9

That’s not an “aspect” of TRP it’s a central premise. You can’t have TRP without misogyny period
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 12:53 AM
3

Like barely any red pillers actually think this way, most are very dogmatic. TRP doesn’t “work” through philosophy anyway. It might somehow be justified but that isn’t how terps describe it working.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/25 12:52 AM
2

I would need to read the complaint. This is buzbee’s case though so it’s partly for publicity. She will most likely get paid though. Esp if there was already a multi seven figure presuit offer
/r/PurplePillDebate27/04/25 04:45 PM
1

This can’t work for people who need college and even higher education for their chosen careers though. Which obv isn’t everyone but not everyone can do blue collar jobs or be some self-made uneducated successful person. Also having kids young would have probably even set you back more so….
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 11:51 PM
3

We do have social obligations, but not those that require us pumping out baby after baby.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 11:44 PM
1

This is such a complicated issue you can’t just ignore economic factors and also cultural ones like the focus on education before families, emphasis on birth control, less influence of Catholic Church, etc. I agree that men don’t want to have kids early like maybe they did decades ago but there’s so many cultural factors that go into how that occurred and you’re just glossing over them all with the whole “men just want sex not relationships” thing. Yes indeed this is also a cultural factor but j…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 11:41 PM
1

This is a bizarre comment full of assumptions to his comments to you. Like wtf
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 11:24 PM
1

Wanting to be a primary provider versus “a woman will lose respect for you the MINUTE you start making one dollar less than her” are two very different things you’re trying to conflate here. Backtracking your argument into some barely recognizable ghost of your original claim isn’t the win you think it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 06:56 PM
1

Your comment isn’t a “General rule” and everyone else a “tiny minority”. So yeah it’s still delusional
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 06:04 PM
1

When you’re generalizing that broadly and being that hyperbolic about it yes that’s delusional. Absolutely. And if you want to base it off your own personal experiences then by that logic my marriage should have failed by now too, but it hasn’t. People who believe TRP as gospel obv are deluding themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 05:27 PM
5

Wait where is this new narrative coming from? I haven’t seen that yet
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 05:16 PM
1

That’s delusional. That shit doesn’t happen by and large IRL red pill propaganda isn’t actually real.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 03:15 AM
1

That’s kinda sad I mean honestly. What a weird “preference” as you’re phrasing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/25 03:14 AM
2

This is pure projection but ok
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/25 12:48 AM
-1

You identifying what “the problem is” directly contradicts your first point
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/25 12:43 AM
1

Like when you get older and are all partnered up this is soooo less an issue. When I was young this was like everything. I was never just a “friend” to boys I was always a romantic prospect to them. Not now thankfully
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/25 12:41 AM
23

A shooting?? And you don’t expect ppl to scream? That seems entirely appropriate omg.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/25 03:00 AM
1

You don’t know what to agree with or disagree with tbh. You need to pick with a position instead of waffling
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 03:34 AM
4

No that’s insane. That won’t happen Jesus
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 02:22 AM
1

And I’m not even disagreeing with that. Obviously. But you’re acting like this is just most often and I disagree so live with that or what
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 02:21 AM
1

lol ok no, men aren’t perpetually victims of women here, sorry. Whether or not your “version” supports that
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 02:15 AM
-2

And I’ve had it happen at least twice as much as you. I’m not dismissing you at all I’m saying don’t argue or act like that’s the norm. It’s not. But that’s what you’re supporting
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:58 AM
4

Obviously it matters if it’s illegal you can’t say that’s irrelevant because “laws can change” like wtf. That specific law isn’t about to change anytime soon my friend. All your other argument is kinda blather like no. I mean you’re mostly just wrong outside of maybe teachers being role models which isn’t good enough to justify what you’re proposing
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:56 AM
3

But y’all are wrong. There’s plenty of men who use that term when no woman has actually done anything except maybe dare give them the same attention as an actual friend. So just be aware of that I guess
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:43 AM
19

This is illegal but also like your justification is laughable. Everyone knows most coaching “teachers” are shit. Your example of why this “teacher” was better is equally laughable. Did you learn more? Get better test scores, get any scholarships etc from this one male teacher?? Teachers aren’t there to teach you “masculinity” male or not.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:36 AM
4

That’s the point tho - it’s not just one or the other. That’s the whole reason I added my experience. Trying to frame it it as wholly “women taking advantage of men” thing is wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:30 AM
4

Well obviously, but if you’re going to phrase it such a way as “men are always victims and women are perpetrators” obviously that’s wrong. Like
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:28 AM
5

Story time: multiple men I grew up with got close to me trying to date me. I never treated like them anything but a true friend. I had at least one guy decide my friendship with him was all bullshit and I was “leading him on” by daring to just hang out with him. I never used him for anything he was just a friend we’d all hang out with/apart of the friend group. That didn’t stop him from the bullshit accusations. I guarantee he’s not the only man who’s done this and I’m not the only woman to expe…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:21 AM
11

Yes but this is an inflated example which isn’t the norm. It might be what the guy thinks ie projects but normally “friendzone”’is more a guy with unrequited feelings who just believes continually being nice and offering favors or whathaveyou should curry romantic favor.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/04/25 01:16 AM
1

This works both ways that’s what you’re ignoring. A high demand confident man js probably going to end up with a high demand confident woman. Y’all never factor in the woman when you make these musings. Most ppl end up with similar situated ppl. It’s not just desperate low value women bagging hot guys hoping for a call
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 03:24 AM
1

Why doesn’t it matter? “Some people” is not all people. Why is it such a sticking point when people have such a standard? It’s not like it’s crazy rare
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 03:12 AM
0

This is stupid though and not accurate. I’m not gonna say men are outright lying but they aren’t being honest with themselves with this bullshit
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 02:58 AM
2

Women don’t want this by and large when they can be with a man they are attracted to, work and he still has a decent job. Would you be with a partner you aren’t attracted to just because they could pay for your lifestyle 100%? Women aren’t choosing this in mass numbers these days (because they don’t have to)
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 02:38 AM
2

What the ever loving bullshit is this? College aged women’s “male peers” aren’t subsidizing all their living expenses what are you talking about. I’ve paid taxes since getting my first job at age 15, are college educated men supposed to be bowing down to me all grateful and shit because according to you I “subsidized” their college careers?
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 01:28 AM
7

Preach. But we won’t get there anytime soon I fear. And college debt is fucking real too. I feel swindled honestly for all the debt I went into for law school. Thankfully able to pay it off now but it’s been a long road.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 01:07 AM
17

I think it’s more like a presumption based on correlation. I don’t think anyone thinks they are “exclusively linked”. It’s also kindof a class dog whistle tbh.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 01:05 AM

Oh so also under “edgy 13 year old”
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/25 12:32 AM

Why because it might have your picture?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 11:49 PM

No one is saying that what a disingenuous comment
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 10:02 PM

Of course it’s discrimination it’s just not illegal discrimination. Most states are at will and you can be fired for virtually anything save a reason covered by a protected class. Even then the federal protections only extend to businesses of certain sizes I can’t remember how many employees atm.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 09:23 PM

You’re talking about free speech as some sort of concept but not about what it means legally. One can be very pro free speech in terms of what that means legally but still agree it’s ok for private employers to fire people for their speech and this isn’t ideologically inconsistent
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 09:09 PM

Political beliefs are not a protected class covered by federal law like race, gender, etc. However there are a few states which do specifically protect against discrimination in employment on the basis of political affiliation and activities. These states are more liberal though like CA and NY
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 09:01 PM
0

No, once again that is false
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 12:53 PM
1

This is false. 80% of men are not single and celibate. Why are you lying?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 03:26 AM
3

Who cares about sympathy that’s not going to do anything to satisfy these men. They still won’t get pussy get real.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 03:24 AM
0

Men did not “heroically sacrifice” their earning potential and buying power wtf are you talking about like what made up history is this even?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 03:21 AM
1

That’s silly, you can want a man with a decent income who still isn’t a “provider”. That’s actually smart.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 03:17 AM
4

It is true. Not sure why you believe attraction has to always encompass some Utilitarian logical “reason”
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/25 03:15 AM
2

No, have you ever even debated this guy before? He definitely meant it more literally than just what you’re describing. Y’all can’t completely water down the whole red pill concept of “wife goggles” into just “he stays because he loves her and she was loyal” lol. It’s meaningless at that point.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 11:13 PM
4

The reason is “I think taller looks better” lol. And frankly I think that’s the more common “reason” then whatever its is you’re trying to sell.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 09:06 PM
7

Attraction doesn’t always “make sense” dear. Idk I just think height is attractive in men. It’s not like the end all be all or the only thing I find attractive. I also prefer skinnier guys (not muscular) and facial hair. There’s no real logic to this it’s just things I personally find more attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 08:28 PM
1

I prefer tall guys but it’s because I think they are more attractive. I think this is probably more common then “I want a tall guy for protection” like just being tall doesn’t magically mean he’s more capable to protect you anyway
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 08:19 PM
2

The idea of “wife goggles” where married men perpetually see their aging loyal wives as “when they were in their prime.” Obv I don’t disagree that looks decline with age or that there are people who stick with their aging partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 05:53 PM
1

I think when this happens it’s more often happening to young men who aren’t quite fully matured, more often than not.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 12:24 PM
1

I feel like this is a very young person take. Once you grow up it will not feel or seem this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 12:26 AM
2

You don’t have “first hand experience” of a phenomenon that’s been made up in red pill communities, has no scientific backing, and is based on your word alone. You’re not an authority on literally anything concerning this concept.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/25 12:19 AM
3

No you haven’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/25 01:53 PM
8

This is so stupid and delusional like how y’all buy into this i have no idea. It’s just a fact men (and less so women) are more attracted to youth. Like sure married men aren’t just gonna always ditch their “post wall” wife but let’s not pretend they forever “see her as she was in her prime” that just fucking dumb
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 11:43 PM
34

Every family needs to make the decision to have kids when it’s best for them. Having kids while younger also has its downsides. I agree that would not be great advice for women who are already 35, but in general advising women they don’t need to rush to have kids in their 20s is perfectly fine advice.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/25 01:38 PM
4

Yes but demand and whatever value it brings isn’t always about what’s healthy and “good” either.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 09:30 PM

Absolutely few men would pick the average women over the hot woman given the option. Let’s be real here jesus. Your premise is flawed in multiple respects this is just one of them. Your comment about who women give their “prime” to frankly tells me all I need to know.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/04/25 07:51 PM
0

Fair. Can’t blame you for that
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 08:04 PM
-1

Y’all are literally doing it to each other at this point - exactly what OP is describing. Like y’all both participating. Lol.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/25 05:43 PM
1

This depends on the study.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/04/25 12:58 AM
1

You are so delusional
/r/PurplePillDebate29/03/25 03:57 AM
1

No it’s not that’s not an apt analogy at all. I likely have a broader (and more objective) range of experience than your average person. I repped both men and women going through divorce.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 05:13 PM

I used to practice family law. It’s not uncommon at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/25 01:12 PM
2

That isn’t now nor ever was a legal right for anyone. It was a result sure, but that’s not the legal right that was protected constitutionally. I guess you could argue there was dicta that supported that as a right but the jurisprudence lingered on bodily autonomy.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 02:45 PM
0

Pre-Dobbs it was not double homicide until viability. Post Dobbs who knows probably very dependent on state law.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 02:43 PM
2

They all have the legal right to raise the kid aka to co parent barring extreme circumstances where it’s cut off from them. Anyway it’s not just unwilling fathers who complain about child support - fathers who wanted the kids do too. Obv not all of them but your comment pretends this isn’t true.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/03/25 02:38 PM
10

Of course society pressures men/women differently this is just reality. But if you think there’s no pressure on women socially to support themselves or get higher careers you and I grew up very differently. And I’m much older than you For women it goes both ways - do it or don’t do it be some sort of dependent.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 12:53 AM
11

None of those people are attractive
/r/PurplePillDebate24/03/25 12:34 AM
1

No I think men in general do care to some extent and manospherians are outliers like with most things. Women also date me on their level for the same reason ie proximity and frequency yet red pillers go on and on and on about hypergamy, it’s not somehow different. If you’re genuinely asking about why men would be interested in women with high level degrees/jobs like same reason men would be duh. It’s not that difficult to see why even those WOMEN might be more high demand. But if you’re insisten…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/25 02:45 AM
2

It’s red pill dogma so I suppose some guys here just buy into it even if they can’t see their own bias to it 🤷‍♀️
/r/PurplePillDebate22/03/25 12:36 AM
9

How do you know what women do in therapy or what they are allegedly seeking regarding therapy? Like what are your credentials to draw these conclusions?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/25 11:28 PM
10

I will never understand the idea that men in general just don’t care about women’s careers/status. Men in general date within their own level. I think it’s like manospherian men who genuinely “don’t care” and project that on other men. My own experience also corroborates this. Men “in general” seem to care at least a little bit. I think women are more appealing to men “in general” if they are higher status/higher educated.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/25 11:22 PM
1

This is childish. You can’t just loosely ascribe everything “good” in life to the perceived ability to get relationships and then make blanket conclusions that “women have it better in life” which is essentially what you’re doing. Like grow up the world doesn’t work this way.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/25 01:28 AM
0

Ok that doesn’t negate what I said though.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 09:44 PM
1

Every state is a bit different and I’m not here to do some 50-stare survey but I’m not aware of any state that doesn’t make you assign child support to the state where you’re getting a variety of state benefits like monetary assistance, public housing, food stamps, Medicaid.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 08:33 PM
13

This is not how that works. If you collect child support and are on state welfare the state will take a good portion of the child support to reimburse itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 08:09 PM
1

Of course he was talking about efforts to make sex based discrimination in employment illegal, what else do you think he meant there about attempts to get government involved?
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 03:26 PM
6

It’s obv not irrelevant. Certain things have constitutional protection (and for good reason) while others do not (for also good reason). Equating the two without recognizing this important distinction is a flawed analogy. In any event I wasn’t trying to provide some sort of direct “dispute” of his claim just adding more context from my own perspective.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 02:22 PM
4

Yes but most couples are dating for years before actual marriage. I didn’t get married until 28 but started dating my husband when I was 19. Most people of my generation are delaying marriage but that doesn’t mean they aren’t meeting/dating their ultimate spouse when they are much younger. O think there’s been studies on this showing average length of time dating before marriage is about 4 years (I could be misremembering).
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 02:07 PM
3

We all discriminate when dating. Employers also discriminate when choosing their employees it’s just some forms are constitutionally barred (such as sex). Of course that goes both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/03/25 01:16 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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