TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Santa-Teresa Archive

View 2 posts and 1,472 comments by Santa-Teresa on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Showing the 1,000 most recent of 1,472 comments.
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
–

You having a problem with your partner noticing other women lies at least as much with your own insecurity as with male sexuality. Your partner noticing others doesn’t mean he would automatically neglect you, as sexual attraction is just a part of overall attraction. If many women make their relationships toxic because of that, it’s a good example of female sexual norms being harmful.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/08/26 12:22 AM
1

As long as he look young and he isn’t unkempt or overweight, I would take anyone appearance wise. I would want someone educated with preferably similar interests, but I definitely wouldn’t mind him not being ambitious or having a higher income than me. As long as they have a stable job, I wouldn’t care. I definitely wouldn’t expect him to initiate, let alone pay the bills for any of our dates all on his own.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 10:32 AM
–

All that tolerance and inclusiveness go out the window when women have to consider neurodivergent men. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/02/210208085441.htm
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 09:24 AM
–

It did happen in emergency situations. But there is a reason why women often don’t pass the physical exams of these jobs. And it’s not sexism.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 09:19 AM
–

Not enough women would want those jobs because they would find it physically too demanding. Which is alright, but calling men useless considering this is just misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 07:47 AM
3

You are free to replace every man currently doing a physically demanding job with women, and see how police, fire departments, sewage cleaning etc collapse…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 07:12 AM
3

So, men are not allowed to want to have sex in a relationship anymore, unless they are okay with being labeled as sex-hungry monsters? “Necessary but not sufficient” is the description you are looking for here. Having sex is absolutely no guarantee for a good relationship, but the lack of it is a dealbreaker for most people. And yes, I definitely would continue having female friends, but friends is the keyword here.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/08/26 07:02 AM
1

So you don’t think not having to approach, paying for dates and having to be less proactive are privileges? Because if so, it’s not men who have to change for the problem to be solved.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 09:06 PM
1

No. Again, nothing about legislation. It’s about educating and convincing people (especially women) that they are not entitled to their dating privileges.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 09:01 PM
1

Again, only because liberal society doesn’t want to deal with a problem which would need women’s help as a group, especially in order to help men. The only real difference is that it doesn’t need actual legal intervention to be solved. But it’s a set of harmful social rules kept afloat by women being seen as a group to be protected.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 08:58 PM
1

Exactly as much as women who don’t want to do away with their privileges, however much they hurt other people. It is seen as discrimination because women being disadvantaged is seen as something deserving improvement, whereas the problems of men, especially those which would require the help of women, are not. And no, no one needs actual laws to remedy this. Only the change of norms.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 08:44 PM
1

Neither are corporate men or men preferring not dating obese women, however much Tess Holiday and the body positivity movement try to convince them of the contrary.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 07:06 PM
1

Yeah, heaven forbid women are reminded they have harmful privileges at certain areas of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:59 PM
1

Right, women having to put equal effort into dating and doing what they preach about is fucked up. Sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:56 PM
1

Women should be reminded that they are not entitled to be approached, not entitled to men paying their bills during after dates and are not entitled to claim they are attracted to deep personalities and kindness if they reject men after an at best one minute long conversation.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:54 PM
1

To the degree it affects many men, no, it’s not a matter of personal preferences anymore. And all of the movements to improve the situation of those in need. Women expecting men to cater to their unfair preferences is the result of entitlement fueled by liberal society believing that expecting women as a group to help men as a group is fascism.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 06:47 PM
1

I’m saying women expecting men to adhere to outdated standards in dating is not is not better than men expecting women to conform to outdated standards in the corporate world.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:44 PM
1

Because the corporate world is men-dominated.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:40 PM
1

And if women want to make careers, they have to conform to the expectations of men, however unfair they may be. No one is making them to do it though. You can make a living as a cleaner or a janitor. At least by your logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 05:36 PM
1

Not having ridiculous standards and not having any standards at all are the opposing extremes of a spectrum. Expecting men to initiate, to pay the dating bills and to be the more proactive party are outdated expectations in 2026.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:59 PM
1

Both are discriminative. Men measurably suffer from women’s higher standards. The only difference is that men’s needs are not championed for by liberal society.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:43 PM
1

Then the same logic should go for women wanting to make successful careers. Companies not granting them the opportunity to be in high positions is their right to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:38 PM
1

Because men deserve equal opportunities in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:35 PM
1

Because it makes dating for many men much harder.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:34 PM
1

Because it unfortunately the opinion of most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:32 PM
1

Having the opportunity to quit doesn’t mean they don’t want to be catered, especially by their romantic partners. If anything, being self sufficient makes them even more picky, as they don’t have to compromise for finding a partner. Which is not a problem by itself, but it becomes one if women adhere to gender expectations for men while exploiting feminism and claiming that criticizing their expectations equals to toxic masculinity and oppression.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:28 PM
1

Oh they do. Some of their needs are more openly voiced than others, but it’s definitely there.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/08/26 04:17 PM
1

Well, at least you admit your hypocrisy. That by itself elevates you above current day mainstream feminists. 👏
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 07:00 PM
2

Somehow women don’t accept the same reasoning when men gatekeep something they want.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:56 PM
2

Women could afford bringing down their standards. Or at least stop berating men for expressing theirs. Because I guarantee you that women do fight for those small subgroups of women who struggle with dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:55 PM
1

No, it’s a completely natural reaction, especially if it happens often without any positive experiences, and expecting it to be accepted is just maintaining aspects of toxic masculinity which are beneficial for women. You shouldn’t be expressively angry about it initially, but it still hurts.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:50 PM
1

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:23 PM
0

Oh come on, enough of this. Yes, many of the the very same women who champion for such policies, which are being implemented in no small part because of their efforts, refuse to put more effort into approaching, exactly because the status quo is convenient for them. And they can afford to do so because everyone who dares to ask women as a group to do something for men as a group will immediately be labelled as an loser incel who doesn’t deserve any consideration. And that’s exactly the attitude …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:20 PM
1

Like, yes, women usually do champion for gender quotas aiming to even out employment imbalances and the EU is actively trying to put such initiatives into action. Which do violate the interests of others, but it’s still happening for the greater good. If the same women claim they still expect men to put more work into dating than they themselves do, because “that’s how things work”, then it’s them who are both entitled AND hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 06:08 PM
0

And if women can’t find work or can’t advance their careers, that’s Darwin in action. Being rejected after a job interview of from a promotion are also parts of life 🤷 And this is exactly why women should do what they expect from men. Why should men care about women not being CEOs or earning less than them? Let’s just not pretend having to struggle to find a romantic partner is not seriously tolling psychologically.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 05:43 PM
1

If you are of the opinion that rejection should be just shrugged off, then nothing. Thing is, it’s just not true. Approaching women as it is is psychologically tolling for many men. If women are more interested in being comfortable than helping others, especially if they’re interested in them, then they are not better than men who don’t care about improving women’s issues because they don’t affect them. Because, strangely enough, “what is socially understood” is somehow to be amended if it affec…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 05:23 PM
1

Approaching men is not gold digging. It’s just doing something for men out of both humane considerations and to make their own dating lives easier. Feminists who expect women to be catered at any point of dating are hypocrites.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 05:07 PM
0

If those women are the same who are hardcore feminists and expect men to cater for their needs at other fields of life, then they are hypocrites.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 04:55 PM
0

Which doesn’t mean they couldn’t be more direct, exactly as much as they expect men to be. Even men who can attract women by initiating would be happy about the change.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 04:49 PM
0

Do you really think most women don’t expect men to initiate even if they are attracted to the men in question? Expecting women to put more effort into dating when they are also interested is not the same as expecting one to be received with immediate adoration.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 04:46 PM
2

You deserve a lot of praise for acknowledging this.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 04:40 PM
3

Considering how women have been fighting to change the dating standards of men, that’s at least hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 04:37 PM
0

Not wanting to pay for all of it when women can more than afford to contribute is exactly the responsible handling of money women supposedly look for. If yo are appalled by it, you just want to be catered.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 03:06 PM
0

Yes, and while feminism did all it could to change the expectations for women, it did nothing to change the expectations for men. It’s not about men working, it’s demanding them to earn at least as much as their partners. Women can work now, they shouldn’t need a provider in a relationship, or if they do, they should stop pretending they are progressive.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 03:03 PM
3

Which can be the result of women having unhealthy expectations.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 02:48 PM
2

Only if men are rejected.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 02:47 PM
1

Then you agree that there is nothing wrong with not being “resilient” enough?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/08/26 02:45 PM
1

Yes, or at leas strongly implied it. Not wanting to be humiliated is not a sign of not bein resilient enough, and its absolutely normal if no men want to feel humiliated.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 02:31 PM
0

Confident and funny are definitely a plus, but shy and introverted are also acceptable as long as she it doesn’t make her a yes-woman with no real opinions or thoughts of her own. A submissive trad-wife wannabe is as much a red flag as a radical feminist. I would want her to be at least college educated and liberal but without the inability to criticize the flaws of current day liberalism. A normal sex drive is a requirement, a little bit above average is a plus. Should be at least open to my ho…
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 12:41 PM
1

No, it’s harmful for everyone. It may take longer for it to affect some people, but it’s still harmful. Do you actually think humiliating innocent people is okay?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 11:28 AM
1

Like, yes, being frequently humiliated is provenly harmful psychologically, who would have thunk?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 10:30 AM
1

Women have detectably become less receptive of cold approach from strangers over the course of the last, say, thirty years. Gen Z men have to meet more expectations than Gen X men had to.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 10:28 AM
2

All of this here.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/08/26 10:20 AM
2

It’s women who created and maintain the system which made me want to kill myself multiple times. It’s women who more often than not support the gender roles which doom me to be romantically lonely because it’s both comfortable for them and they would have to help men as a group, which is seen as a default anathema for women, even if said men were liberal and progressive, see, again, what happened at Silverman’s funeral. Women’s rights shouldn’t be violated, but the majority of the Western world …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 07:53 AM
0

It’s women who created and maintain the system which made me want to kill myself multiple times. It’s women who more often than not support the gender roles which doom me to be romantically lonely because it’s both comfortable for them and they would have to help men as a group, which is seen as a default anathema for women, even if said men were liberal and progressive, see, again, what happened at Silverman’s funeral. Women’s rights shouldn’t be violated, but the majority of the Western world …
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 06:43 AM
4

When teenage boys are not employed as baby sitters because they are seen as potential pedophiles, you know it’s not just about setting healthy boundaries. And while I don’t doubt there is a payment gap with nurses, I honestly doubt doctors would suddenly stop being one of the best paid and most respected people in developed countries.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 01:44 AM
2

That’s exactly because men having any kind of demand from women is dismissed as conservatism, and therefore is hated by liberal society. Thus many men go to the people who don’t dismiss their issues out of hand. Is it problematic? Yes. Is it to be expected? Also yes. See what happened at Silverman’s burial. Quite probably none of those ideas will be implemented in the overwhelming majority of the West. Whereas gendered expectations from men, such as how they should be financially better off than…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 01:35 AM
5

https://www.afr.com/policy/health-and-education/why-i-campaign-for-sex-consent-education-20230913-p5e471 https://time.com/2913313/5-things-we-must-teach-young-boys-about-rape-right-now/ https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB118903209653018615
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:40 AM
1

To a degree, but again, liberal society is putting its whole weight behind the effort to help them. Developed countries in the West are introducing gender and racial quotas for work and education, same sex marriages and non-heterosexual rights are allowed and protected, respectively, in 95% of the West. Whereas men claiming they need the help of women as a group to solve their systemic problems are dismissed as conservative predators, however liberal and progressive they otherwise may be.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:25 AM
3

On the other hand, the very same Israeli leaders who probably all have ancestors who perished in the Holocaust are currently committing a genocide. There is a difference between learning from history and living in the past. If anything, women who can’t or don’t want to recognize how their privileges hurt men are those who don’t want to learn from history.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:11 AM
5

Like, most Redditors are probably Westerners and still ignore how much help they get from Western liberal society, arguably the most powerful driving force behind development currently.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/08/26 12:04 AM
5

Learning from history is not the same as mistaking the past for the present. Women now are the majority among medical students, the wage gap is decreasing and liberal society pays a lot of attention to the needs of women. Boys being treated as potential rapists is happening right now. Learning from history would actually dictate that you stop treating boys as girls were treated back then.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/08/26 11:59 PM
3

But their dating pool is incomparably better than that of others until then, or even beyond that, depending on how much they take of themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/08/26 06:06 AM
1

Percentages affect the probability of coming across people like this. Much more women are dishonest about their standards than men. And I wouldn’t care about those women if the mentioned probability of encountering them while looking for good women wouldn’t be unexpectedly high. Because mind you, a lot of those women are nice and progressive people who appear to be good partners initially.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:36 PM
1

Not only, but since way too many women are like that, regardless of what men do, it’s easy to come across them. Those women are free to change, and thus solve the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:26 PM
1

Those women are hard to avoid when you want to date since a large portion of them are like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 07:02 PM
1

Women themselves claim not to be interested in hookups and preferring long-term relationships. And no, the portion of women who disregard morals for the sake of fun when it comes to dating is large regardless of the morality of men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 06:59 PM
1

Considering how most women don’t engage in hookups or short-term relationships and that most men also want that, I would say yes, this should imply that women find kindness the most attractive trait. And it’s hard not to bump into these women when a large percentage of women are like that when it comes to dating, however good and progressive they otherwise might be.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 06:41 PM
1

Women. And being appalled by others’ willingness to include absolutely immoral people into one of the most pleasurable experiences humanely possible while pretending to be virtuous is just not the same as being morally well adjusted only for the sake of a relationship or even sex.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 05:23 PM
1

And you guys just don’t want to admit that a large portion of women are simply not as attracted to moral values as to other things completely unrelated to these. It’s easier to say that all of those men can’t find a partner because they are bad men, not because women’s standards can be and actually are flawed.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 05:12 PM
–

Just world fallacy. Most men don’t struggle with dating because they’re bad people. They struggle because even otherwise morally good women have unhealthy standards when it comes to dating, and morality is often not the most attraction-inducing factor for these women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/07/26 04:53 PM
6

Bisexual people are not exclusively into gay sex. If you’re that afraid of your bisexual partner not being satisfied with you, then it’s indeed not about masculinity, but rather about what OP means about insecurity. If a bisexual man chose you as a partner, you shouldn’t be afraid of not being able to satisfy his needs. Those men whose needs you actually couldn’t satisfy probably wouldn’t choose you to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 04:56 PM
4

That’s not necessarily a refutation though. This bifobia usually manifests when it comes to dating since that’s when men are expected to be masculine, which being attracted to other men, let alone having sex with them, goes against according to many women. Expecting that level of masculinity is harmful, even if it’s limited only to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:36 AM
6

That’s probably the most genuine description of the reasons behind the bifobia of many women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/07/26 10:18 AM
1

Many of us do want to be moral people, but also experience how women often care less about men being morally good than about being attractive, which takes a toll on our mental health. Many fail at continuing being moral, unfortunately. But even those who succeed have to fight an uphill battle for the favor of women in spite of them being moral people.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 02:40 PM
1

So making more money makes being morally flawed suddenly legitimate?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/07/26 01:29 PM
1

The overlap is large enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/07/26 03:11 PM
1

Like, that’s what instructions have been for since time immemorial. Trial and error is annoying as hell, and should be avoided whenever possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/07/26 08:44 AM
1

It doesn’t have to be enforced per se, as it shouldn’t be a law. It should be only a social norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 11:49 PM
1

You are entitled to the chance of having one.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 10:38 PM
1

I probably would tell her, although I’m not really into casual sex to begin with, so the probability of this happening at all would be very low. But to flip the question a bit, what I definitely would want to avoid is her accusing me of exploiting her only for sex, even though I have made the situation clear from the beginning.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 07:57 PM
0

They are not entitled to rob you of one of the most joyous experiences in life and to cause serious psychological damage with harmful standards either. Much more people would be happy if women would actually do what they preach about and would be more willing to actually try to learn more about the personality of the men they currently refuse after talking to them for half a minute.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 07:27 PM
1

It is if it’s happening because of harmful social norms.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 07:13 PM
4

They are provably hindered by unhealthy social norms. The entitled people here are women who believe that they are owed a partner who conforms to their expectations of men, which are products of the exact same patriarchal system they claim to be fighting against. Laws defending the rights of women came about because of unhealthy social norms which demonstrably caused many people suffering. Now we don’t even need actual laws to combat norms causing men suffering. People should just realize these …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 06:14 PM
0

If they demonstrably affect the lives of many people, it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:52 PM
0

I honestly don’t think so. What I see is them being offended by having to be productive at all cost and definitely having to be more productive than women. Someone working a mid or even low level office job is productive, simply by doing a job. The usual complaint towards men is them lacking ambition, but with all due respect, people are owned to be accepted by society and the chance of getting into a romantic relationship without striving to be a CEO, a world-class artist or anything else outst…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:36 PM
1

If people in general would refuse to be even friends with average but shy men to the degree they are rejected in general as romantic partners in spite of claiming to be interested in the deeper aspects of one’s personality, then it would be even more discriminatory. It doesn’t mean that having high standards when it comes to dating is healthy.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:11 PM
5

Interestingly enough, abolishing corporal punishment actually started earlier in the military than elsewhere, since soldiers killing their abusive officers can become a serious problem for everyone involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 05:01 PM
4

In general, military sociology proves that the discipline used in schools until recently is detrimental to the effectiveness and cohesion of the team. What it often results in is soldiers seeing their officers as their abusers, often rightfully so, and exploiting actual combat situations to take revenge on them. I think most Americans are aware of fragging incidents and why they happened. Now and example from my personal life. I have been doing karate for more than twenty years now. Once I was i…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 04:57 PM
14

This should be adapted into a sketch parodying the gendered expectations for men.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 04:30 PM
20

Fellow customer service worker here, and I agree. The pool of people asking for your help is always the minority within the entire population.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/07/26 03:24 PM
1

If your preferences cause others to suffer considerably while you changing them doesn’t demand you to put much effort into the process, you are violating your own principles about giving everyone the chance to be happy. Going out with an average man to at most three dates to get to know them better is not more of a violation of your rights than the introduction of gender and/or racial quotas in employment and/or education are violations of the rights of legal persons. And that’s without mentioni…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 09:00 PM
0

Men primarily want young women with healthy bodies. The former is granted to everyone once in their lives, and maintaining your health is not difficult nowadays either (not drinking and smoking much and eating relatively healthily are not difficult, honestly ). So yes, most men expect things from women which are pretty average, in contrast to women’s expectations about charisma, confidence and wealth. And yes, both should value personality more, but men’s standards are both much easier to meet a…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 08:23 PM
1

Being physically attractive and morally flawed overlap much less than being charismatic/confident and being morally flawed.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 07:28 PM
1

It’s not a secret, that’s the point. What angers many men is that many women are at least as shallow as men while they pretend to be progressive and enlightened.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/07/26 07:24 PM
0

I didn’t deflect anything. Some people not wanting to be friends with you is not the same as having to meet high expectations to find a romantic partner. You are more likely to find other people who are willing to be your friends, but finding women with lower expectations for their potential romantic partners is much more difficult.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 05:02 AM
1

My fellow men who say that will probably remain attracted to you if you do the things mentioned. Friends are much easier to find and friendships are usually much less deep than romantic relationships. But if someone says they choose their friends based on one set of criteria while they actually select them based on another, that’s also hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:43 AM
1

I don’t deny that men often also forget about morality when they are attracted to women. There are two issues though. First, men are, as far as I can tell, much more honest about their preferences, and are much less likely to lie about them for the purpose of virtue signaling. Second, there is much less overlap between physical beauty and immortal behavior than between the latter and confidence/charisma. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full htt…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:37 AM
1

I don’t deny that men often also forget about morality when they are attracted to women. There are two issues though. First, men are, as far as I can tell, much more honest about their preferences, and are much less likely to lie about them for the purpose of virtue signaling. Second, there is much less overlap between physical beauty and immortal behavior than between the latter and confidence/charisma. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full htt…
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 04:37 AM
0

Because many women don’t care about moral character as much as they claim to do. Otherwise low lives and criminals would be the ones actually struggling to find a partner and not morally absolutely decent but shy men.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/07/26 12:43 AM
2

Many women do start losing their attractiveness by then, but for absolutely preventable reasons (smoking, drinking, an unhealthy diet, too much sunlight). Even attaining financial stability is more difficult than not smoking, drinking or getting exposed to the sun. For many women, even not wanting to get promoted and being content with your current position is a red flag.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:46 PM
2

Exactly by giving a chance to much more men to prove themselves to be suitable partners without having to fulfill impossible expectations.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:39 PM
2

Most women just have to maintain a youthful appearance to be attractive from 18 to 35. A lot of that is simply a matter of no substance abuse and not becoming obese. Objectively easy and definitely much easier than becoming rich or becoming charismatic, which are outright impossible for many men. If they find a partner then, it’s very likely that physical attraction will matter for that man less and less as time goes on. Being excluded from dating causes severe psychological problems, and in man…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:34 PM
3

Women can easily retain their attractiveness much longer than 25. No smoking, drinking and exposing yourself to sunlight moderately and not becoming unattractively obese are all easier to do than what women expect from men. And most men want a romantic partner. If they find one early enough, the woman being called a slut is not possible by definition.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:22 PM
2

You shouldn’t expect gender roles to be changed at one field while expecting them to remain unchanged at another.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 11:15 PM
2

It’s just hard to accept that there are much more of them than you would presume. Especially since they are often very progressive otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:58 PM
2

What we care about many women pretending to be less shallow than they actually are.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:46 PM
1

So does it imply being personally impressive enough means you can afford having a bad personality?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:39 PM
4

The biological difference is marginal, otherwise European women wouldn’t be much less likely to be obese than American women. Also, being slim is not necessarily the only factor in being attractive for a woman. https://www.psypost.org/being-perceived-as-thin-does-not-guarantee-a-female-body-will-be-rated-as-attractive-by-men/
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:32 PM
3

I think women not having their current expectations from men when it comes to dating should be a social norm.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:24 PM
5

Most women have to do nothing, or at least very little, to be attractive for most men. And it definitely doesn’t end at 25 if you maintain a healthy lifestyle. And exactly because of that, men are much less discriminatory in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:23 PM
4

The woman I’m currently courting is slightly overweight. Body proportions matter much more for men than women presume. And putting down weight is still easier than creating a gym bod, even if you’re only slightly overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:16 PM
5

Who has more agency: those who have to do little-to-nothing to be attractive or those who have to work for it? Women have to maintain a youthful, healthy appearance in their primes, and they have more opportunities to find a partner for life than men in their entire lives. If you do find that man, emotional connection will replace physical attraction eventually.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 10:10 PM
8

Not being obese is much easier to achieve than a gym bod.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:55 PM
5

So you wouldn’t have any problem with it if it was legal? And if you would, why are you forcing men to have a harder time dating because of their gender?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:52 PM
1

Society could also stop worrying about a lot of problems women face and it would still function. I don’t think those issues should be ignored though. And if you had a very bad social life which affects you emotionally severely in spite of putting a lot of effort into it while Epstein had a lot of friends and society would continuously try to make you believe personality is the most important thing to have a good social life, you would be right to be upset. There is this frequent assumption that …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:49 PM
7

Why don’t women appreciate they have to work harder for the same amount of money than men? By your logic, they should.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:12 PM
2

But you never said anything about this being bad. You seemed to have stated it like something which just has to be accepted instead of being fought against, which is usually not the reaction when a social issue arises, especially if it’s related to women being disadvantaged at some field.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:05 PM
6

First, men are at least more honest about their preferences. I have seen very few men who haven’t admitted that they value youth and beauty the most in women. There is no virtue signaling to the degree women often try to convince others how much personality and kindness matter for them, when in fact, confidence, charisma and/or financial status can and often do outweigh personality for them. Second, women may stop dating an abuser when the abuse becomes more serious, but they are just as likely …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 09:00 PM
2

Saying that when a man is not impressive, personality matters means that if he is actually impressive, most women don’t mind him having a bad personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 08:34 PM
2

What you implied was that most women become “shallow“ under the right circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 08:11 PM
2

Because it means that many women would be willing to date with seriously flawed men under the circumstances right for them, instead of not being willing to date those men at all, because their moral compass doesn’t allow it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 07:29 PM
2

But if they were, they could be seriously flawed personality wise, you would go for them? Again, not exactly a confirmation of the primacy of personality.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 07:21 PM
1

Not exactly. If the answer is yes, it means personality is much less important than you claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 07:15 PM
1

Because it would reflect reality more, as admitted by OP herself.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 07:11 PM
3

OP herself claimed that we shouldn’t be surprised about abusers getting away with what they do because they are rich and well connected, and that people looking away is something to be expected, not something to be fought against. I reacted to that.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 06:44 PM
5

You yourself said that “when you’re not impressive, personality matters a lot.” Doesn’t that imply that if you’re impressive, personality matters much less? Also you “it proves that people tolerate serious flaws when someone offers enough value in return.” Doesn’t that imply that even serious personality flaws are overlooked if the person has other qualities? And yes, if so, it does mean people are seriously flawed.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 06:16 PM
3

I would say way too many women are willing to ignore flaws of personality for the sake of being together with charismatic and confident men. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:47 PM
6

And this is a slap in the face of liberal values and morality in general. No amount of money and connection should be able to compensate for being an abuser. If the abuse doesn’t outweigh the charisma, appearance or financial status of the person in question for you , you are an immoral person. Claiming that people should get over about abusers and criminals being excused for their behaviour because they are rich, good looking or charismatic is seriously problematic.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:41 PM
2

Which means money was more important for them than personality. Which, in turn, means that personality is less Important than money and charisma. That’s problematic by itself, but at least stop pretending it’s not widespread.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:30 PM
5

Most women claim kindness is important for them in a LTR. https://images.ctfassets.net/juauvlea4rbf/7Ku1E79xS6n1oaMXqo9rKD/dc470b206f11133d5b7d46fd05d09f19/Inside_art_1_EN.jpg?w=2400&h=1600&q=50&fm=webp That 88% should go for assertiveness and confidence, not kindness.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:25 PM
6

Charlie Sheen’s example does show that personality is much less important than it is often said to be. Considering how often do women themselves claim this, I say yes, men calling out women for often caring much less about personality and kindness than they say is absolutely legitimate.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/07/26 05:20 PM
1

It at least plays a very important role for many women. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/08/20/personal-experiences-and-attitudes-of-daters/
/r/PurplePillDebate11/07/26 12:01 AM
–

Why does that sound so impossible?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:44 PM
–

If you adhere to biological explanations so much, men are attracted to younger women because they are the most likely to be able to conceive and to carry out a healthy child. Yet somehow I doubt you would find that to be an acceptable explanation for all men preferring young women appearance wise.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:42 PM
–

Even a wrong smile can give them that. They are just better at hiding it after high school.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:37 PM
–

So men like both flat and big chested women? Also, having smooth skin and being petite is not something very difficult to achieve for women until they are young. Then if you manage to gain a partner who honestly loves you, your appearance will matter less as time goes on.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/07/26 11:22 PM
1

Women also tend to receive incomparably more help from liberal society than men. Incels are actually much more likely to kill themselves than anyone else.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 09:40 PM
2

Women are not more likely to like objectively dangerous than shy men because of incels. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full Liberal society defending women at all costs is like several Western governments defending Jews at all costs, which makes them blind to the wrongdoings of Zionism. Yes, women often were and are oppressed. It doesn’t make them unable to be oppressive themselves.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 09:29 PM
2

Israel is actually a good example of an oppressed group believing they can do anything and every criticism they might get for it equals to oppression. Women having unhealthy dating standards is in a large part what causes incels to be incels, especially if men living in the West are blamed for misogyny in Iran or Afghanistan.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 09:23 PM
12

The law doesn’t compel you to buy anyone’s albums or to support them in any other way. If their art is about despicable things only for the shock value, they deserve backlash for it.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 12:12 PM
10

I mean morally.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 12:04 PM
11

And how is she any better?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/07/26 12:00 PM
1

Their lives would definitely be easier with women changing their dating habits. I do support gender quotas which go far beyond anonymous resumes. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/pl/ip\_22\_3478 Which is, again, fine, because it makes it possible for people who would have been dismissed based on superficial information when the expectations are supposedly about deeper, less obvious values. Exactly what I expect dating to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 10:09 AM
2

Most young men complain about the dating habits of women. https://open.substack.com/pub/ymrp/p/are-young-men-over-dating?r=nufjk&utm_medium=ios Also, I will keep bringing this up: you can’t say you support gender quotas in employment which obviously force others to violate their immediate interests and saying women are free to do whatever they want in dating without being hypocritical. Not that I don’t support the quotas themselves. They are a good example of violating immediate interests can le…
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 01:05 AM
2

Nothing implies women couldn’t change their dating habits if they really wanted to. It’s at least as much about not wanting to take the burden of approaching as about immutable differences.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 12:56 AM
1

Women choosing to be alone rather than dating even an average man implies that. And no, the average man today is certainly not as much behind women as not to deserve romantic attention.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/07/26 12:47 AM
1

This pretty much confirms that women often have unhealthy standards when it comes to dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 10:00 AM
1

It happens often enough for it to be noticeable.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 09:52 AM
1

As I said, claims and actions can differ.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:42 AM
6

No.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:35 AM
0

Yes, but that’s often not the reason they choose them.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:26 AM
0

Exactly
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 08:03 AM
-1

Not necessarily consciously, but I do think many women are dishonest about their standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 07:29 AM
1

Doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re not lying about them though. Nobody likes to be reminded of their shortcomings.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:33 AM
1

A large portion of liberal society wants to introduce laws gender quotas. https://www.cec-managers.org/eu-commission-gender-equality-directive-leadership/
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:13 AM
1

No. I mean the same women who are very quick to admonish men for wanting them to bring their dating standards down support laws about gender quotas which practically force employers to employ women against their will. Not that I’m against that, mind you. But supporting that and calling out men for their mentioned desire is hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/07/26 06:08 AM
1

Most men in general, not just on the internet, don’t like dating single mothers. There are more than enough men who reject them politely, or at least not worse than how women on the internet regard neurodivergent men, or any man who dares to criticize women for their dating habits, for that matter. And sure, people have to work, but it’s not what many women want. They could make ends meet by being cleaners or janitors. What they want is successful careers with high positions and huge salaries. W…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 09:19 PM
1

No, but you they pay you and other employees money. For exactly the same reason as an employer should employ someone whom they feel is a net loss for them initially. Because maybe if are willing to give them a chance, they will be able to show you aspects of their being which are not obvious initially, but actually make them valuable for you.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 08:19 PM
0

I did. Dating and employment are exactly as inclusive by nature.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:56 PM
0

What exactly is under the purview of non-discrimination and inclusion seems to be strangely aligned to the needs of women. By the same token, you can ask employers to change their immediate interests and take risks by employing you as a woman, but why should they when they can also find men who seemingly can do the same job exactly as good as you, but are less likely to be absent from work, and their absenteeism is easier to change, as it is not because of biological reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 07:35 PM
1

The definition of struggling should be revised in light of how the financial status of people has worsened in general. In just 15 years, the average U.S. homebuyer went from 39 to 59 years old. 53% of people in Germany, one of the richest countries in Europe, live in rental homes. And even though Gen Z earns more than their parents did in their age, their situation is less secure.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:47 PM
1

If she really liked to date, but most men would refuse her without thinking she was a used up whore, would women not champion for her anyway? Because decent men are usually not enthusiastic about dating single mothers either. Similarly, how is telling women they are more likely to be absent from work, so we won’t give you a chance, because heaven forbid we take risks, better than telling late bloomers that they don’t deserve a chance, because we won’t take a risk? That’s good to know. At least y…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:10 PM
1

If she really liked to date, but most men would refuse her without thinking she was a used up whore, would women not champion for her anyway? Because decent men are usually not enthusiastic about dating single mothers either. Similarly, how is telling women they are more likely to be absent from work, so we won’t give you a chance, because heaven forbid we take risks, better than telling late bloomers that they don’t deserve a chance, because we won’t take a risk? That’s good to know. At least y…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 06:09 PM
1

I do wonder if men saying single mothers should remain single for the rest of their lives gets the same support from you. Or women who are told they can’t have successful careers and should be happy with their lower paying jobs. I also hope you don’t claim to be a liberal, since what you say goes against the basic liberal principle of people being able to change.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 05:00 PM
0

Current society overwhelmingly caters for the needs of neurotypical people, especially at dating. Always asking neurodivergent people to mask and try to fit in while doing nothing in return because it would be more exhausting than living in a society designed for your needs goes straight against the liberal principles most women claim to adhere to.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:46 PM
0

The expectations of men towards women are much easier to meet than vice versa. Everyone is young once, remaining healthy with a good BMI is doable, so is being a nice person in general. Maybe motherhood is the only thing difficult out of these, but that’s something women do at least as much for themselves as for their partners. And most men are not the sole providers, but women still look for men who are financially better off than them. Them having a higher income is undesirable for most women.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/07/26 04:29 PM
1

At least legalising and legitimising prostitution and visiting prostitutes would be a huge improvement.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 11:11 PM
1

At least a large portion would be at least tempted if they were attractive enough. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full
/r/PurplePillDebate05/07/26 05:02 AM
8

There are many women who find morally at least dubious men attractive and who are at least willing to take the risk of getting together with a bad man if he’s attractive otherwise. The portion is definitely larger than 1%.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 10:37 AM
6

No. Many women are attracted to bad men because their confidence makes them attractive, regardless of the potential danger and the moral implications. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full
/r/PurplePillDebate04/07/26 09:04 AM
–

I’m not attracted to rapists and murderers.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 06:20 PM
–

Because being shy and awkward is far better than being a rapist and/or a murderer by any human standards? And I think people who think otherwise have serious problems.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 06:08 PM
–

Yes, people being more attracted to rapists and murderers than awkward men is seriously problematic and get used to being called out for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 05:55 PM
–

Without even mentioning how most young men complain about the dating culture of women, not only neurodivergents, claiming or even implying that rapists and murderers getting significantly more romantic attention than “dweebs” is acceptable is seriously messed up.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 05:52 PM
–

Women are free to actively approach men and try to extensively know their personalities before getting into a relationship. It’s up to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 05:42 PM
–

Kindness alone isn’t . Confidence and charisma without kindness are. Pretending kindness is equally important as those two is either gaslighting or self deception. That’s what the post is about. It doesn’t deny that kindness alone is often worthless.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 05:06 PM
–

Which proves OP right. It’s not that many women find kindness itself repulsive, but they don’t find the lack of it a red flag either. Charisma and confidence are more important than kindness for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 04:57 PM
–

Then women should be honest about it and admit it’s charisma and confidence they are attracted to, not kindness or morals.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 04:00 PM
1

“Most of them, they think it was some battle. A siege, a burning tower, an enemy with a torch. One fool asked if it was dragonsbreath. [laughs bitterly] I'll tell you what it was, girl. I was younger than you, six, maybe seven. A woodcarver set up shop in the village under my father's keep, and to buy favor he sent us gifts. The old man made marvelous toys. I don't remember what I got, but it was Gregor's gift I wanted. A wooden knight, all painted up, every joint pegged separate and fixed with …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 03:57 PM
–

“Most of them, they think it was some battle. A siege, a burning tower, an enemy with a torch. One fool asked if it was dragonsbreath. [laughs bitterly] I'll tell you what it was, girl. I was younger than you, six, maybe seven. A woodcarver set up shop in the village under my father's keep, and to buy favor he sent us gifts. The old man made marvelous toys. I don't remember what I got, but it was Gregor's gift I wanted. A wooden knight, all painted up, every joint pegged separate and fixed with …
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 03:57 PM
–

The entire court audience was bewildered by the claims about Bundy having done the things he was accused of getting proven. Both men and women. It’s hard to believe all or even most of them had mental problems. Charisma can and often does have a stronger effect than morals.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 03:50 PM
1

Exceptional situations are exceptional exactly because you can’t make general statements based off of them.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/07/26 01:33 AM
–

How would you react if someone told you you actually need therapy instead of receiving more economic opportunities?
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:32 PM
–

You don’t become sad by being refused once, twice or even three times. You become sad only after you are refused dozens of times. And you get frustrated when women are campaigning for others to put their immediate interests for them aside, but when it’s expected from them, they are in denial. Women who are not given the chance to have successful careers should also just go to therapy and learn to accept that companies don’t own them this. If you can’t accept that you may have to live as a cleane…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/07/26 06:29 PM
1

And just like fortune cookies, a lot of those supposed rebuttals can be countered by asking women to think about how their problems about not being able to find work stems from them wanting to be CEOs or high-ranked employees. Considering how women are provably more likely to be absent, there is a legitimate reason for this to be less likely, stemming from biological differences even without accounting for childbirth and raising children. Women could decide they can live their lives as cleaners,…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/07/26 01:24 PM
1

Gender quotas and even the degrowth movement are about certain or even most people limiting their immediate interests for the sake of others. Decent men having a chance to go on a few dates which they otherwise had no opportunity for is exactly as legitimate as providing opportunities for women to build a career which they had no chance to have before.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 04:10 PM
1

As a counterexample to the original claim, no, it isn’t. It means that something happens very rarely. The original claim wasn’t that misogyny doesn’t exist in the US. It was that it’s much rarer than believed to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:58 AM
1

It wasn’t me who came up with this counterexample. Something happening very rarely means it barely exists. Not saying it shouldn’t be taken care of, but it’s not a refutation of the original point.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:47 AM
1

And it actually proves that it actually barely exists anymore. You’re not countering the original claim with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:40 AM
1

That’s not disputed. Nobody said misogyny doesn’t exist. What was said is that it’s not as problematic as many like to claim to be, and you tried to refute that with something which is not a good counterexample. Or was it not meant to be a refutation?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:36 AM
1

You bought this up as a counterexample of misogyny barely existing in the US, while actually it’s a misogynistic thing which happens in the US very rarely, making it a perfect example of misogyny barely existing in the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:23 AM
1

The point would be if it happened frequently, which it doesn’t. You can’t bring up something as an example of a systemic problem if it happens very rarely.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:19 AM
0

You trying to portray fringe events as something systemic and not the work of fringe assholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:15 AM
0

Men are thousand times more likely to be raped by women than female athletes getting sex toys thrown at them. By your logic, men being raped is also systemic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:13 AM
1

Out of how many occasions when female athletes competed publicly in the US overall?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:09 AM
0

These things don’t happen to most female athletes either. You calling this systemic makes you wrong.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 03:08 AM
0

Men getting raped by women is more common than this by far. By your logic, misandry is even more common than misogyny… That’s exactly the entitlement people are talking about.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:31 AM
3

Yes, men committing suicide because they are lonely and women not helping even though they could is a prime example.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:25 AM
2

Very true for many women in Western countries, unfortunately. The privilege of Western liberalism putting women on a pedestal had some very nasty effects.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 02:07 AM
8

Therein lies a huge misconception: A lot of those men do have a steady social life, but when it comes to dating, they’re struggling because of the unnaturally high expectations of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 01:57 AM
-2

It often causes severe depression, which is a leading cause of suicide. If your liberalism was actually as universal as you portray it to be, going on a few dates with men whom you wouldn’t date based on a few sentences you spoke to each other but who are otherwise decent wouldn’t be impossible.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 01:45 AM
-5

By having to work much harder than women to get a romantic relationship, one of the most fulfilling experiences of human life. And no, men don’t have it easier in an already established relationship either. A toxic relationship hurts men equally as women. But women can find a new partner incomparably easier.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 01:38 AM
-4

It’s about women not being able to admit that they’re not always the victims, but nowadays often also the oppressors of men. That’s combined with them not wanting to put more effort into dating and you have exactly this entitled attitude that liberal women so often fight against otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 01:23 AM
3

Which implies that people should put more effort into dating and trying to know both people who want to date them and those who they want to date. It all boils down to people who can get a relationship easily don’t want to put more effort into dating. You do you, but then also face the consequences.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 12:27 AM
3

And many people say that socialisation and the happiness gained from it, while important, are often not enough for a satisfying life. They are saying that “replace your lack of romance with other kind of socialisation” is a disingenuous argument to make, mostly aimed to avoid having to admit that in this case, it’s women who have to help men, however problematic misogyny in other cases can be.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/06/26 12:06 AM
2

His health, mostly. Which is what all those men also miss by not being given a chance to experience one of the most fulfilling experiences in life. I don’t think trying to deny that relationships and sex life are fundamental components of a healthy psyche for the overwhelming majority of people is healthy. I do know a man who is one of the most charismatic people I know, smart as hell, a very good organizer and is in a leading position in several students organizations. Still, when he broke up w…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 11:43 PM
2

Missing one single thing can lead you to feel your life is horrible even if everything else is going seemingly well. And these men could be the foremost liberals without ever mentioning anything extreme, but most of the people dismissing their sufferings would equally dismiss it even then if they brought them up.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 10:52 PM
5

Women have the privilege of getting in a relationship easier. Men have all the problems a relationship can have, plus the problem of having to struggle to get a relationship to begin with.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 10:40 PM
3

If anything, men have to settle more often exactly because of the higher standards of women. Still doesn’t mean that they are less likely to face problems in an established relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 10:25 PM
2

Not burn it all down, but it’s a huge problem. People should have learned the weighted effect particular things can have on others’ lives at least since the death of Robin Williams.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 10:22 PM
0

Having to meet much lower expectations for initiating. You can say it still doesn’t guarantee protection from a toxic relationship, but neither does being a man who has to meet higher expectations. Men are just as likely to end up in a toxic relationship as women, but they often have to move mountains to even get there.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:56 PM
3

True, but again: many men struggling with dating do have friends, even long time friends. It doesn’t mean they don’t suffer from not being able to find a romantic partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:44 PM
2

Not my entire, but friends will never fill the gap of not having a romantic partner for many men. Friends are not a remedy for romantic loneliness.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:30 PM
1

That’s the thing: a lot of people (especially men) longing for a relationship do have long-time friends. But they never replace romance.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:27 PM
2

Meaning: honest, clear communication instead of hints should be standard?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:24 PM
0

And having a romantic partner is more valuable to many people than any other kind of social life. Which is natural and alright. People should stop pretending that having friends replaces romance for a large portion of people.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 08:18 PM
-5

Not being able to get a relationship is a major cause of depression, which, in turn, is a major cause of suicide. I would wager this dismissive attitude has killed at least as many people as all incel terrorist attacks together.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 06:24 PM
1

By your logic, locking away suffragettes was justified. They committed terrorist attacks after all.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 06:09 PM
0

Exactly. The only difference between Women’s rights and men’s rights is that liberal society recognises the former as something important. Hopefully, there will be a time when young men having the chance to experience romantic relationships, provenly one of the most joyous things in life, would be seen as the same as women’s voting rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 06:05 PM
-1

The very same thinking led to suffragettes being institutionalised. Yes, the chance to date is not less important than the chance to vote.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:59 PM
2

A very small border where attacking would be a logistical nightmare. No, I don’t think they have any reason to be concerned.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:50 PM
-6

Even most of those who say extremist things would never implement them in practice. Taking into consideration how not being able to find a partner can lead to suicide, I say no, feminists dismissing the issue are not better than radical incels.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:46 PM
4

All women have a privilege in dating, not only those who want a career. It’s more about not wanting to acknowledge that there is something which women have to help men about than actual vilification.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:40 PM
3

No, they are not: https://open.substack.com/pub/ymrp/p/are-young-men-over-dating?r=nufjk&utm\_medium=ios
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:33 PM
1

With all due respect, madam, you should do it more. https://open.substack.com/pub/ymrp/p/are-young-men-over-dating?r=nufjk&utm\_medium=ios
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:29 PM
1

Which makes them still the minority. Claiming it’s a general phenomenon in the West is simply false.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 05:14 PM
–

Practically yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 12:30 PM
–

True. Extrapolating the situation in some states in the US to the entirety of the western world is misleading.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 12:27 PM
–

There is a reason why celibacy was abolished by all Protestant denominations. My former German teacher was from East Pomerania. She told me how Catholic priests regularly slept with and impregnated their cleaning ladies, while this was almost nonexistent with Lutheran pastors. I guess you know which are allowed to marry, and which aren’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 12:24 PM
5

Yeah, it’s not like trying to be as clear in communication as possible would be better for everyone. You hating autism is your thing, but at least take pity of your fellow neurotypical men. https://open.substack.com/pub/ymrp/p/are-young-men-over-dating?r=nufjk&utm\_medium=ios
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 11:56 AM
2

Norway is not being invaded. Also, a large army composed of unwilling soldiers is usually worse than a smaller but more motivated one.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:23 AM
7

Communicating your honest emotions should be a requirement especially if you operate based on emotions. Expecting others to be mind readers is just laziness, and something even men who are seemingly successful with women find frustrating.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/06/26 09:08 AM
1

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308254/
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 11:42 PM
2

Women are more likely to be absent even without pregnancy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 11:37 PM
1

Then women shouldn’t have the right to a job if a company sees them as a net loss due to their provenly longer absences rooted in biology. Which means that yes, women won’t get a lot of jobs they want, but you don’t get everything you want.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 11:29 PM
1

Women are just as entitled to the chance of becoming rich and economically successful as men are to find a romantic partner. The chance, not the end immediately. Employers have the right to fire particular women who don’t meet their standards, just as women have the right to break up with men who don’t meet theirs. But neither have the right to dismiss these people without having given them the chance to prove themselves worthy of their desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 11:18 PM
1

And employers aren’t required to hire you by the same token. Women are more likely to be absent due to biological differences, even without accounting for childcare. By your logic, employers shouldn’t be required to hire people they deem a net loss.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:52 PM
4

Very true. Women should at least admit what they actually are attracted to and stopping demonising sex-work clients would be a huge improvement by itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:24 PM
-2

If you support gender quotas at employment, while having this attitude to dating, you’re hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 10:21 PM
4

You seriously don’t have to be a supermodel for men to be interested in you as a woman, and as OP says, not being overweight and not destroying your body by substance abuse is much easier than becoming taller, richer or more charismatic. The guy you mentioned could well be an average guy who only gets matches from below average women. Him not getting matches with average women would actually prove that many women do have unhealthy dating standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 12:39 AM
1

So men don’t go for looks solely?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 12:24 AM
6

Putting down weight is usually definitely easier than becoming rich and/or gaining charisma. Men’s standards are much easier to meet. And most men do want a steady relationship. Quite probably even those who say they envy women for being able to have hookups would not care about hookups at all if they could have long term relationships with all of their benefits.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/06/26 12:07 AM
1

A relationship is not about all of your desires being catered to. A man being physically more attracted to other women doesn’t mean he can’t prefer you a billion times over them overall. If that’s not enough for you, then you’re indeed not suitable for a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 08:47 PM
1

Then women should stop saying how it’s mostly emotions they are attracted to. Also, emotional connection can increase sexual desire, and for a while can compensate for decreasing physical attractiveness, as it is probably the case with middle-aged couples. If a man truly loves you, you won’t find yourself in a dead bedroom overnight.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 08:22 PM
1

If it’s the constant attraction from the beginning, it mostly means that the man still dearly loves the woman, since those who never actually did are those who would cheat on or leave their partners. In this case, it’s her needs which have grown in magnitude. And sure, some women may be bothered about it, but physical attraction eventually does decrease with age with both genders, since sexual desire itself does, regardless of gender. It’s not something you can avoid, and it’s definitely not som…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 08:03 PM
1

Attraction can change in form while remaining constant in magnitude. Why is it a problem is physical attraction is replaced by emotional one if women are more into emotional attraction to begin with?
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:40 PM
1

Do you have any proof that lessening physical desire cannot be balanced by stronger emotional attachment? https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/do-older-men-prefer-younger-women-new-study/
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:34 PM
1

It is definitely a very important consideration. You seem to dodge the question of how much this actually affects well-established relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 07:02 PM
2

As in more boring for both parties.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 01:20 PM
2

It’s not necessarily because she is aging, but because sex becomes more boring after a while.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 01:11 PM
1

Most men say women are the most attractive in their early-to-mid-twenties. They don’t claim to be attracted to 18-year-olds en masse. Also, claiming that women are the most attractive at that age doesn’t mean that they can’t be attracted to older women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 11:01 AM
–

Initially, it is physical attraction, but emotional attachment becomes more important as the relationship develops. Also, most men are attracted to at least average women from 18 to, say, 35, and many of the things which might make you unattractive are mutable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:25 AM
2

And considering how most men don’t cheat on or leave their older wives with or for younger women, it should be emphasised that not being in your physical prime as a woman probably won’t destroy your relationship once it is established.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:18 AM
2

Most men say women are the most attractive in their early-to-mid-twenties. They don’t claim to be attracted to 18-year-olds en masse. Also, claiming that women are the most attractive at that age doesn’t mean that they can’t be attracted to older women.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:14 AM
1

It’s not only “spergs” who might lose sheer physical attraction to others as they age. It doesn’t mean that men in general would leave their aging partners, since the established emotional attachment can replace physical attraction. But you do need physical attraction initially, and considering how you yourself often highlight in your comments that you at least dislike aging, I do presume your wife being in her physical prime was one of the most important factors in choosing her to begin with. “…
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 10:07 AM
2

Nothing indicates that the things mentioned would have to be forced on the woman. Couples do things to “spice up” their sex lives when both parties get bored with vanilla sex. It’s not that rare really.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:55 AM
1

Taking care of your health is not as difficult as people like to portray it. Remaining healthy with a healthy BMI until your 50s is doable.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:51 AM
4

Exactly. If those bonds are established, physical appearance will matter less than emotional value. When you need physical appearance as a woman is the initial part of a relationship, but men find most women from 18 to, say, 35 attractive, even longer if the women take care of themselves. Establish a well-working relationship in that age range, and you will probably find a partner for life.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/06/26 09:48 AM
–

Personally, it’s not likely, although I definitely don’t rule out that there are women out there who remain attractive due to a healthy lifestyle and/or good genes. Not smoking and drinking frequently from 15 to 40 helps a LOT in maintaining your attractiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/06/26 09:16 AM
6

There is some truth to people ignoring the context. But honestly, if a man did what she did, how many people, especially feminists, would care about his backstory?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 05:40 PM
5

Understanding where she comes from doesn’t make what she did excusable. And I really don’t see how “everyone” hates her. If anything, she gets more sympathy than condemnation, something which would be probably reversed if she was a man. (Although I admit the storytelling style of the film probably also contributes to this. Forrest’s POV is so strong that it’s sometimes hard to see through his rose-coloured glasses.)
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 03:56 PM
5

That’s the thing though. A man with an incurable STD impregnating the woman he has neglected for decades only because everyone else has abandoned him would make him hated with the audience, and no amount of past trauma would be enough to excuse it. A woman doing this does get the excuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 02:56 PM
2

It’s often not a simple analysis, but trying to excuse her acts and depicting her as a victim of the circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 02:46 PM
1

And that nothing excuses that?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 02:14 PM
1

Being a toxic person doesn’t start with raping and murdering. And exploiting someone else’s feelings is wrong, even if you are a woman who has been abused. People should stop pretending this somehow gives anyone a leeway.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:44 PM
1

Not reciprocating his feelings is not why people dislike her. Going back to him and exploiting his feelings and obliviousness is. She was exactly the kind person who would need therapy instead of all the lonely men this advice is thrown around to.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:41 PM
1

Being a toxic person doesn’t start with raping and murdering. And exploiting someone else’s feelings is wrong, even if you are a woman who has been abused. People should stop pretending this somehow gives anyone a leeway.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:34 PM
1

So, like, 90% or them are not? And being a millionaire starts with having tens of millions at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:28 PM
0

So you agree that she was a toxic person as an adult, regardless of her past and her childhood kindness?
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:24 PM
2

Pretending she does because everyone else has abandoned her is toxic behaviour. Misleading someone to believing you love them is toxic behaviour. And it was ultimately her choice, not the result of predetermined events as many people defending her claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:19 PM
3

Regardless of the genre, it should be common knowledge that what she did was seriously wrong, and a clear example of a toxic relationship. You can pretend what she did was ultimately good for him, but it doesn’t negate the fact that she was clearly exploiting someone and a lot of people either excuse her with her past or how he was happy about it because he couldn’t realise what was going on. She was not a good person, and nothing excuses her behaviour as an adult.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 01:08 PM
6

Which means that everyone else in the community was below bare minimum. It doesn’t excuse her behaviour of probably exploiting the love of a mentally disabled man (and quite probably infecting him and their child with an incurable disease) because she has been abandoned by everyone else, whatever abuse she went through and whatever good she did for him in the past. That’s why categorising the story as a romance is not far off from reality. From Forrest’s perspective, it was a romance, and Jenny …
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 12:51 PM
10

Not being attracted to him is one thing. throwing him away and going back to him when everyone else threw her away is something completely different. And let me flip the usual “being kind is the bare minimum” mantra we hear so often from those who are against the notion that women should change.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 12:24 PM
1

Everyone is young once. The overwhelming majority of people are never millionaires. And yes, a lot of people want a steady relationship in their twenties.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:44 AM
1

Everyone is young once. The overwhelming majority of people are never millionaires. And yes, a lot of people want a steady relationship in their twenties.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/06/26 09:43 AM
1

But they indicate that’s the most important thing for them in long term relationships, something most women prefer when it comes to relationships. And most women also want sexual relationships, so here it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 08:12 PM
1

The study literally indicates that for the overwhelming majority of women are attracted to kindness. It’s not men who are saying that, it’s the women asked in the survey. Yet the portion of women attracted to kindness is definitely smaller than that.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 08:07 PM
1

It does, at least in long term relationships (which most women prefer, and which are not sexless in the majority of cases ). Women are free to state otherwise. And the obsession comes from the hypocrisy of women preaching about morality and kindness, but many of them being more open to felons than awkward, but kind men.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 08:01 PM
1

They mean women in general should be expected to care about kindness above everything else. Which is not true in practice, that’s what makes most women claiming it is liars. And it’s not the only study claiming that: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-myths-sex/202203/the-sexual-appeal-dark-personalities
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:46 PM
1

Many care about most things listed above more than kindness actually. But they do claim they care about kindness more than those things.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:43 PM
1

Only moderately important.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:35 PM
1

I have been a leftist since elementary school, and been supportive of the rights of minorities and women. My grandmother keeps recalling a story how I stopped to help people building barricades in my hometown during a flood, even though I wasn’t really physically fit to provide much support. Just a few days ago, I offered my car to some people in the debate club which had terminated my membership previously. Not that it has ever mattered romance wise. All of my coworkers “have their shit togethe…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:35 PM
1

Let’s just make this clear: It’s women who claim that kindness is more important for them than anything, and it’s women at the same time who prove to be more interested in men who are likely to lack kindness. When many women are actually interested in men who are below the bare minimum morally and still preach about how important kindness is, calling them out is warranted.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:14 PM
1

For example: https://helloclue.com/articles/sex/idealpartner
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:08 PM
10

Yes, a large part of this is social. Female courting culture being almost nonexistent is a huge part of the asymmetry
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 07:01 PM
-1

Okay, so you still had tons of options in your twenties and thirties? And it’s not a logical error. Women who are above 40 were young once and had plenty of opportunities when they were young. By the time you are physically undesirable, you have had more than enough time to form a deep relationship where this doesn’t matter anymore. And being desirable is a huge advantage when you want to start dating someone. A large part of those men who want to have sex with you are also open to a long term r…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 06:57 PM
0

But there are phases. You have more options at dating from 15-40 than most men in their entire lives. More than enough to find someone if you put enough effort into it.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 06:28 PM
0

Going to a few dates with a man because you realize that you can’t know the full extent of his personality through a half minute long conversation is rape only with an unnaturally flexible definition of rape.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 02:50 PM
3

Men’s main standards focus mainly on things that are much easy to change than what women look for. Being young is something which is granted to everyone, and putting down weight is still much easier than not being neurodivergent or being taller. And yes, being in a relationship is not the same as entering one, but you can’t be in a relationship without being allowed to have one, and this argument is also exactly why the “women can be abused in a relationship” argument doesn’t prove women don’t h…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 02:45 PM
3

It pretty much is. You expect others to violate their immediate interests so women can prove their worth, but you are not ready to violate your own interests for others to be able to do so. And that’s textbook hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 02:40 PM
1

I will say what I always say when this comes up: many women decrying men’s pleas for women to widen their boundaries do support policies obviously violating the immediate interests of others, with the gender quotas in employment being the prime example. I actually also support those policies, as they help women show their actual capabilities which they otherwise couldn’t, especially since companies say they actually appreciate qualifications. But you can’t do that and then claim going to a few d…
/r/PurplePillDebate20/06/26 02:24 PM
2

The reason women are called out is that their choices often exclude kindness when they are looking for attractiveness, which implies their claims about the importance of kindness are false.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:35 AM
–

Spinster is more like an unmarried older woman. I’m not aware of it being used for women under 40 either.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 06:04 AM
–

Considering how women seem to be willing to ignore red flags for the sake of fun, I say yes, many women do prioritise other traits over kindness. If being attractive includes traits which exclude kindness but you keep claiming that kindness is important for you, then you will be called out for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 05:50 AM
–

Women regularly claim they appreciate kindness the most. And no, piercings, tattoos and partying don’t make you bad. But there’s a tendency that women ignore red flags for the sake of confidence and assertiveness.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 05:35 AM
1

You seem to be denying the existence of legal persons. Yes, institutions do have rights, they can be wronged. Because, again, there are people behind them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 04:39 AM
–

Dating bad people and claiming you value moral goodness the most (which most women do) are both individual choices. You can date bad people, claim you like good people and then receive criticism for your hypocrisy and faulty moral compass, you can date bad people and admit you at least don’t care and then receive criticism for being bad (but at least honest), or you can try to change your preferences so that you actually prefer good people and then you won’t get criticism for your morality. You …
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 01:44 AM
–

We do understand it. Having a confident and charismatic personality is more important than being morally good for many women. Fine. But then 1 Stop virtue signalling and claiming that kindness or deep personality are important for you 2 Don’t be surprised when people call you shallow.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 01:30 AM
2

Women still routinely say they care about kindness. Some certainly do, but there are way too many who actually don’t, and are just virtue signalling while being absolutely okay with dating assholes. And many other women don’t want to admit this.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 01:17 AM
2

They don’t necessarily like assholery per se, but many are more than willing to ignore it if it’s accompanied by traits they like.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:32 AM
0

Women are more likely to be absent also for other reasons. And yes, for employmers, that can well mean a net loss. I’m not saying that gender quotas are a bad idea overall, but saying that you can violate the immediate interests of others for a supposed greater good in one case but not in another is hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:24 AM
1

Not ever, and obviously within a reasonable age gap. But finding a good partner is a time and effort consuming process. If you find a truly loving partner in the end (and a more throughout process like this makes it more likely), I think it’s worth it. Or you can admit it’s not the deeper aspects of personality you actually care about. You might get labelled as shallow, but that’s kinda unavoidable. Or you can quit dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:20 AM
1

No one said it doesn’t exist. I said it shouldn’t exist after talking to someone only for a minute at best when you say that the deeper aspects of someone’s personality is the most important for you. If women actually don’t care about deeper personality as much as they say, I probably wouldn’t get more matches. If they do, then the probability does increase.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:06 AM
–

Some are desperate to have someone they can have a relationship with. Still doesn’t mean it would make them proud. You simply can’t enjoy a relationship for itself if you don’t have one.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/06/26 12:01 AM
-1

My point was that expecting employers to adhere to gender quotas while saying that men are not entitled to more chances is hypocrisy. In fact, I would like both quotas and men having more chances to be norms. And yes, men would be very happy if women would think that a man whom they see as unattractive may turn out to be attractive if she dedicates more time and effort to knowing him.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:46 PM
–

A non-confident or non-assertive man is usually cooked, regardless how kind or selfless he is.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:35 PM
–

Yes. If women preferred kindness as much above everything else as they say, the current dating environment would be very different.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:27 PM
1

Economic institutions do have rights, which can be violated. Not least because it’s actual natural persons (the owners of the companies) who suffer the consequences. And their short term preferences are violated by forcing them to hire people they initially deem an economic liability overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:24 PM
–

They say they are much more willing to give a chance to the average woman than women are to average men. Nothing implies that it’s not the relationship itself they’re after.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:19 PM
–

A very large is at least willing to take the risk. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:16 PM
–

It’s them saying it’s one of the most important factors. Dating men that are bad people (and a lot of women do that) contradicts that it would be important for them at all. https://helloclue.com/articles/sex/idealpartner
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 11:06 PM
–

Women are often attracted to traits which are at least predisposing factors for someone to become a bad person.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:59 PM
–

Behaviour is still easier to correct than biology.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:57 PM
–

Women regularly claim otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:55 PM
–

You really should try to prove most men are not good people by “modern standards”, or you should check if those standards are valid.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:54 PM
–

You don’t have to be redpilled to notice the often toxic standards women have for dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:50 PM
1

The same way gender quotas violate the autonomy of company leaders and owners by forcing them to employ people they see as at least a risky investment.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:43 PM
–

They are more likely to be absent. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10789064/
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:39 PM
-1

Nothing said anything about it being government mandated. It should be the norm for women without anyone having to enforce it. To prove that they have interesting and valuable parts of their personalities which can’t be revealed during a conversation lasting for a minute. And yes, it’s up to men to be able to take no for an answer after the woman actually tried to know them completely. But not before that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:36 PM
–

Because most people like to be in a relationship for the relationship itself, not because they see it as some kind of trophy.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:31 PM
2

Being willing to date assholes negates the notion that women are attracted to kindness at all. And women were asked, so yes, it’s the voice of women. And it’s not the only study reflecting that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:25 PM
–

Nobody said anything about sex immediately. Going on a few dates for the men to prove themselves is a very flexible definition of rape. Not least because women themselves claim to be attracted to kindness and deep personality the most.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:16 PM
–

The idea is that women are attracted to traits which at least make men prone to being bad is backed by science . Women either own that kindness is not the most important thing for them, or will get criticism for virtue signaling.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:07 PM
–

Women themselves claim to be attracted mostly to kindness. Which experience does contradict very often, true, but they continue claiming it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 10:05 PM
–

Do you want company owners to employ people they see as risky investment?
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:59 PM
–

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:49 PM
–

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:44 PM
–

So these women actually don’t care about kindness and moral decency… Fine, but then at least own it.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:43 PM
–

But you’re still willing to sleep with them if they check all the boxes. None of which include not being an asshole, as long as you particularly are not affected… Yes, you really should stop virtue signalling.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:39 PM
–

Which confirms that many women don’t care about men being assholes as long as they are charismatic enough and said assholery doesn’t affect the women in question.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:36 PM
–

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:33 PM
–

The same way gender quotas violate the autonomy of company leaders and owners by forcing them to employ people they see as at least a risky investment. But it’s still the right thing to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 09:13 PM
1

By your logic, no one should be owned a chance to have a successful career if it violates the immediate interests of others, that is, company owners and leaders. And, returning to OP’s statement and echoing your logic, we can admit that women not being able to have a high earning career is said without having to change the status quo, since we would be unable to do that without violating the interests, preferences and financial prospects of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 08:32 PM
1

Providing these women a chance to start a career makes big take financially riskier choices by employing people who are more likely to be absent than others. It’s not a bit less of a violation of choices and freedom than going on a few dates with a man who isn’t attractive enough based on the three sentences you have spoken to each other (all while women claim to be actually interested in the deeper parts of their potential partner’s personality)? Why exactly are the immediate interests of compa…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 07:09 PM
1

And an employer who can employ you for a position which can mean an important step for your career has the right to say no to you if they think you won’t make good workforce because you are a woman. At least by your logic. You can find a blue collar job to make ends meet, or even to live as a lower middle class worker. No one owns you a chance to have a successful career. At least by your logic. Not being able to find a date objectively worsens your quality of life. Yes, there are undatable peop…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 06:34 PM
1

A much larger percentage of men needs help with dating than women, and even in the majority of the cases where they do, the obstacles are much easier to overcome than for men (putting down weight is incomparably easier than getting rid of neurodivergence, being young is granted to everyone once in their lives, being kind if not difficult and delaying aging by not smoking and drinking with moderation is feasible). Just as with women who need gender quotas because they are the ones who are disadva…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:46 PM
2

Women are equally entitled to the chance of becoming rich and economically successful as men are to find a romantic partner. The chance, not the end immediately. Employers have the right to fire particular women who don’t meet their standards, just as women have the right to break up with men who don’t meet theirs. But neither have the right to dismiss these people without having given them the chance to prove themselves worthy of their desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:36 PM
–

I’m actually arguing for more socialism for both women wanting to make a career and men trying to find a romantic partner. Gender quotas make women entitled to certain positions where they have a chance to prove their worth and make a career. This requires sacrifice from employers, as women are provenly more likely to be absent from work. Still, these quotas are right, because if an employer is actually seeking qualification, they should be able to take the risk. Similarly, if women were actuall…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:28 PM
1

If it’s about immediate sex, then it’s about immediate sex with women who consent to it, even if for money (yes, a lot of sex workers do consent to their work, and are not exactly happy about being seen as abused puppets with no agency). Otherwise, it’s about being given the chance to date and to prove themselves as partners worthy of a romantic relationship with both its physical and emotional benefits for both parties.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:16 PM
–

Because both require others to sacrifice some of their freedom for the sake of fulfilling the legitimate desires of others and thus of bettering society.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 05:04 PM
1

Giving more chances for men to date.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:05 PM
1

Dismissing the responsibility of women in male loneliness.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 04:03 PM
2

No, and that’s why it’s not Trumpists I’m trying to convince. The liberal community is powerful and is provenly capable of making the life of those in need easier and better. That’s why it’s frustrating when they are so selective about who they want to help.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 03:10 PM
2

He represents one of the most liberal and most famous cities in the world. You can’t say his statements are not reflective of the liberal community.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 03:03 PM
1

As I said, liberal thinking, and I mentioned Zohran Mamdani.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:59 PM
3

It’s about better opportunities for women to have successful careers. Which is exactly as much a right as better opportunities for having a relationship. The government can get its taxes paid by women working as janitors or cleaners and with all white collar employees being men. It’s primarily about fulfilling legitimate desires, not economic interests.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:58 PM
1

A good, loving relationship makes the life of both parties better. Finding a good partner by giving more chances to men is not a given, but neither is getting good workforce by employing more women. The EU did introduce quotas which they plan to be binding for all member countries.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:42 PM
2

Again, it shouldn’t be, or at least it shouldn’t be looked down upon if someone is a consumer of sex work. Somehow, going to sex workers and being open about it is not a problem in the Netherlands, for example.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:35 PM
1

These quotas violate the rights of employers exactly as women deciding to give more chances to lonely men would violate the freedom of women. No more, no less. It’s not about government interference, as it’s not even needed if women could adopt this thinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:32 PM
1

“The more interesting RP-style observation is that many people apply these principles selectively. They are highly individualistic when discussing male struggles but much more collectivist when discussing female struggles. That's where many men feel the inconsistency lies. So I don't think the logical conclusion is "men should stop caring about women entirely." The stronger argument is that if society expects empathy, support, and concern from men, then men's issues should receive the same level…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:14 PM
3

It really shouldn’t be. It should be a normal part of life.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:09 PM
2

I’m not, but I definitely wouldn’t mind if most people would be okay with sex work and its customers.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:06 PM
1

The actually tolerant approach would be not reprimanding anyone for doing it even if it’s known. But alas.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:02 PM
2

Women and liberal society do support policies which violate the rights of choice of others by supporting gender and racial quotas, since women are provenly more likely to be absent, which makes them objectively initially less attractive for employers. Which means that yes, employers are forced to give up some of their freedom and consent to provide opportunities for women who may not get it otherwise. Is this a bad thing? Absolutely not, but then complaining about how interfering with consent is…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 02:00 PM
3

But the same women can’t support policies introducing gender quotas which benefit women without sounding hypocritical. Employers often don’t prefer women for objective economic reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 01:17 PM
2

Even if they pay for sex or simply watch porn, they are reprimanded for supporting the abuse of women. And there is detectable hypocrisy in claiming that women deserve more chances from employers , even if they’re objectively a riskier investment, but men don’t deserve more opportunities in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 01:13 PM
1

Women and liberal society do support policies which violate the rights of choice of others by supporting gender and racial quotas, since women are provenly more likely to be absent, which makes them objectively initially less attractive for employers. Which means that yes, employers are forced to give up some of their freedom and consent to provide opportunities for women who may not get it otherwise. Is this a bad thing? Absolutely not, but then complaining about how interfering with consent is…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 01:10 PM
1

If most see that they are at least given a chance, most won’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 12:16 AM
2

Women regularly claim to appreciate kindness and/or personal depth the most, while they are actually attracted to primarily charisma and status. This brings especially neurodivergent men to a desperate situation, because being alone with someone is usually the situation where they can get over their shyness and show their real self. Which, considering how being romantically unsuccessful is one of the main reasons for suicide, and men a multiple times more likely to commit suicide than women, is …
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 12:15 AM
3

Absolutely not all of them. It’s time consuming, yes. But I still think finding a loving partner is worth your while.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/06/26 12:00 AM
1

Giving an average, even if awkward man a chance to prove himself to be a good partner through a few dates is not exactly the same or worse than providing a roof to homeless people, again, unless you have sky high expectations.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 11:25 PM
6

Because of the mentioned dismissive attitude. Zohran Mamdani pretty much represents the opinion of the liberal mainstream in this regard, in my experience.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 11:00 PM
4

Most romantically lonely men need a chance to have a relationship, not a bed (since there’s still no evidence they would be homeless).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:42 PM
3

Yes, and I actually find the often dismissive attitude of many supposedly liberal people, those who demonstrably can and do improve the lives of those in need, to the problem of romantically lonely men very saddening.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:39 PM
4

Until recently, the quota of the gender and ethnicity of the people employed by a company was also something personal. Then these groups began to let their voices heard because they were objectively discriminated against. Now there are quotas which objectively violate the freedom of employers, but are still the right thing to do, because they allow these people to prove themselves, which they otherwise couldn’t. It’s exactly the same thing with lonely men. They are often not given the opportunit…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:35 PM
1

Most of them don’t desire my attention. Neither do they desire sex immediately, for that matter, however surprising it seems. Just a chance for a relationship. But feel free to expect others to invest time and effort into you while continuing to neglect equally legitimate desires of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:22 PM
3

You don’t have to immediately have sex with every man. What you need to do is to give a chance for them to prove themselves. Yes, that means you have to put more time and effort into dating. But that’s not actually different from expecting companies to employ women (even if they are provenly more likely to be absent) for them to prove themselves as a good workforce. They are equally legitimate desires.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 10:03 PM
-1

Still no proof that most men who struggle with dating would be as undesirable as a homeless man (unless you view even average men as that undesirable).
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:55 PM
0

Actually, no. https://homelesshub.ca/blog/2015/what-are-statistics-homelessness-due-divorce/
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:49 PM
4

Women approaching their thirties are at least as much incentivised by their own desires to find a partner and often to have children as by outside social expectations. Men do make more money, but the gap is not only shrinking, but there is a good chance that women may eventually outearn men in the future. And lonely men and boys receive most of the attention they receive because of the supposed danger they pose, not because society otherwise would care about them.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:11 PM
-7

Most men actually desire to get to know you as a person and you as a sex partner. Alas, many are not given even the chance to prove they are worthy of it. And that’s before mentioning how many women judge other women who willingly offer up their bodies, and how they actually actually hate their male customers b
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 09:03 PM
-6

It’s usually not homeless men who call for some romantic interest from women. Equating the average man who struggles with dating to homeless men tells me much more about the standards some women have.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 08:56 PM
1

You can be asexual and/or aromantic.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 05:49 PM
1

Not only they didn’t make it clear, but they outright contradicted it.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 01:03 AM
1

Because recognizing that some norms are wrong and trying to rectify them is a thing. That’s why slavery was abolished and women can vote, among other things.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/06/26 12:32 AM
1

Which is pretty much still the norm and women don’t seem to be interested in changing it.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/06/26 11:49 PM
7

I agree that it's not casual sex in particular which people necessarily need. I do think 99.99% of non-asexual/aromantic people would need to experience sex, but with a genuine romantic partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/06/26 09:02 PM
1

Three months are a very long time in work. And women being even more vulnerable than thought makes them actually even less attractive to employers under unregulated conditions.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/06/26 05:34 PM
1

Men would be more than happy if much more women would do what they preach about.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:33 PM
1

They do. Quite often it’s still worthless.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:32 PM
1

In dating no.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:31 PM
1

Not only because of that. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10789064/
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 08:02 PM
1

Have you done any of that detectably? Not being a non-stop champion of social issues with a huge positive impact doesn’t make anyone a bad person by itself.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:57 PM
1

Not only does this unfairly exclude a lot of decent men simply because they are not demigods, but women attracted to charismatic evildoers are somehow scrutinized much less by purportedly liberal women than men who are accused of being unproductive and boring.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:52 PM
2

Then neither should women who are not like that. And I have just sent you a link showing a large portion are not like that.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:48 PM
0

A lot of engineering and IT achievements are extremely beneficial for all of these objectives. Many engineers and programmers work on social projects. So do many teachers. Men not willing to contribute to society is a myth. So is the correlation between contributing to society and being successful in dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:44 PM
0

They often already do that. There is a whole lot of productive men who don’t get any attention from women (many engineers and programmers) in spite of being successful at their jobs.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:34 PM
0

Yes, and giving more chances to men to prove themselves instead of prioritizing the unhealthy standards of women is an important part of the process.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:24 PM
1

I agree, but by the same logic, women’s unhealthy standards shouldn’t be prioritized over the interests of society.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:20 PM
1

It’s not like caring for humanity is a decisive factor when it comes to attracting women, unfortunately. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:17 PM
2

Even the most progressive and least harmful company risks more losses with employing women than men due to the more frequent and longer absence of the former. And women not wanting to give more men a chance to dating also prioritize their own interests. You can’t have it both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:12 PM
0

Companies are led by people, and it’s their money which is being risked. And again, more well-working relationships are also beneficial for society in the long run and also override the the short-term dating preferences of women. You can’t say artificially influencing interests is impossible or reprehensible when you yourself campaign for it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 07:01 PM
0

If you think men’s relationship problems are not an important responsibility of women, then yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:54 PM
1

Yes, but you do need to violate the immediate interests of companies. More people in good relationships would also definitely increase the overall quality of life for society. And those require more effort than many women are willing to put into it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:52 PM
-2

Back on you if you support gender quotas at companies n
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:44 PM
4

Women are also more likely to be absent, which is a huge negative for companies. Women who have proven to be a reliable workforce are a plus, sure, but companies do have to jeopardize their own interests to find that out. Which is fine, finding good workforce is a risky investment, and you have to be willing to put time and effort into it. But so is finding a good partner. If women were willing to do what they expect companies to do, they would be much healthier dating standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:38 PM
–

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:25 PM
–

Yet the very same stranger wouldn’t be bothering her if he was charismatic enough. Which, again, underlines that claims about kindness being attractive and interested in the deeper aspects of personality are at least exaggerated.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 05:18 PM
–

Because women themselves mostly indicate kindness and personality are the most important qualities for them. If not, you do you, but at least be honest about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:49 AM
–

I would be surprised if most awkward guys would have problems this serious. Situations and people’s ability to show every aspect of their personality. Again, it does mean you have to invest more time and effort into dating. But it’s worth it if you want to find someone you can have a family and grow old with.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:47 AM
–

Ours? A lot of men also make a living by doing blue collar jobs. No, you presented no proof that socially awkward men are more likely to be jackasses. On the other hand, you kind of admitted that a man can be a jackass and attractive for you if he is hot enough for whatever reason.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:13 AM
–

If women can expect others to adjust their preferences to their needs, men can do it too. You can’t have it both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:09 AM
–

Awkward men get refused even when they go to women who are sitting alone in a bar. Interrupting women is clearly not the reason, not least because a charismatic man can do this to way more often than an awkward one.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:08 AM
–

Jobs maybe, careers aren’t. You can work as a janitor or a cleaner and be financially independent. Nothing indicates that awkward men are more likely to be jackasses than charismatic Chads. But charisma privilege can help you a lot.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 11:03 AM
–

The majority of women do support these measures, while also being vehemently against giving a chance to awkward men. Just because you particularly don’t, it is relevant in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:58 AM
–

Which still means that it’s not kindness or deeper aspects of personality that you’re after. If you were, you’d be willing to give him a chance to prove that he’s capable of being more interesting under other circumstances. Yes, it means that you have to invest more in dating, but I don’t think it’s ultimately not worth it if you find a good partner in the end.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:56 AM
–

Then they should at least stop claiming they are. You definitely wouldn’t die without your financial independence, so the usual argument about not dying from the lack of something is rebutted. And still, liberal states take measures to ensure that more women get a good career, and a lot of women support it, because they think they are entitled to a chance to prove themselves. And they are right.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:44 AM
–

But if you were actually interested in kindness or his entire personality, awkwardness wouldn’t be a dealbreaker for you. And I see no reason why awkward men would be more likely to be shitty than non-awkward men.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:38 AM
–

Do you mean that it is an obstacle if the man is nice because he wants a relationship with a woman? Does being nice to get into a relationship make it impossible to actually care for your partner?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:22 AM
–

For the very same reason gender quotas favoring women are a thing: women are objectively speaking a risky investment for employers due to their longer absences. But if the employer is actually interested in qualifications and dedication, they should be willing to take this risk. Similarly, if women are actually interested in personality and/or kindness, they either wouldn’t mind awkwardness (by far the biggest obstacle for men in dating) or would be willing to provide an opportunity to the man t…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/06/26 10:16 AM
1

Even supposing that's true, women value charisma and status the most. And at that, their standards are noticeably higher than that of men at physical appearance.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 09:08 PM
3

No, simply the standards of being attractive are much lower. Men don't feel it as settling, because they are also content with being more average girls.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 08:59 PM
4

I think, on average, men have detectably lower standards for entering a relationship than women. Even lesbians struggle to get the attention of women attracted to other women since the high standards remain.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 08:20 PM
9

Many men don't have game because women have high expectations. Many lesbians don't have gane because women have high expectations even from other women and they don't know how to court because female courting culture is practically nonexistent.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 01:45 PM
4

I’m not saying this is right, quite the contrary. These unhealthy expectations are probably the reason why divorce among lesbian marriages is so common.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/26 11:02 AM
3

One would expect a nation fighting for its survival to be able to recruit enough soldiers without having to resort to press ganging.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates10/06/26 09:32 PM
3

I’m 90% sure the guy started out as a polite guy who respected women as anyone else who gets to have a relationship. All this brought him was years of women rejecting and people trying to gaslight him how being in a relationship and having a good sex life aren’t huge things to have.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 09:30 PM
1

They do set the quotas as a goal. Which is, again, fine, but it is actually a good example of meddling with preferences being necessary.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 08:37 PM
2

The reason why companies don’t prefer employing women is because they are absent for longer periods for biological reasons (mostly because of motherhood), so yes, there is a good chance that employing women is a risky investment for companies. That doesn’t mean they shouldn’t give even give them a chance, as it often happens.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 08:34 PM
2

I don’t think trying to deny that relationships and sex life are fundamental components of a healthy psyche for the overwhelming majority of people. I do know a man who is one of the most charismatic people I know, smart as hell, a very good organizer and is in a leading position in several students organizations. Still, when he broke up with his longtime girlfriend, he was reduced to a broken alcoholic and what actually put him back on the track was finding another loving girlfriend. I think at…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 08:25 PM
2

The difference is that a) men seem to be more honest about their preferences and b), their standards are much easier to meet (being young at the beginning of the relationship, having a healthy BMI and not destroying your system with drinking and smoking are much easier than not being autistic). By the same token, there are no gender quotas for men because they are not affected negatively by employment discrimination.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 08:06 PM
1

Well, ideally, you’re also good friends with your siblings. My relationship with my sister is unfortunately also rocky, but I know that’s not how it’s supposed to be.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:58 PM
2

I think they do, at least if they claim to be attracted to personality and/or kindness. If you are, either awkwardness (by far the most problematic thing for men in dating) either wouldn’t be a problem at all, or women would be more open to know the entire personality of awkward men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:56 PM
2

For a few dates, yes. If she actually cares about kindness and/or personality as much as women often claim to be. Yes, it means she might have to put more time and effort into dating. But that’s, again, not so different from putting time and effort into finding a good job. Finding a good partner is worth it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:48 PM
2

The notion that men are not entitled to prove their value on a few dates as partners should be done with, provided it’s actually personality, not just charisma and status women actually care about.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:43 PM
-1

I would do it even for my friends. Helping people to get into relationships when you know they’re struggling should be a given.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:40 PM
2

OP’s story is about a man who has probably never been given a chance by dozens of women, and OP was the last straw. Chances are he wouldn’t have cared about being refused at all if he had had the experience that he did have a chance with other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:38 PM
0

Yeah, heaven forbid you actively help your sibling get a better life.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:29 PM
2

I say stop having double standards. If you think gender quotas for employment are reasonable, then being against giving a chance to awkward men is hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:28 PM
0

At least I hope you don’t pretend kindness is the most important thing for you in a partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:25 PM
1

By themselves, no. The same people who support them telling men who struggle with dating that women’s dating preferences are inviolable is.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:22 PM
2

It is still often about flaunting your wealth and you can at least expect that poorer people will feel bad when you do it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:16 PM
1

They are at least supposed to be. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/pl/ip_22_3478
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:08 PM
-1

Obviously I didn’t mean she should date her brother. But being his wingwoman and actively trying to find him a potential partner is perfectly feasible. So is telling other women that they should give more chances to awkward men for those to prove themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 07:02 PM
2

Gender quotas for employment, for example. Women are exactly as entitled to prove their value as workforce and that they deserve a good career as men are entitled to prove their worth as partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 06:58 PM
1

It’s not a difficult question to answer.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 06:25 PM
12

Women overall have higher expectations when it comes to dating in general, even if their potential partner is also a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 06:00 PM
-1

What exactly do you do to help your brother with dating?
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 05:37 PM
1

Beyond the obligatory “he shouldn’t have behaved like that”, had he told you the most polite and empathetic way that his life is hell because of the lack of one of the most fulfilling experiences a human being can have, would you have done anything else to help him besides being sorry for him? The easiest way to prevent such men from bothering you is stopping the process which creates them (since there is a high chance that he wasn’t always like that). People should actively try to help men like…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 05:36 PM
1

Then society should stop interfering with others’ preferences at other areas of life too.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 05:14 PM
1

She will say those things. Whether she chooses her partner based on them is a completely different matter. And yes, there are some really unattractive women who can’t break the ice, but even then, it’s mostly about being obese (a mutable trait in the majority of cases) or old (being young is something granted to everyone once in their lives, and the average woman has at least twenty years to be attractive and form relationships if she takes care of herself).
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:16 AM
1

I spent a good part of my late twenties being as communicative and helpful as possible. No results, only friendzone.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:08 AM
1

But she still scores while being overweight.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 03:03 AM
1

In the majority of cases, not even having common interests or laughing at the same things lead to a relationship with women, let alone polite chatting. Talking to men is not exactly the grace you believe it to be. Women still expect you to be charismatic and charming, and their threshold at this is definitely higher than that of men for the attractiveness of women. And unattractive women do struggle, but a woman has to be really ugly and/or unpleasant to be seen as unattractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 02:57 AM
4

Too true. ““Why do you let people call you a dog? You won’t let anyone call you a knight.” “I like dogs better than knights. My father’s father was kennelmaster at the Rock. One autumn year, Lord Tytos came between a lioness and her prey. The lioness didn’t give a shit that she was Lannister’s own sigil. Bitch tore into my lord’s horse and would have done for my lord too, but my grandfather came up with the hounds. Three of his dogs died running her off. My grandfather lost a leg, so Lannister p…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/06/26 02:25 AM
3

Is Ukrainian morale so low that they need conscription to maintain an effective army?
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates09/06/26 05:10 PM
3

I think it’s stupid too. I actually prefer sexual women, as long as it doesn’t happen at the expense of our relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/06/26 07:09 AM
0

Then I guess men are free to be disgusted by women who don’t want to put down weight even if they are perfectly capable of doing so, therefore potentially ruining their own lives and that of their families by proxy?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 12:30 AM
10

At least I hope that someone who believes in vaccines worsening autism doesn’t call themselves liberal or progressive.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/06/26 12:26 AM
–

👆
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 05:21 PM
11

You never see that because you can find another potential partner as women magnitudes easier. For many men, getting into a romantic texting with a girl is a once in a half year opportunity. That’s the same as calling women who can’t have successful careers because of discriminative selection procedures crybabies. (Also, fyi, I saw my mother literally saving the life of a teenage girl after the girl tried to commit suicide after breaking up with her boyfriend.)
/r/PurplePillDebate06/06/26 12:38 PM
1

If the Russian population was so enthusiastic about conquering entire Europe, Putin wouldn’t be so worried about calling the invasion a war and about declaring full mobilisation.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/26 03:14 PM
1

Russia invaded Ukraine because they expected it to be a cakewalk with the Ukrainians greeting them as liberators. Now they don’t want to quit because of sunk cost fallacy, but that doesn’t mean they are keen on attacking NATO-countries.
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates05/06/26 02:25 PM
–

Not from being unattractive, but because they probably find someone who does find them attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/06/26 12:02 PM
1

Yeah, that’s why the Nordic model of prostitution was introduced in several European countries…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 05:06 PM
1

Yeah, because Tate and the rest can make abuse and rape somehow legal and legitimate… If a manosphere influencer openly claimed that women were to be killed, how would you react?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:25 PM
1

By your logic, I can’t make Tate or Flesh see abuse of women see my way, and I would be actually interested what do you think about the killing of girls in China and how this is anyhow better. None of the accusations have been proven, but somehow all of them surfaced when these people began to talk and publish about their views, which challenged some mainstream feminist views.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 01:12 PM
1

It’s physically impossible not to lessen the number of males in particular without killing males (unless they can control which gender a baby will have, which I doubt). More boys are born than girls. Straus was accused of sexual misconduct and domestic violence. Farrel was accused of sexual abuse and incest. Steinmetz was threatened with a bombing during her daughter’s wedding. Let’s just not pretend these are not instances of serious abuse, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 10:57 AM
2

It is something stated to be of exceeding importance. If assertiveness was stated to be that important, it would be more understandable, but it isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 07:39 AM
1

Suggesting that men should be reduced to 10% of the population is definitely not better than anything Andrew Tate and the like have come up with. Also, what this generally result in unjustly labelling males as predators and rapists, as well as them and their supporters getting bullied.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 06:31 AM
2

https://franklyno.tumblr.com/post/62192542728/part-1-part-2-part-3-transcript-sources https://franklyno.tumblr.com/post/61911332445/part-1-part-2-part-3-transcript-sources And mind you, those are people by and large considered important contributors to human rights by liberal society.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/06/26 12:04 AM
1

You really should do some research.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:39 PM
1

You really should do some research about games and anime if you think it has stuck on the level of Super Mario or Sonic.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 07:38 PM
–

Making dating for them possible definitely helps.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 04:45 PM
2

I actually thought about what I would wish for in a similar situation several times. My wish would be that women would give me a chance. The movie conveys a toxic and dangerous message by implying that men don’t want genuine relationships based on mutual love, and that women as a group have no active responsibility in solving the issue. Men don’t necessarily want women to fall in love with them or to have sex with them immediately. What most men want is a chance for them to prove themselves to b…
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 11:37 AM
2

Awkward men not being chosen as partners is a very obvious example of women demanding social status.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/05/26 08:56 AM
1

It’s not just a random company, but a demonstrable general thing for companies . Supporting laws which compel companies to risk losses by employing women is not better than incentivising women to lower their standards when it comes to dating. By your logic, it’s very convenient for women to be able to start a career while their employers bear the risks for it. Because again, women are absent for a longer time. Companies not willing to take the risk is also no one’s fault, it’s just free will.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 07:33 PM
1

Women are demonstrably more likely to be unavailable, which makes their employment an objective risk for companies. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11308254/ https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/-/ddn-20200708-2 It might not have happened because of the generosity of men, but the gender quotas are the result of liberal society, the one doing the most for the development of humanity, having taken up the cause, knowing well that it would violate the interests of compan…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 06:18 PM
1

Yes, and liberal society (especially other liberal women) supports the desires of those women with the quotas, even if they actually violate the immediate interests of companies. Rightfully so, but claiming that society wouldn’t function properly without these desires being fulfilled and therefore giving otherwise decent men who struggle with dating a chance to prove themselves is bad is hypocritical and selfish.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 04:11 PM
1

So you agree that companies prefer men to women (for various reasons)?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 12:37 PM
1

Then why exactly are gender quotas needed? Not that I’m against them, mind you.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 12:32 PM
1

Said by someone who probably never had problems with dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:37 AM
1

There kind of is: https://helloclue.com/articles/sex/idealpartner
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 09:34 AM
-1

Obviously no one is talking about excluding all women from the workforce. Companies take as many women as it is economically beneficial for them and the women who are economically the most beneficial for them. Which means those women who prioritise their work over their families. Which means women who are willing not to have children for a longer time than they would prefer. There could be women who resign to low quality jobs or being housewives in exchange of being mothers, and there could be w…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 05:17 AM
1

If female applicants would be more likely to get accepted, countries wouldn’t need gender quotas to begin with. Also, availability and experience matter much more than education nowadays, unfortunately. So yes, companies would probably prefer men to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 04:18 AM
-2

Companies do make a risk by employing women, mostly because of their usually longer absence from work. Companies employing less productive people can also have economic consequences, both for them and indirectly for society. Women do have the opportunity not to look for jobs which demand them to be that productive or they can be housewives. Society as a whole probably still could function. It still doesn’t mean that this is how it should. So no, I don’t believe this is as much about maintaining …
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 04:14 AM
-1

Only if you want it to be. Women demonstrably spend more time away from work than men, which makes employing them a demonstrably riskier choice. Forcing companies to employ women is an obvious infringement on their immediate interests and therefore also on those of the people controlling it. This doesn’t mean it’s not the right thing to do, but then let’s just not pretend trying to influence preferences is something women dislike.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 03:51 AM
2

“The law At the top levels of governance, laws could already be in place mandating some kind of gender quota; it just depends on the country. Take the EU, for example. In 2022, it agreed on a new directive requiring that 40% of all non-executive director positions be held by women from 2026 on. Women should hold 33% of all director positions within the same timeframe. The law is a significant step towards giving legal weight to gender quotas, and if your company is based within the 27-member blo…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 03:40 AM
0

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_quota
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 03:34 AM
-2

It’s not something the government should equalise, women as a group should equalise it more than it currently is. Which is actually very similar to the claim that since men still dominate politics and business, it’s their responsibility to make the lives of women at business easier.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 03:32 AM
0

By the same token, female quotas at companies should be abolished and women should go from employer to employer until someone employs them. Find a company that doesn’t mind you having children or being unavailable for a longer period.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 03:18 AM
2

There are, but if you indicate that kindness is the most important for you, then things antithetical to it should be the hardest dealbreaker. It isn’t, therefore it’s not the lack of kindness which repels you.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 02:56 AM
4

Awkwardness being seen as a dealbreaker means that it is probably not kindness they are primarily after, exactly because they don’t exclude each other. Assertiveness/charisma and awkwardness do, which implies that’s what you are actually looking for.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/05/26 02:29 AM
2

Looking for internal values is supposedly a liberal principle, which is I think the main reason why women claim kindness to be the most important for them when looking for a partner. They themselves think this is how men are supposed to be primarily selected, but when it comes to actually choosing a partner, they revert back to choosing them based on other, more superficial criteria.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 05:54 PM
1

As you can see below, most women openly claim they value kindness the most. Which is not true, I agree, but then at least own what you think.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 05:46 PM
5

It’s one of many personality traits. Many other personality traits surface only if you give more chance to the person in question to show a fuller extent of their personality. Yes, it’s possible that some people believe that they can get a full picture of someone by talking to them shortly a few times, but I think it’s more like that these people deep down know well that they are not willing to put enough effort into knowing someone’s personality as much as they claim. Also, kindness is somethin…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 05:44 PM
4

Refusing an awkward men immediately without going on a few dates with him while claiming to be attracted to personality is not better than refusing a woman after a job interview for not agreeing not to have children while claiming to be looking for qualifications.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 01:56 PM
5

There is a widespread fallacy that an oppressed group is infallible and criticising them equals to oppressing them. Liberal society, unfortunately, tends to treat women exactly like that. They should remember that a prominent Jewish group, of all people, is currently committing a genocide. Which doesn’t mean that the Holocaust didn’t happen or that antisemitism wouldn’t be a huge problem even now. But that doesn’t invalidate the fact of a genocide in Gaza.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:56 AM
3

They are. https://helloclue.com/articles/sex/idealpartner Kindness and fun are absolutely not necessarily the same thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 11:25 AM
4

Then women should stop pretending it is.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/05/26 09:34 AM
6

If women are entitled to the chance of being both mothers and successful at their careers, then men are entitled to the chance of proving themselves to be good partners. If men are not entitled to a few dates to prove themselves, womens’ quotas at companies should be abolished and women like Tess Holiday should be working on putting down weight instead of trying to be sexy in fashion magazines. Enough of the double standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:57 PM
8

Morally notably bad, but socially skilled men have way less problem with attracting women than morally notably good but awkward men. Let’s just stop pretending morality is a decisive factor please.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:48 PM
6

It’s painful having to admit that you cannot be a mother and have a great career and your dreams about the latter are a casualty of your having been born a woman. It’s easier to be just angry about it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:44 PM
0

Would you say the same thing about a woman who would have to promise she would not have children if she wants to build a career? Because yes, for millions of men, “working on yourself” is a burden exactly as great as giving up the opportunity of becoming a mother.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:40 PM
2

https://helloclue.com/articles/sex/idealpartner
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 02:12 PM
1

Weighting does happen though, and kindness is supposed to be the most important trait, according to polls.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 01:42 PM
8

Then at least be honest about it and stop pretending you actually care about kindness and personality more than charisma. Does admitting that mean you’re not as tolerant as liberal principles would demand? Yes, but you can’t have it both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:46 PM
4

I do hope people having this opinion at least don’t call themselves liberals.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:41 PM
1

Blanket-characterising games and anime as childish in 2026 is kind of indicative of the lack of progress many people calling themselves liberals bemoan.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:35 PM
1

Which is also a traditionally masculine trait which is beneficial for women. To be clear, sure, it would be cool if people who intervene in such situations to defend women would always come out of them as victorious. But it’s not a given, and them not engaging doesn’t necessarily mean they wouldn’t if they were sure of a good outcome.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:12 AM
2

It does, it’s an answer to your claim that men having to be leaders and protectors is not something superimposed on men by women as well. Many women do prefer traditional masculinity as long as it doesn’t affect them or other women in a negative way.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 09:05 AM
3

Men having to be proactive, successful and charismatic is at least as much female as male perpetuated, not least because most women (therefore a large proportion of feminists) definitely prefer these traits when at dating. Feminists can say that they are fighting against maintaining male gender norms which are harmful for men, but actions show otherwise.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 08:22 AM
1

I don’t think the Bible should be taught as a basis for norms, you are right.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:42 AM
–

You can argue that. It still shouldn’t make her exempt from criticism.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/05/26 12:35 AM
0

Because she wished every man ill, regardless if they actually raped or not. You can fight oppressors without becoming oppressive yourself. And you deserve to be criticised if you actually become oppressive yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:36 PM
–

Should we condemn the Israeli leadership for fighting Hamas the way it does? They are just fighting a genocidal enemy, and there is collateral damage in every war…
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:14 PM
–

If feminists today would widely condemn Dworkin‘s misandry, then it would be an anachronism. Alas, she is still treated as an important contributor to the development of human rights, and her work is seen as exemplary. And believing that the oppressed can never become oppressive themselves is historical illiteracy.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 11:11 PM
–

I would say it’s going backwards in the conservative parts of the US. I can’t see a ban on abortion or women getting stripped of their right to vote happening in blue US states, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or Western Europe.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 10:58 PM
–

Again, being oppressed doesn’t give you the right to become an asshole yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 10:36 PM
–

I’m not surprised, but being a victim doesn’t excuse you being an asshole. That’s exactly the same fallacy which makes many people unable to believe that Israel as a Jewish state is capable of committing a genocide. And yet… Also, considering how much sex workers themselves hate swerfs, I’m not sure Dworkin‘s sex negativity did much good for them either.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 10:19 PM
1

True that.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 03:32 PM
7

If she was willing accept my courting, then yes. Not saying “without a thought”, but she does seem to check most things I look in a woman.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 03:24 PM
6

Considering how men are expected to initiate in most forms of communication, I say yes, the issue is still gendered, even anxiety itself isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 09:33 AM
2

Truer words have never been spoken.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/05/26 09:29 AM
7

“If Indon't find him desirable? Probably not. Unless I get to know him and he becomes somehow desirable.“ This. If you actually cared about personality as much as many women claim, they would be willing to give a chance for men to show their real personalities.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 09:55 AM
2

Some do, but I would be surprised if they were the majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:57 AM
2

If you maintain a relatively healthy lifestyle, your chances of becoming a 3 as a woman from 18 to 40 are very low. Not becoming overweight, not smoking and drinking with moderation are all easier than being funny b
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:55 AM
2

The wall existing doesn’t mean you hit it in your late twenties, unless your lifestyle is horrible.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:37 AM
1

A woman who is 4 can still find a partner who is 4 or 5.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:29 AM
2

With what, not looking like you’re in your forties when you’re actually in your late twenties?
/r/PurplePillDebate26/05/26 06:25 AM
1

My helpfulness, my kindness, my willingness to be there for them even in their darkest moments, the interesting conversations we have, the hobbies which she can share with me and yes, our sexual experiences.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 10:33 PM
9

You really need to improve your lifestyle if you age that fast.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 09:45 PM
4

You have more opportunities to find a partner from 18 to even 40 if you remain healthy than most men in their entire lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 04:35 PM
1

Not drinking alcohol, not smoking and not having an unhealthy diet is feasible.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 04:31 PM
–

Somehow Desmond Tutu was able to recognize and acknowledge the existence of anti-white racism and that anti-black racism doesn’t justify it. Man-hating feminists should take an example of him.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 02:22 PM
–

Yes, it is. I don’t care about bigots being bigoted and tribal, because that’s what they are. They should be fought against, not convinced. But seeing the very same behavior from liberals, who otherwise do the most for the development of humanity and champion for the downtrodden is disappointing.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 01:20 PM
–

I have never heard people calling themselves liberals not condemning Musk, Tate or the manosphere in general. But I don’t see the same liberal society condemning mainstream feminists quoted in an answer to the mod post to the same degree.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:59 PM
–

If actually you think so, good.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:36 PM
–

So when women support crimes committed by women against men, those are outliers. If it happens the other way, those men represent the ordinary man… Sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:34 PM
–

Somehow “not all men” was not exactly a convincing argument for women when the Pelicot-case came out…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:26 PM
–

Many of whom were women. Although, to their credit, those at least don’t claim to be feminists or liberals.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 12:11 PM
–

The problem is that while the manosphere is expected to condemn such extremism, feminism quite often gets away with it.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 09:22 AM
–

The issue is that mainstream feminist groups, those which claim to strive for equality, support Steiner.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/05/26 09:11 AM
1

It’s irrational because, based on data, you should be much more concerned about men who you know well than about strangers in general. But you probably aren’t, which would presuppose that you’re not cautious about random average men either.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 12:06 AM
1

Again, considering who is more dangerous statistically, you should never stop being worried about dogs or men, especially if you have become close to them. But I don’t think you would do that.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/05/26 12:00 AM
13

And you probably enjoy all that because you’re successful at dating. You get cause and effect wrong. Many unsuccessful men don’t enjoy dating because they are mostly, if not always, unsuccessful at it, therefore they go back playing Skyrim. Also, let’s just not pretend many men who are successful at dating aren’t also avid gamers in 2026, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 07:30 PM
14

Yeah, those with this kind of “hunter” mentality are probably those who are very successful in dating in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 03:33 PM
1

So are you afraid of every dog you pass by, the dirty/smelly ones or those that bark at you with their teeth bared?
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 11:45 AM
0

Statistically at least, most women are raped by people close to them.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 10:12 AM
1

By that logic, you should never stop being cautious about men, but I don’t think you are this careful about your boyfriend or brother. Women like to talk about how they have to be careful, but a large percentage of that is probably preferences claimed to be a necessity for being careful.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/26 10:09 AM
0

Reminds me of the rhetoric which resulted in suffragettes being locked up in asylums…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 11:01 PM
1

When you are more cautious about those people who are less likely to hurt you than those who are more dangerous, then yes, your caution is misplaced.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 10:58 PM
1

First, most serious abuse women receive is not from strangers, but acquaintances, even partners, yet women still don’t stop dating. Second, it’s kinda bold of you to assume that one rejection is the only form of emotional abuse awkward men receive.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 10:46 PM
6

When the scope of concerning behaviour encompasses practically everything which criticises women as a group, then yes. In which case you really should reconsider whether you are defending women from harm or making holy cows of them. Especially since, again, it seems that it’s not those men who cause most harm to them are the most hated by women.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 08:38 PM
1

Yes, and if an animal attacks you, the most likely attacker is a dog. Still doesn’t mean that the frequency of dog attacks would make being cautious of dogs in general was vindicated. Also, the majority of attacks on women are carried out by men they already know well, yet more women are in a relationship than men. Therefore yes, I do think that women don’t actually fear men as much as they claim to do.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 07:11 PM
1

If it’s demonstrably only a small fraction of dogs which bite you, then yes, you being cautious about most dogs you encounter is not reasonable. Of course, if you have been attacked by a dog earlier and you have developed a phobia, it will be understandable, but still not rational.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 06:53 PM
4

The portion of aggressive dogs, especially regarding certain breeds, is very important when it comes to evaluating the actual threat they pose.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 05:08 PM
9

The statistical reality is that the overwhelming majority of men are not violent with women, yet this part is somehow very rarely included in womens’ claims about male behavior.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 01:17 PM
11

The point seems to be that you should be able to distinguish between men who harm you and men who defend you. You can claim that they do not deserve special praise for it because it’s the bare minimum, but you are obliged not to conflate those who harm you with your protectors, especially considering the latter are the majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:55 PM
3

This. It’s not that women are less prone to violence, they are just less prone to physical violence.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 12:34 PM
2

True. A lack of communication is probably one of the most important aspects here.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/26 11:58 AM
11

The greatest contradiction in her claim is that liberal society does recognize female-specific issues (which is absolutely right, but denying the existence of male-specific issues with this view is hypocrisy.)
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 03:13 PM
0

Yet they do expect employers to employ more women than they want, even though women are more absent from work than men. At which women are actually right, employers can make this sacrifice. But so can women by giving more chance to men at dating.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 12:12 PM
2

The point was that women are less and less reliant on falling back to those jobs than men due to better prospects in education.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 11:01 AM
–

The very fact that liberal society, the one which contributes the most to the development of humanity and which is very influential is a huge asset and the support men receive is disproportionately low.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/05/26 10:55 AM
1

Most people do.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 02:48 PM
2

Overall, I think a lot of people in general don’t age as well as they could if they took care of themselves. Not drinking like fish and smoking like chimneys would definitely help.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:23 PM
1

Yet more women are in a relationship than men. Which is not necessarily to imply that the sexual harassment of women isn’t a serious issue. But loneliness seems to be even more serious.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:20 PM
2

No. Most people are not asexual, and no sex is a dealbreaker for them in a serious relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 01:12 PM
6

“Prefer” is not the same as “necessarily choosing”. Youth is just one of the factors influencing attraction. Yes, when you are trying to develop a relationship out of nothing, appearance and youth do matter. But then you still have to be attractive personality wise for the relationship to develop. Most men don’t just abandon their partner with whom they have been living together in a happy relationship for a long time just to have sex with a young woman. If men are given a chance to develop an a…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/05/26 11:58 AM
1

Because the whole “women are getting less interested in men” seems false to me. Women are interested.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 04:00 PM
1

And yet, all polls indicate that more women are in a relationship than men, and yes, most of those are heterosexual relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/05/26 03:51 PM
7

Women are allowed to have MUCH more standards than men. You can’t champion for the (otherwise admirable) cause of changing gender norms while insisting on men paying for you when you could well split the bill without being a hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 09:22 PM
2

If that woman also believes in changing gender roles, I am at least entitled to point out her hypocrisy. (And I probably wouldn’t date a conservative woman, so if that ever happened, calling out happens too.)
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 09:18 PM
0

Women wanting to be SAHMs are a small subset of women expecting men to pay the entire bill. Most middle class women could afford going Dutch, they simply chose not to, because it’s convenient for them.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 09:13 PM
9

Yeah, and he dared call out those advices as useless and may have expected society to actively intervene. You know, like women expect society to do so when it comes to their (otherwise often legitimate) complaints.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 12:40 PM
3

The fact that the dating world is as ruthlessly predisposed against men objectively needing more chance provided to them by women is a clear example. Exactly because women are an oppressed group, their thoughts and desires are seen as inviolable by liberal society, and is unable to consider women as a group needing to change their behavior as it is expected from men as a group. The thought that oppressed groups can’t behave oppressively towards members of other groups, even if that group is ofte…
/r/PurplePillDebate14/05/26 12:19 PM
2

You are simply the exception, not the rule and your confidence in this quite probably comes from being accepted more than rejected. Literally constant rejection conditions you to feel vulnerable, and honestly you really shouldn’t expect people to be thick skinned enough not to be emotionally damaged by it.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:34 AM
7

The thought that the oppressed can never become oppressive should really die.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:18 AM
4

I never said you had said anything like that, it was just to illustrate this general train of thought many feminists currently.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 01:12 AM
1

It’s all nice and dandy if you are not hurt by what people say online. Many people are not that lucky.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:50 AM
6

The entire concept of moderating posts and banning entire groups is based on the concept that people face consequences from what is said online. And consequences do not start at going on a killing spree.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:37 AM
3

The logic is exactly the same. “Misogyny has been a problem for a very long time, and it mostly comes from men, so you calling out feminists for their misdeeds against men in general equals to misogyny.“
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:09 AM
3

That’s like saying because antisemitism is a millennia-old problem and led to horrible crimes, the genocide in Gaza is acceptable. Oppressed groups can become oppressive themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/05/26 12:02 AM
9

Are you saying that you don’t think what people say in online spaces doesn’t in fact have serious consequences in real life in 2026?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:58 PM
4

The problem is, again, that liberal society, the one which most young women identify with and the one which does the most for the development of humanity, does try to combat misogyny while routinely ignoring misandry.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/05/26 11:51 PM
2

The former one doesn’t mean you don’t love the person in question. Not having demands in a relationship is equally bad as not giving anything in return.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 10:29 PM
2

Enjoying their company is the benefit you get from these bonds. Liking or loving someone doesn’t mean you can’t expect them to like or love you equally or to maintain that relationship if you think it’s not reciprocal.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 10:12 PM
1

Why would a man need to be financially very successful to be in a relationship unless we cater to outdated gender norms which benefit the desires of women? Why is being content with a decently paying job and not having the motivation to go forward in the hierarchy is so repulsive?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 10:09 PM
2

Again, romantic relationships are transactional. Problems arise when one party expects more from the other without giving equally as much. Unconditional love actually guarantees toxic relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:56 PM
2

No one forces you to have children the 2020s, and STIs are also easy to defend against if you’re careful enough. And no, I don’t think being a lower level technician makes anyone unworthy of the love of an average woman, or even that of a woman who makes more. The most important hindrance to such relationships is the attitude that men always have to be financially more successful than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:53 PM
1

I truly wish it was so, but alas. It’s certainly possible that the person in particular was unable to express his thoughts, but again, someone with communication issues usually has difficulty with that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:41 PM
2

The two are not mutually exclusive. You can be the most valuable and lovable person imaginable if you have no courage to even ask out a girl. Knowing that your friends can vouch for you and actively improve your chances if needed is a huge motivation for developing yourself. Expecting people who have communication issues to do most of the development alone is, again, against the principles of left-wing liberalism. If those people didn’t need active help, they wouldn’t have communication problems…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:23 PM
2

That can be rooted in you not willing to put enough effort into helping them. If your friend whom you like expresses his desire to be in a relationship, and if you think he is a nice person overall (which you probably do, otherwise you wouldn’t be friends), it’s very hard to imagine you find him personality wise unmatchable for a long time. So he probably has communication issues, which often can be helped by his friends providing him more aid. Most misogynistic incels are not born like that. Th…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 09:05 PM
2

If your friend would let you know in the most civic way possible that he is actually suffering from not being in a relationship, would you actually try to make it easier for him to get one?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:43 PM
2

There are very few types of relationships that are not transactional to a degree. A romantic relationship is not necessarily about unconditional love and devotion, but the reciprocity of providing and receiving love and affection. Those men who refuse to be agreeable unless they get romantic affection are probably indeed not suitable for relationships, but you shouldn’t mistake that for not being entirely selfless in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:40 PM
1

Wingman and matchmaking culture should be a common and accepted part of friends‘ groups. Matchmaking as a profession should also be accepted and widespread. And overall, society should be more inclusive towards people with communication difficulties. The current system of (mostly) “either you adapt fully or we just let you rot” goes straight against the liberal, left-wing views many people who advocate against taking the relationship problems of these men supposedly adhere to.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:32 PM
1

Maybe an actually liberal and left-wing society would help people not to get that far in being desperate by actually helping them at least get a chance to get into a relationship. Similarly how it helps women get a chance to get careers.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:18 PM
4

Most men don’t start as wanting sex immediately either. Many men who don’t get sex without paying for it would be more than willing to go slow if they were given a chance at all. “Lower class technicians” not being good enough and men paying entirely for dates give the impression that you simply want to maintain outdated gender norms simply because are beneficial for women.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/05/26 08:11 PM
2

And being a parent (for some, especially that of another man) is one of the greatest dealbreakers for men, making single mothers one of the few cases where women struggle to get a partner, resulting in women taking up their cause and men not liking that. And no, this is not the same as asking women to be more open to awkward men. Becoming a parent is a responsibility magnitudes greater than that of enduring the quirks of an awkward man who might not even be that awkward once he’s given a chance.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 06:37 PM
1

Which would require me to either limit my pool even further or bow before outdated gender norms just because these happen to be beneficial for women… I fail to see how anyone with supposedly liberal views can support a scenario like this, but you do you.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 06:24 PM
1

It’s not an obsession. It’s an obvious dealbreaker for many men, and one of the scenarios which forces women to do the legwork of initiating and approaching, which I think is one of the main reasons why women take up their cause so much when it comes to dating. Yes, there are some assholes who feel obligated to call single mothers failures, but most men who think it’s a dealbreaker just go on.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 12:22 PM
3

No, which is exactly why many men don’t choose single mothers.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 12:11 PM
4

There are other things, but many are not that obvious initially. A child, however, is very obvious.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:59 AM
3

Not anything, but the average woman has the chance to find a partner. I don’t see how that is a negative.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:42 AM
1

How much less likely are women with whom you share interests to expect you to pay for dates?
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:25 AM
4

Many people are not ready to be parents, and the trauma a potential breakup can bring, both for them and the child. Simple as that.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 11:21 AM
5

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22455182/ https://www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/why-bad-looks-good/202105/why-some-rape-victims-continue-to-date-their-rapist I would say “personality” should be replaced with “charisma” and “being interesting”.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/05/26 05:51 AM
-6

Neither assault nor rape are common enough to stop women from dating, and STDs are even easier to prevent than pregnancies.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 06:03 PM
-3

Ehm, no, the probability of giving birth to an unwanted child is very low and, more importantly, not lower with a man you are immediately attracted to than with someone you are not. Also, men preferring women in their twenties can also be explained by biology, but I doubt you would accept that explanation.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/26 04:38 PM
0

We may have a lot of experience about being rejected in spite of being nice and seeing a lot of men having girlfriends in spite of being assholes, but charismatic assholes.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 08:58 AM
1

Charisma is quite often both heat and water, and does outweigh kindness. And that’s what many men have a problem with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/26 08:53 AM
1

Yes, and OP did say it’s something getting popular with incels, who are an extreme example. Most women in the Global North are middle-class, and only those living in the greatest poverty die in childbirth. You don’t have to be a trophy wife to live under materially decent conditions. I’m not saying there aren’t areas of life where women don’t have it more difficult. The difference is that
/r/PurplePillDebate06/05/26 09:39 AM
6

Yes? Why is that so surprising?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 09:20 AM
0

Maybe, but then we should stop worrying about boys being influenced by red pill influencers.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 06:57 AM
–

True that.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/05/26 03:54 AM
1

So you admit manhating is actually more tolerated than womanhating, but still claim that women have it more difficult currently?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 10:26 PM
2

I did. Please, do explain how come the portion of women who are single never exceeding that of single men proves that women prefer being single? https://preview.redd.it/b6f1b5uuwzyg1.jpeg?width=675&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0fdce4c0c0d2b3fbfc11ad8e832d04b91e7dc734
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 10:06 PM
2

That still doesn’t explain the at least ten percent difference. If women preferred being single that much, the data would indicate a difference showing that. But it doesn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 03:33 PM
2

Then why are there more single men than women?
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:40 PM
2

Meaning women don’t like being single more than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/26 02:03 PM
4

Like, yes, a well-working relationship is one of the things most likely to improve the quality of your life. But this level of hypocrisy would gall me even if I was living in such a relationship (as it is case in many men here).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 07:25 PM
6

None of the leading fashion brands would look in Tess Holiday’s general direction without the body positivity movement, which is mostly supported by women claiming to represent liberal values. No one can say this interference with standards of attractiveness was fair and men’s demands for women to change theirs are not without being a hypocrite.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 10:55 AM
4

Then do what you preach, and encourage morbidly obese women to put down weight instead of pressurising fashion companies to present them as sexy. And not a word about victim blaming when your standards result in you exploited and abused.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 10:50 AM
4

Yet more women are in a relationship than men, and yes, most of these are heterosexual relationships.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:58 AM
5

Then apply your own standards, and tell Tess Holiday to quit modelling until she has a healthy BMI (which, by the way, she could have probably attained with the effort awkward men have to put into dating long ago).
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:55 AM
2

Some fundamental parts of it can’t. There are two problems here: Women are, in fact, not primarily attracted to the things they claim to be attracted to, even though this kind of attraction (being attracted to kindness and attentiveness) can be influenced. Second, there were very active attempts to influence men’s standards of what they see attractive in women by leading fashion companies. Even supposing it was unsuccessful in the end, both the intention and the effort were there. Denying simila…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/05/26 09:41 AM
1

It does. The gap between women and men is, however, nowhere near as significant as you portray it to be, especially if you take the degree to which women are attracted to antisocial behavior into account.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 10:52 AM
1

Yet at least as many women are in a relationship as men, and yes, the overwhelming majority of those relationships are with men. And it’s not simply that women tolerate these traits with grudge, but often downright disregard them as they are seen as manifestations of confidence and charisma.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/05/26 10:20 AM
1

Rewarding anti-social behavior is anti-social behavior by itself. Considering how widespread this is, it pretty much goes against your narrative of men being significantly more prone to antisocial behavior than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 10:01 PM
1

It is the truth: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1501809/full And it’s easy to talk about skew when you don’t consider this a manifestation of being edgy.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 09:31 PM
1

Then let’s get descriptive: women are often not sympathetic for many men because they prove themselves to be equally antisocial as the men you describe by rewarding these men while ignoring absolutely nurturing and kind, but less exciting men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 04:39 PM
1

So next time I hear about a woman having been exploited by an obviously problematic, but charismatic and charming man, am I allowed to say she also bears responsibility for her situation?
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:51 AM
1

By your logic, a large portion of women doesn’t deserve any sympathy either for their support of antisocial behavior. The gap exists, but is much less significant than you believe it to be, and your denial of sympathy not getting extended to these women tells much more about your bias than about any kind of grand universal truth.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 11:46 AM
1

The problem is that, even supposing the difference is as stark as you believe, women are often not bothered by this kind of behavior. Disturbingly often they even appreciate it if it’s combined with confidence and charisma. Which flies in the face of your claim about women being intrinsically more moral than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/04/26 10:51 AM
2

I do know. What you seem to miss is that that such behavior is not common among people in general, thus most men are not like that, therefore your attempt to justify disregarding men’s pleas towards women in general are not well founded. Also, many men who do behave like that actually attract women, a further proof that women in general are far from being significantly more nurturing than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 11:47 PM
1

If you would love data as much as you claim to do, you would know that the men who actually perpetrate crimes are a statistically insignificant minority of the population, and if being an edgelord is actually that common among men, women don’t seem to mind it since still more women are in a relationship than men (and yes, most of these are with men). Also, many women outright reward this kind of behavior by dating men who exhibit it. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338348374_Women_as_ac…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 11:27 PM
5

If women actually did what they preach about, bullies would stand no chance overall and kind guys would have a chance to date, even if they are awkward.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:25 AM
4

Then women should stop trying to frame the whole issue as “good women vs evil incels” and stop gaslighting people how they are mostly attracted to kindness.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:24 AM
0

This.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/04/26 08:18 AM
5

This has less to do with women being more against violence than with women being less assertive and less determined to do things physically. Many women are neck-deep in the Epstein files, lionise murderers just because they are charismatic and/or good-looking and female leaders were not much less ruthless than their male counterparts over the course of history. They were simply less frequent overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:49 PM
1

You didn’t address the issue: in a lot of cases, being an edgelord is outright rewarded if it’s combined with charisma. If it’s so, it’s often treated as a manifestation of boldness and confidence. Moreover, let’s just not pretend you can’t find examples of women supporting things at least as antisocial as those you mentioned. Does this characterise most women? At best as much as your examples characterise most men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/26 09:31 PM
0

There is no movement calling for women to see awkward men as attractive similar to what the body positivity movement is doing for unattractive women. My issue is hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 10:10 PM
0

They do, and women always reprimand them for it. There is actually an entire movement trying to portray unattractive women as attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 08:21 PM
0

No. The majority of dangerous and unhinged men have no trouble with finding a partner though.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:56 PM
2

I did. I’m still waiting for liberal society to support the cause of easening dating for men as it did for, say, the dating issues women. Life is more complex than evil “Trump/conservatives/Russians/Redpillers etc.” being on the one side and good “Democrats/liberals/Ukrainians/Liberal women etc.” being on the other.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:51 PM
2

The difference is that when women say they are victimized, liberal society hurries to their aid, especially if said victimization is done by men. Should the reverse happen, men are dismissed by the very same society as women-hating Tate-fans.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:37 PM
2

This goes for selfish women too.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:28 PM
1

Yet heaven forbid men ever say out loud obese women are unattractive. In fact, they should be presented in fashion shows so it can be pushed down on everyone’s throat how sexy they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 06:25 PM
1

Most women are not not as fat as to be immediately rejected by men.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 12:13 PM
1

Yet most women are in a relationship, in spite of all the (probably valid) claims of harassment.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 12:06 PM
3

Being in a well-working relationship is at least a very good way of improving the quality of life for the majority of people. There is a reason why most women are in a relationship, in spite of frequent complaints about at least sexual harassment. Therefore yes, making people finding relationships easier should be a cause progressive communities should aim for and denying its importance is exactly one of the double standards you advise OP to call out.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 11:43 AM
1

I would call this a necessary but not always sufficient requirement.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/04/26 11:21 AM
–

Honestly, I have never understood where this “boys will be boys” thing comes from. It’s downright outlandish for me. If anything, I saw boys getting punished much more often than girls as a lazy way of taking care of any kind of troublemaking, while even the simple thought of girl bullies was something that caused teachers to go syntax error.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/04/26 04:28 PM
1

I think they would be much more enthusiastic if they were supported by women without hesitation, like gay rights are.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 02:38 PM
0

Yes. But it did happen, against all the odds, at federal level. In part because women took up the case without hesitation.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 09:37 AM
1

If a wheelchair bound person would come public with this problem, most feminists would probably support them, at least verbally. They would definitely not meet the outright hostility men’s rights issues receive from mainstream feminists. And nobody changed anything. You belonging to a non-mainstream branch of feminism won’t make you a point of reference, exactly because you’re non-mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/04/26 12:02 AM
1

Different, but proportions matter. The mainstream is liberal, or at least claims to be. Most feminists didn’t come out a TERFs when Rowling did. And yes, mainstream feminism advocates for MANY minority groups, much more than the “there is only so much energy and time” argument would allow for. It’s just some groups which are beyond their compassion, for various reasons.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:48 PM
1

Current day mainstream feminism is claimed to be liberal, both by its most notable followers and most notable figures. TWERF and the like are not mainstream.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:40 PM
2

One of the basic tenets of liberalism is universality, which dictates that you shouldn’t be selective about your advocacy based on skin colour, gender and/or sexual orientation. If you advocate for most groups except for some having a specific skin colour, gender and sexual orientation, you are reasonably suspected of being biased against said group.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:34 PM
0

The very fact that gay marriage, which is actually something most Christian denominations are theologically against, was legalised at all caused a huge uproar among conservative Christians, yet it was carried out. Religious freedom could encompass banning gay marriage, but it can’t anymore. The religious resistance argument seems weak, especially considering that those religions which do demand circumcision are definitely not the majority.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:27 PM
2

The problem is that many feminist groups did come to the aid of several minority groups and advocated for their causes without even having to be asked, such as LGBTQ+ rights without having to be asked. This has never happened with heterosexual white men. Yes, most oppressors came from that group, especially regarding the oppression of women. Still, the thinking that heterosexual white men have no issues systemically affecting them and that they don’t need any help with it should disappear.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:15 PM
-1

So was having gay marriage legalised. And yet… A large part of this probably comes from the fact that heterosexual white men were oppressors for such a long time that even the proposition that they as a group might be disadvantaged in certain areas of life comes off as outright unbelievable for liberal groups.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 11:06 PM
0

The feminist attitude that women as a group cannot be held collectively responsible for anything as men as a group made a huge contribution to this flocking.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:59 PM
2

If people would put effort into highlighting how big of a bullshit it is theologically, the opinion about it may change.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:51 PM
2

No, it’s a remnant of 19th century anti-sexuality bullshit. Most Christian denominations don’t demand circumcision.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:49 PM
0

That’s a theologically weak argument, and most people know it. The overwhelming majority of the US population belongs to Christian denominations which don’t require circumcision. The whole thing is a remnant of the 19th century anti-sexuality craze.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 10:46 PM
1

Yeah, and she was absolutely not exploiting the situation by asking for more money knowing he would absolutely pay it. That’s just not how exploitation by the wealthier party looks like.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/04/26 05:24 PM
–

I would like women who love preaching about how men should put an effort into becoming more attractive would actually try to do what they are preaching about. This is not to legitimate bullying, but the fact that women are so ready to dismiss the unattractiveness of men as something only the affected men can change while downright refusing to take responsibility for their own unattractiveness is a bit galling.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 02:39 PM
–

The majority of the US population is not fat because they have an uncontrollable hunger. That’s just biologically not true.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 02:05 PM
–

No, it’s not. If women can preach about the importance of changing and developing themselves, they should do what they preach about.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/04/26 01:59 PM
2

I have nothing against spending money as long as I’m not expected to spend more money than her.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:27 PM
2

Most of the women who don’t date are already in a relationship. And yes, most of those are at least also with men. There is nothing wrong with investing in a date as long as the investment is equal. You are not morally allowed to exploit the desire of others for a relationship to save money.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 04:23 PM
2

Way to adhere to gender norms which benefit women for your personal benefit.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:54 PM
2

It’s like telling you are not entitled to save money at the expense of others who desire a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:50 PM
1

Because tons and tons and TONS of people want a relationship. It doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t do away with the practice of them having to spend disproportionately more money on dating than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:39 PM
5

Because tons and tons and TONS of people want a relationship. It doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t do away with the practice of them having to spend disproportionately more money on dating than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate14/04/26 03:38 PM
-2

I mean a large segment of the body positivity movement does put a lot of effort into depicting undesirable women as desirable.. It is pretty mainstream, for women at least.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 06:06 PM
1

Most societies in the global North have money based economies, collectives and barter systems are not a point of reference. And yes, beyond a point, redistribution has no effect. But that doesn’t reaching that point through redistribution is not advisable.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:48 PM
1

Voluntarily or involuntarily?
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:31 PM
0

But it’s a basic necessity for people, and redistributing it means you take some of this necessity from others who are affected by having less of it.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:24 PM
3

It is a distribution of money and opportunities to gain money, which pretty much does affect people, since these don’t exist in a vacuum.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:20 PM
0

The money involved does affect people. By your logic, demanding an employer to employ more women who don’t want to dedicate most of their attention to their job is robbing the employer of their money.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:16 PM
3

Neither are career opportunities, according to the same logic. You are not entitled to the money of an employer. All employers need workers who would dedicate most of their lives to their work. Does that mean women have to choose between having a career and having children? Yes. Is this an acceptable mindset? No, but many do use this logic way too often.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 05:09 PM
-2

“The hypocrisy comes from right "free market" people who want a state mandated girlfriend like a communist” Honestly, those wanting “socialism” on the labor market but demanding capitalism at dating are not better overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/04/26 04:58 PM
2

Spontaneous desire is human. The question still isn’t if male desire is active or reactive. It’s about female desire, so whether men are more attracted to supermodels is irrelevant.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 05:56 PM
2

The question wasn’t if men have spontaneous desire. It was if women had it.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/26 09:22 AM
1

There are more women in a relationship than men, and yes, most of these are heterosexual relationships. So either women are content with not being loved or they are actually loved.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/04/26 07:43 AM
1

It means exactly that men find a much wider range of women attractive than you think. Also, I talked about forming long term relationships. Yes, physical attraction is important in those, but it can abate. Physical attraction is usually the first step for men, and being young, relatively well kept and not morbidly obese is not something most women up to their late thirties struggle with.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 11:18 PM
0

Men are much less picky about women than you presume. Even an average woman in her mid-30s gets more attention than an average man with a decent job but, say, no desire to become more than what that job requires. A woman has much less to do to form a relationship in which her physical appearance doesn’t matter as much later than a man has to do to get into a relationship where charisma and money don’t matter as much later.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/04/26 10:32 PM
1

If verbal abuse also counts, up to 80% of women experiences sexual harassment. Yet more women are in a relationship than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 10:14 AM
2

So being abused to the degree the average woman is abused is still not enough for them to stop dating, proving that being alone is still worse than being abused as much as the average woman is? If so, we agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/04/26 08:10 AM
1

How does that answer the question?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:20 PM
1

But women who continue dating in spite of the dangers probably do.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 10:19 PM
3

I never said I would try literally everything. But I would be willing to go through what the average woman has to go through to find a compatible partner.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 12:03 PM
3

Since I’m not gay, sexual compatibility is kinda dubious.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/04/26 11:58 AM
5

Autistic women are better at masking in a large part because women leaving behind traditional gender roles is encouraged at least by liberal society, and autistic women quite often do exactly that. Most women, regardless of political and social affiliations, still expect men to fulfill traditional gender roles if they want to be seen as a suitable partner, which is often made impossible by autism. Also, nobody says you should stay in an abusive relationship forever. But being able to go through …
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 08:24 PM
9

If I had to go through a few abusive relationships to get a loving and sexually compatible partner at the end, I would go for it. And so do women who still date in spite of the dangers of sexual abuse.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:34 PM
11

Just to be clear, I’m not saying abuse of women isn’t a serious issue. But being without romance and/or sex seems to be even worse for everyone who is not asexual/aromantic.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 04:11 PM
1

It’s not about being together with your abuser, it’s about being willing get through abusers to get an loving partner instead of choosing celibacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 11:18 AM
9

Depends on the method, but if you include verbal harassment, it can be up to 80%. Yet most women do date. In fact, 46% of autistic women are in a relationship, which again implies that they are willing to put up with some abusive relationships if they can find a loving partner in exchange later.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:44 AM
16

Why do women themselves continue dating in spite of the constant threat of sexual abuse, according to statistics?
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:22 AM
9

Some is the keyword here. Most women do date in spite of being exposed to regular sexual abuse, based on statistics.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:15 AM
10

Because if it’s as unsafe as you think and abuse is at least as bad as being alone, one would presume women, especially autistic women, would simply quit dating. They don’t, which implies that either the abuse is not as serious as they claim to be or being alone is still the worse option.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 10:03 AM
9

Yet it doesn’t stop them from dating, which does imply that even women subconsciously think that being without a partner is still worse than being as abused as they are.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 09:57 AM
13

Hot take, but honestly it’s not as obvious as you believe. As an autistic person, I have experienced abuse and conflict my entire life. If I had to put up with additional abuse in exchange of being able to find a romantic partner, I would take it. Life itself is toxic for autistic people, the possibility of finding a partner is worth enduring some more.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/03/26 09:42 AM
2

I mean that women demonstrably stated and state that kindness is the most important aspect for them while looking for a partner. Which is, again demonstrably, not true. You can have the excuse of limited options under poor economic conditions, but the situation is not much better under any circumstances.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 07:08 PM
5

If being a felon is not a negative enough to outweigh any positives they might have, then socially awkward people are better off without pairing up with people who think like this. If a criminal whose actions are known to their environment is more attractive to you than any awkward, but decent person, you really are the last one who should talk about introspection.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:49 PM
1

Exactly.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:56 AM
1

Problem is that being virtuous is not the best way to draw women’s attention even in an entirely middle class environment either.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:44 AM
5

No one mentioned not having any positives. A lot of romantically and/or sexually lonely men are decent people with decent jobs and friends. And yes, if you would rather date a felon than a socially awkward man, the problem is with you, even by your own logic.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 06:31 AM
1

The difference is that men are much more open about their preferences. Women do tend to claim that kindness is the most important aspect for them in a relationship, while it quite probably isn’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/03/26 04:21 AM
1

A lot of wealthy people became wealthy because they offer something which people actually want. The argument that these people don’t own anyone a cent because they managed to create their own success and others didn’t holds exactly as much water as saying unsuccessful men are not owned more chance when they do exactly what women claim to be attractive.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/03/26 04:16 PM
–

Humans can develop themselves. Similarly how men are expected to go to therapy, women can bring themselves to become better people by consciously trying to appreciate different things with attractiveness if it leads to them being attracted to bad men more often than good men.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/03/26 01:35 PM
2

I almost asked out a girl with a slightly troll-like face and body odor. A friend of mine hung out with her more often, so they got together faster. Women have claimed to evaluate kindness the most while looking for long term relationships the most in polls. Men never said anything like that about obese women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:58 PM
3

I know. Being kind and respectful should be some of the most attractive traits in men.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:51 PM
4

Maybe if it was what made someone attractive to begin with, more women had the chance to be with loving and good partners.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:46 PM
5

Most men are capable of talking about different topics. They might not be cracking jokes which make the whole room rolling with laughter or they might not sing so good at karaoke nights that they make you wonder how they haven’t started a singing career yet, but they might be able to open up to you and make a valuable partner who loves you honestly and is able to maintain a well functioning relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:26 PM
3

Actually, the thing is that being nice and respectful are the least important things for many women. They can do as they please, but they really shouldn’t say they haven’t been warned.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:18 PM
2

I’m willing to bet many those guys become angry and “misogynistic” when they realize that being nice and decent is simply not enough to be seen as a partner, contrary to what women themselves claim.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:12 PM
5

So women think there aren’t enough stable, reliable men to begin with, but they are still more likely to be in a relationship than men (and yes, most of those are heterosexual relationships), simply because they prefer the company of men who they find entertaining… Honestly, the problem here does lay in being stable and decent not being enough for men to be attractive to women.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/03/26 01:06 PM
1

Prostitution can very much be a need for people who can’t experience sexual intimacy any other way. The fact that you provide this experience for people, many of whom are probably very grateful for it, makes it a perfectly legitimate job if it’s served to those who actually need it.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 09:25 PM
1

By that logic, buying any products or services which involve workers risking discomfort, injury or even death should be equally condemned. And there is a lot of those. Unless you think sexual trauma deserves more empathy than injury or death.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/03/26 04:52 PM
5

That’s my greatest problem about statements like this too. Sex work does objectify people, but so do many other jobs, even to a greater extent. Many people routinely risk life and limb so we can enjoy the quality of life we currently do. Unless people against sex work consider physical injuries or death less serious than sexual trauma, they shouldn’t condemn the customers of prostitutes more than they condemn the customers of roofers, loggers or maintenance workers. And no, this doesn’t justify …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/03/26 02:10 PM
2

A fallacy which won’t stop being a fallacy just because many believe it. Going to sex workers can have very legitimate reasons. A polite, well-mannered and progressive man not being able to experience one of the most joyful experiences in life is certainly one of these.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/03/26 06:47 PM
–

You are a very good person then. But only a drop in the ocean I’m afraid.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 10:59 AM
–

The body positivity movement needs an equivalent with a movement trying to show that men different from the standards of women also can be attractive. And it’s not necessarily about appearance, but things which women find more attractive, that is, charisma, success, financial status and the like. There has never been a movement similar to body positivity trying to depict awkward, autistic men as attractive to women as, say, Tess Holiday was supposed to be attractive to men. And believe me, autis…
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 10:54 AM
–

I think they are delusional. There is a reason why the body positivity movement also puts a huge emphasis on trying to present overweight women as sexy and attractive. Some of these are unable to present themselves as attractive simply because of their excessive fat, but the intention is definitely there.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 10:50 AM
–

“I guess the point would be to have an internal belief that your bald head (or whatever feature) is beautiful which is not reliant on external validation of any kind.“ Which would be delusional. Most people simply can’t persuade themselves that they are valuable in any way without external confirmation. That’s just deceiving yourself.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/03/26 10:40 AM
1

Obviously those who don’t expect others to pay don’t have the same mindset as those who don’t. What other reasons do they have besides those mentioned?
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 01:45 PM
1

Considering how you yourself stated that most women under 50 don’t want children, it’s either that or (in light of the latter) misaligned instincts. Middle class women are having it nowhere near as bad as 75% of them not being able to share dating costs.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 01:37 PM
1

Adherence (conscious or unconscious) to outdated gender norms expected from men and no incentive from liberal society to voice the need to change this because of the fear of being labelled misogynistic.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 01:27 PM
1

Compatibility can be because of misguided standards, and if your standards are demonstrably harmful for a large group of people, then yes, you are morally obliged to change them. First, evolutionary explanations are amoral. For a man, evolutionary wise, it’s the best to find a woman who is at her physical peak, just like women seek resources from men. You can’t bring up one without mentioning the other, unless you use double standards. Which presuming that most age-gap relationships are predator…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 12:41 PM
1

Giving an equal chance for everyone should be at least a moral incentive. If everyone leaves you behind because of outdated premises, it’s their fault, not yours. Regarding fertility, this seems like weasel wording. Women are significantly less likely to have healthy children in their 20s and early 30s than later. And that’s evolutionary exactly the same as women demanding resources. Predatory age gap couples are like that, but a man can seek a younger wife exactly because he wants children and …
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 01:41 AM
0

“there will be so much more women than men in society, that women gonna start competing who can be the best trad wife again, in order to not be the one who’s left over.“ This should be programmed to appear with epilepsy inducing shining letters to everyone who claims hypergamy is defensible.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 12:58 AM
2

Men wanting to have sex with younger women is also “just biology”, you know. If you oppose that but support female hypergamy morally, be warned that you can’t have it both ways.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 12:48 AM
2

Exactly. Believing that you are more likely to expect better treatment from a man who can choose (and therefore get rid of you exactly because of that) than from a man who can’t (and who is therefore incentivised to put a huge effort into a relationship they have finally been able to get) doesn’t hold more water than explicitly expecting a better treatment from a lonely man.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/03/26 12:38 AM
1

Leaving people behind when they didn’t do anything to be left behind and you could adjust your own preferences to include them is both emotional laziness and abuse. Emotional neglect is considered a form of abuse. Men wanting to have children are, by evolutionary logic, completely justified in trying to have children with a woman who can carry a child without having health problems. The probability of that is the highest with women in their twenties or up to mid thirties. Employers are, from a t…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:57 PM
1

You being down for it doesn’t change the fact that liberal society, by and large, doesn’t support men to the extent it supports women. The notion that oppressed groups cannot behave oppressively themselves is one of the most harmful fallacies in history.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 11:06 PM
0

If feminists refuse to be equal when it comes to things that traditionally benefit women, such as splitting the bill, it’s about female supremacy. Gender equality is not about men kowtowing to the desires and preferences of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:50 PM
1

Nobody, or at least most people, not wanting to be your friend does harm you severely psychologically and it can be seen as a form of psychological abuse if you haven’t done anything to deserve it. If a custom causes a large swath of people to be friendless, it’s possible that the c And since you yourself have admitted that you can date without having to reproduce, you don’t have to take any of those things into account. Or you can, but then stop calling middle-aged men preferring women in their…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 10:43 PM
1

If nobody wants to be your friend because of some outdated concept about piercings being harmful, it’s up to them to stop excluding someone because of it. You are not entitled to your preferences if you know you are causing harm with them and it takes no serious effort to change them. And since the evolutionary based justifications of women wanting men to bear most of the burden of initiating a relationship are outdated, as you have proven it, exactly because feminism has managed to convince soc…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 04:59 PM
1

I’m still reacting to your reply, not your post.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:08 PM
1

If most people avoid you because you have piercings, then yes, the problem is with them, not you (unless piercings demonstrably go hand in hand with serious psychological or physical issues, which they don’t). Positives can and should also be considered morally binding. The way men have to bear the majority of the burden at the initial stages of dating is problematic, it can and should be changed.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 03:02 PM
1

One would think if you believe feminism isn’t supposed to be about that, you would have denied it when someone outright states that…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:51 PM
1

It’s about your reply, not your overall post.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:39 PM
4

Splitting the bill on a date is subjugation of your free will only if you are ridiculously entitled.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:37 PM
2

She practically agreed that feminists don’t actually care about equality. Again, I don’t think this is what feminism is supposed to be about, but she seems to agree to it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:33 PM
2

Feminism is supposedly about equality, which does presuppose pointing the same force at a different group. Otherwise, you deny the freedom of choice from the group to the same degree it is denied from your group.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:11 PM
2

She didn’t deny that feminism is not about equality, but female superiority. I don’t think that’s what real feminism is about, but she seemingly does.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:08 PM
6

Or feminists should start holding women adhering to outdated dating norms accountable even if they benefit women. It’s supposed to be equality, after all, not female supremacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:35 AM
4

If you openly claim that is what feminism actually is, do you actually claim that it’s actually female supremacism disguised as progressivism?
/r/PurplePillDebate28/02/26 02:31 AM
3

But it’s mostly them who demand their partner to be always at least as productive and well-earning as them.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/02/26 03:01 PM
2

About point 1 and 2: supposedly anti-red pill women do have quite similar beliefs, with the statements about women replaced with similar ones about men in point 2. The difference is that women making these claims are rarely ever held accountable for them by the very same liberal society which is very quick to condemn Red Pill and its indeed misogynistic elements. Therefore, an ideologization of women's behavior on part of both liberal society and many liberal women does try to overrationalize wo…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 10:06 PM
0

The important nuance is that sex positivity regarding male sexuality per se is often not only not supported, but outright demonised by liberal society.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 09:19 AM
0

True. Unfortunately, when mainstream society talks about sex positivity, it’s only positivity about female sexuality in the majority of cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 09:17 AM
1

Interestingly enough, I see as much sex negativity from liberal society as “angry sexless basement dwellers”. There was a post here not long ago about British legislation regarding things affecting mostly male sexuality (prostitution, porn, even erotic anime art), which strongly implies that these legislators actually believe all of that is inherently exploitative and a witch hunt is the only solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/02/26 09:14 AM
3

For me, sexual and sexually experienced is a plus, but not a must. Having commitment problems is bad, but so is chastity, both are incompatible with the type of reltionship I want.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/02/26 08:49 PM
1

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate08/02/26 09:45 AM
–

Then you shouldn’t talk about children when none are involved.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 02:06 PM
–

You don’t consider that child and overall mortality were different from what it is now. When having enough children is a conscious and necessary aim, then yes, men are going to choose younger women to have as many children as possible. Now men do find younger women more attractive, but that doesn’t mean they will leave their aging wives as soon as they see a younger woman available.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 01:59 PM
–

What exactly is a “child” for you? A 30 year old woman going out with a 52 year old man doesn’t involve children by anyone’s standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/02/26 01:47 PM
–

Yep, the hypocrisy is strong here.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/02/26 01:40 PM
3

I don’t think lovebombing is actually that effective (if anything, it’s rather repulsive to most women), but even if it was, putting all that effort into forming the relationship and then realizing that your partner is actually incompatible with you is not a joyride for men either. But it’s a part of dating, unfortunately.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/02/26 06:03 AM
5

It’s just semantics at this point. A lack of sexual attention in the long run causes serious suffering and needs to be addressed, regardless of where exactly it is supposed to be located in the pyramid.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 10:38 AM
1

Most will, yes.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 10:32 AM
1

Show me 100 28-year old virgin men and 100 28-year old virgin women and ask them if they suffer from the lack of sex. I guarantee you the difference will be almost nil.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/01/26 10:30 AM
0

Then why do sites of advocacy groups for disabled women highlight that it’s everyone’s right to satisfy their sexual desires and outright encourages disabled women to use the services of sex workers? Sex can be bad for women, but the orgasm gap didn’t stop women from trying have satisfying sex, since, again, women don’t seem to have less sex than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 10:07 PM
2

Incels have to live at least fifteen years from the age of eighteen without sex, and they are the chief subject of this sub, so at least if you criticise their desires with your argument, it is moot.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 07:01 PM
2

A negligible one. Most women would be as starved of sex as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 06:51 PM
2

Short term, maybe, but if you extend the observation period to, say, fifteen years, starting from an age of 18, the difference will be negligible.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 06:39 PM
2

This distinction is far from being as sharp as you think. Nobody wanting you for years with everyone else around you finding a partner is at least as painful psychologically as physiologically, and it does become a psychological need so strong that it practically affects your psychological health as much as any serious psychological issue. I have never seen any proof of women tolerating involuntary celibacy as much better as women disparaging men for their desires claim them to be. It’s simply t…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 05:46 PM
0

The implication that sex is not a basic need for women is false. Sexual hunger takes longer to kick in with women, but it does kick in.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 03:39 PM
-1

This is only one part of the problem. There is a difference between the sex drive of men and women, but it’s not large enough for women to be able to tolerate involuntary celibacy much better than men. What this difference does account for is the fact that women in their prime experience involuntary celibacy so rarely that they almost never realize what a basic need sexuality is. Women resort to very similar methods when they experience years long involuntary celibacy. Studies also show that wom…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 02:20 PM
2

So that’s why sites describing the rights of disabled women talk about the rights of using the services of sex workers and conventionally unattractive passport sisters go to Jamaica to get local gold digger boys… Women are simply not exposed to involuntary celibacy due to being able to find a sex partner in their prime. Those who are not attractive enough resort exactly to the same methods unsatisfied men do.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:38 PM
1

Lower than that of men. It doesn’t mean non-asexual women would tolerate years of involuntary celibacy much better than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/01/26 01:30 PM
1

Do you think you could have shaped Wilson to be a good partner? Felons are exactly the danger you expect yourself to be protected from.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 09:38 PM
1

They are quadrillions of times more likely to be good partners than convicted felons and mass murderers.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 09:16 PM
1

Bold of you to assume that non-dark triad men whose only “crime” is not looking you in the eye and being awkward are somehow more dangerous than this) or even Wilson. You are not really helping refute claims about hybristophilia here…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/01/26 02:41 PM
1

This. At least I won’t waste my time and effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 03:22 PM
5

True.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/01/26 03:21 PM
–

Liberal society, the one responsible and truly capable of doing something for the development of humanity, fights misogyny, while does much less to fight misandry. If even the most progressive parts of society ignore several problems affecting men, what hope is left?
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 07:47 AM
1

If anything, I would be happy if people were more tolerant of men earning less than their female partners. Demanding men to be always more competent than women is one of the greatest cancers of dating currently.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/01/26 12:26 AM
2

Especially since nowadays, even bridge trolls have to be seen as beautiful, but for an average man it is strongly advised to start with actually below average women. I know OP means well, but the fact that many average women feel themselves above men who fulfil all the requirements they have for a good a good partner which makes men appreciate dating advice from women ever less.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 03:34 PM
–

Hell nah. There are some things which are naturally more geared towards men (such as bodybuilding), but overall, if anything, several subcultures, such nerds, should spread as far as possible. It’s very sad that even nowadays, even otherwise educated and well-situated people see anime and video games as if they were for kids and not pastime activities other educated and well-off people can enjoy and make their lives richer with.
/r/PurplePillDebate24/01/26 01:22 PM
–

Treating romance and sexuality as something not a need and trying to make those people who are excluded from them believe it’s okay to be excluded from them is kind of similar to reeducation camps aimed at “converting” gay people to the “right way” and is probably one of the reasons liberalism is losing men at an alarming rate. “Ask me how I know” They won’t ask you, because you don’t know. There is not a single human being on this planet who would not feel miserable if they knew they are destin…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/01/26 10:57 PM
2

A lot of these men probably did try to change. The problem is that, contrary to men’s expectations towards women, women’s preferences are treated as something not to be interfered with. Therefore, women are often dismissive of men who don’t fulfill every single requirement they have, as it can be seen from the case of your friend. Misogyny of course doesn’t help and should be fought against, but not every criticism of women’s dating behavior stems from misogyny.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/01/26 07:37 AM
3

As the other commenter noted, dating doesn’t suck equally for everyone. And again, many men are initially open to getting to know women before. The problem is that they are never given the opportunity to date, let alone to have sex and/or relationships. The prospects of many red-pilled men are much worse to begin with than you seem to believe.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:19 PM
3

Most women have to leave for maternity leave for a relatively long time, and companies are known for dispreferring women who plan to have children soon because of it. Yet often they are at least compelled to employ them at least by social pressure, if not by law. Unwanted pregnancy, STDs and a lack of orgasms all can be solved (the former two by being honest about your health and using protection, the latter by honest communication and men being open to learn how to please their partners). Very …
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 09:11 PM
7

I think in a way, it is. If rich people are not completely entitled to their money, people better-off at dating also own those who are less fortunate at least more chance to start a relationship and/or have sex. If nothing else, prostitution could be regulated, made completely safe for everyone involved and legitimized. If we accept people risking life and limb on a daily basis as a part of their jobs, legitimizing entirely safe prostitution with little-to-no risks for anyone is a completely leg…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:58 PM
2

Women wanting to have children can get jobs which make it possible for them to make ends meet. What they probably won’t be able to pursue is a great career . One could argue that women should be willing to choose between that and having children, and ensuring that they have the opportunity to afford both means violating the economic independence of big companies. An argument I would not support actually, but one I think that has exactly the same validity as not giving less fortunate men in datin…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:50 PM
8

As many people should have the same chances as possible. Your pursuit to financial stability can also be viewed through very different perspectives. A Reaganite libertarian would say laws forcing companies to take the risk of financial losses due to having to employ young women who go for a maternity leave soon or Denmark even providing apartments and a relatively decent income for you until you find a job are all serious violations of the economic independence of hard-working people. Progressiv…
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:16 PM
3

So if a company complained that having to employ young women who want to start a family is a financial burden for it, would you say it’s not an infringement on the rights of the company as an independent economic actor? I would say companies should be obliged to employ young women in spite of those losses, but would never say a complete laissez-faire in dating is any more tolerable.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 08:01 PM
11

Sex with someone who is willing to do it with you is one of the most fulfilling experiences in life, especially if it happens in a relationship.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:46 PM
–

You can have live a fulfilling life without your financial independence too. Women themselves result to male prostitutes or become passport sisters if they have to live in involuntary celibacy. They are lucky they don’t have to experience it as often as men.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:43 PM
3

You could survive without your financial independence.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:36 PM
7

The issue really is whether you would care about their misery if they were as progressive and feminist as it would suffice for you to call them good people. Because more often than not, the answer is no. And exactly that’s why many of those initially decent men turn to red pill and misogyny. I’m happy if you are not one of those women. But many of them are, unfortunately, not like you.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/01/26 07:35 PM
4

Nah. In fact, I would be all over the moon. This not only presupposes that she is willing to initiate, but that she loves me so much that she goes against conventions.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/01/26 09:33 AM
2

You are a good person.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 10:04 AM
1

A lot of shy men did try to talk to women before. They repeatedly face rejection because, contrary to what they generally claim, they appreciate assertiveness much more.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 10:02 AM
2

This word needs more women like you.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 07:30 AM
0

Men being forced to always initiate by social norms upheld by women too is probably a huge part of the problem though. His condition may not have always been this serious, but was worsened by several not very kind rejections. Before that, he could have been better at talking to women without having been additionally traumatized. Way too many people don’t understand how devastating frequent rejections can be.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/01/26 07:28 AM
1

Because liberal society, the one which is the most likely to call out and combat bigotry and intolerance, tends to ignore homophobia coming from women, while constantly holding men accountable for it. And that’s practically the scenario with several social issues. The double standards don’t get lost on the male audience, who understandably lose their trust in liberal ideas, however good they otherwise are.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/01/26 10:40 PM
1

So you never experienced what those people experience. You can still communicate how you like sex with your hookup partner and then have good sex. You can’t do that when your partner is literally no one.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 05:27 PM
1

Could you have had at least sex if you had really wanted to?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 05:16 PM
1

Women can’t tolerate that no one wants to have sex with them either. They just don’t experience the situation by and large.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 05:08 PM
3

Yes, women also pay for it if they have nothing to lose. It doesn’t mean they are not in a problematic situation, often beyond their control. “Sex workers – are workers who offer sex and sexual experiences to people in exchange for money or other things of value. People with disability have the same rights to access sex work services as everyone else. For many people with disability, accessing a sex worker can be therapeutic and beneficial for their health.” https://oursite.wwda.org.au/sex-and-y…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:56 PM
5

Not getting any voluntary sexual or romantic attention from anyone you find attractive is not voluntary celibacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:39 PM
5

Then let’s call it no voluntary romantic and/or sexual attention on part of people you are attracted to. Women don’t tolerate it better than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:33 PM
7

So women don’t tolerate involuntary celibacy better than men? Good, then you don’t dispute that.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:15 PM
7

Keeping things secret is not as easy nowadays. And the main point is that women don’t tolerate involuntary celibacy better than men. They just don’t experience it as often.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:11 PM
1

Says someone who never have to risk at least social ostracism to do it. You have pretty much proven my point.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 04:03 PM
1

Pretty much does. Having to resort to something which goes at least with social ostracism does not imply that getting out of inceldom was something easily done for men. Involuntary celibacy is a very serious situation for those who have to deal with it. Women mostly simply don’t have to, that’s why it’s so easy for them to dismiss it as nothing.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 03:44 PM
1

So men have to risk at least being severely shamed for something women can get without any problem? Right, not being an incel is very easy…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 03:08 PM
1

When mainstream society shames them for it even in places where it isn’t illegal? And even if that wasn’t an issue, do you think visiting prostitutes is the same as being in a genuine romantic relationship?
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 03:00 PM
1

The fact that women in average are still more in relationships than men contradicts this. No one forces these women to be with their partners. Also, this is still only voluntary celibacy. I was talking about years long involuntary celibacy.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 02:55 PM
4

There are literally more women than men in relationships. Nothing implies women would tolerate years long involuntary celibacy than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 02:01 PM
5

There are more women in a relationship than men. Even if all of that is true, it doesn’t stop women from dating by and large.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 07:14 AM
75

Women claimed to value kindness the most in long term relationships. Not financial status, not charisma, but kindness. https://www.businessinsider.com/what-women-really-look-for-in-a-partner-study-research-2019-7#:~:text=Researchers%20analyzed%20the%20answers%20from,72.3%25%20of%20women%2C%20respectively I don’t think they claimed the truth, either intentionally or unintentionally. What the study and your question together highlight is that women’s standards are often very different from what th…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/12/25 12:10 AM
0

Feminism disregarding and oftentimes outright downplaying the issue of woman on man abuse is harmful towards men.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/12/25 06:15 PM
0

If it’s done by Christians, circumcision is not a religious practice, or at least not one practiced by the most common denominations. I don’t think it can be protected by any law about religious freedom in the majority of cases in the US.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 02:21 AM
1

Women do claim it’s especially kindness, not charisma, not look or monetary status which they value the most in long term relationships. https://www.businessinsider.com/what-women-really-look-for-in-a-partner-study-research-2019-7#:~:text=Researchers%20analyzed%20the%20answers%20from,72.3%25%20of%20women%2C%20respectively.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 01:08 AM
1

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate27/12/25 12:53 AM
1

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 05:45 PM
1

Yes, and intimate partners also have more access to their partners than strangers do. By your logic, since men in general kill other men, you can also blame proximity instead of gender for the gender imbalance in intimate partner homicides.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 02:01 AM
4

Even statistics refute the claim that women are better at handling involuntary singleness than men. Even according to the most conservative estimates, there are some 10% more women in relationships than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 01:33 AM
7

OP also highlights that the real problem is the juxtaposition of single men and women and the hypocritical claim that women take romantic and/or sexual loneliness much better than men. Yes, intimacy is a basic need and yes, an actually developed and liberal society would try to help those who lack it instead of putting all responsibility on them by only giving them advice about what they should develop about themselves (not necessarily a bad thing by itself, but mostly worthless without meaningf…
/r/PurplePillDebate26/12/25 01:26 AM
3

Men being expected to initiate, be proactive and successful under all circumstances even by supposedly liberal people is not a lie. Neither is the fact that liberal society, the one which otherwise does the most for the development of humanity, is reluctant to hold women as a group accountable for anything in the same vein as it does with men. Add to that the indeed hard work of socializing autistic people and you have what we currently have.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/12/25 01:36 AM
-1

I meant there is a difference between gang-bangs and piss sex specifically.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:52 PM
2

No truer words have been spoken, I must say.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:47 PM
-1

There is a difference, but wouldn't you call someone messed up if they "only" watched specifically bestiality porn instead of actually committing bestiality? Also, gang-bangs and piss sex are not exactly at the same level of depravity inho.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:44 PM
1

Agree, but then say this to several women here who regularly shame men for watching porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:38 PM
3

"It's not porn if it's a fictional novel" Since when? Written pornography is a thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/12/25 02:35 PM
1

Certainly…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 07:52 PM
1

It seems you have no arguments left.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 07:26 PM
2

Not in this area of life. Admitting there are some issues which affect men and their solution depends in a large part on women won’t make anti-liberals right about everything, or even most things, actually.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 07:00 PM
1

Of course they don’t do it out of altruism even in the case of women. But liberal society pays too much attention to women’s issues for them not to be able to ignore them.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:40 PM
1

It proves that men do follow fashion and that their representation in the body positivity movement is at least extremely low compared to that of women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 06:10 PM
1

There has never been an open movement akin to the body positivity movement or fat feminism. Some people did try to aid awkward men, but they did it individually.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 05:51 PM
1

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/391342478_The_evolution_of_the_media_image_of_Victoria's_Secret_Angels_the_collaborative_development_of_feminism_and_the_all-media_environment “A total of 182 valid questionnaires were collected in this study, all of which had watched Victoria's Secret fashion shows, of which 55.5% were female and 44.5% were male, covering ages below 18 (7.14%), 18-29 (36.81%), 30-39 (32.97%), 40-49 (17.58%). People aged 50 and above (5.49%), staff (65.38%) and students (…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 05:42 PM
1

No. But I presume fashion psychologists do.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:58 PM
1

Then what don’t you understand: “Vermeer sees research focusing primarily on women and the impact of body positivity on them, but also on the impact of social media on their self-image, eating disorders and self-confidence. "It's not that men don't have image issues, it just seems like researchers and [in this case] fashion brands don't pay much attention to them," she tells FashionUnited.”?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:48 PM
1

Open the links.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:42 PM
2

Says who? Any other attempts at rebuttal beside empty claims?
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:31 PM
2

First of all, by and large, no, body positivity seems to exclude men. https://fashionmagazine.com/style/plus-size-male-models/ https://fashionunited.uk/news/fashion/what-s-happening-with-the-plus-size-men-s-fashion-market/2024022874333 Second, it was an example of a movement supported by liberal society very obviously intervening in the preferences of others.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 04:02 PM
–

It has been a movie trope at the very best. It has never been given the moralistic load of helping people in need inherent in the body positivity movement.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 03:09 PM
–

I’m not sure, as body positivity movement itself has a dubious effect. Nevertheless, the notion that “trying to influence the sexual preferences of others is unethical” is at least hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 01:44 PM
–

No. https://www.psypost.org/how-a-woman-dresses-affects-how-other-women-view-her-male-friendships-study-suggests/ https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article-abstract/37/6/921/1868588?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false And calling women undesirable is much less acceptable than doing the same with men.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 01:36 PM
–

Because you can’t claim “you can’t influence people’s preferences” when there are obvious systemic attempts to do exactly that when it comes to women. But I’ll go further: the “you won’t die without sex” argument has exactly the same merits as the “you won’t die without financial independence” argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 01:34 PM
–

And those who can’t for various reasons deserve the same treatment as morbidly obese women who are featured in fashion magazines. All women’s issues are taken up by society, regardless of how small a minority they are. Enough of the double standards, please.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 01:17 PM
–

When you see liberal society getting mobilized for women’s issues (a right thing by itself), but stubbornly refuses to do the same for men’s issues, you can’t help but note that advice is not enough.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/12/25 11:30 AM
6

Problem is that women regularly imply or even openly declare that they like kindness the most, when it’s obviously not true. That would be bad enough by itself, but liberal society, the one which indeed usually does the most for the development of humanity, mostly considers women at the very worst the lesser evil compared to heterosexual men, and usually their word as a group is taken for granted and sometimes even as instructions for practices. Men lack this influence on the single most impactf…
/r/PurplePillDebate12/12/25 03:58 PM
1

“Man up and endure the pain, however many rejections you have got” is not only cruel, but psychologically not tenable either.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 08:16 AM
1

Women dress for men at least as much as for other women. https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article-abstract/37/6/921/1868588?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false https://www.psypost.org/how-a-woman-dresses-affects-how-other-women-view-her-male-friendships-study-suggests/ Yes, I agree that prostitution by itself shouldn’t be condemned by anyone. But it’s not necessarily predatory, and neither is pornography. There are many porn companies featuring actors absolutely content with what they’re doing. And …
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 08:15 AM
2

It does, because you never have been in the situation of being constantly rejected and receiving at the very best only very few positive feedbacks. Because then you would know why your point doesn’t stand.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:57 AM
1

Then stop featuring morbidly obese women in fashion shows and magazines, stop judging men for watching porn featuring younger women or overall, stop judging men for visiting prostitutes if it happens without any harm or coercion and stop judging age-gap couples if the younger party is older than 21 and the gap is not larger than, say, twelve years.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:53 AM
1

Yes, I mentioned that earlier. Your safety is something you are entitled to. But your preferences are not about your safety, so 1. don’t bring up safety when it’s not the main issue and 2. stop supporting movements openly trying to change men’s preferences in dating, all in the name of equality and inclusion. And no, pressuring leading fashion brands to feature morbidly obese women is not just about fighting bullying. It goes much beyond that, and I have a hard time believing those supporting an…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:41 AM
3

So some rejections, then a lot of positive feedbacks, and your first two relationships failed because of the lack of actual interest on your end…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:33 AM
3

Tell me you had satisfying relationships despite rejections without telling me you had satisfying relationships despite rejections…
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:20 AM
1

Women like that are few and far between, and they also prefer dating normies. And again, women and movements women support often openly berate men for and aim at changing their preferences, all in the name of equality and inclusion.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:18 AM
1

Uncomfortable feelings can be from your preferences which have nothing to do with safety, especially if your better safe than sorry attitude somehow filters mostly for men who you find unattractive. It’s simply much more about personal preferences than safety. And many women do support movements aimed at changing men’s preferences, so it’s at least hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 07:08 AM
1

Yes, and if they say that they don’t prefer older and/or obese women because they had bad experiences with them, they are probably not telling you the truth. If you can’t tell who is safe from simple interactions, are you sure your gut feeling is about safety and not your preferences not being met?
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:47 AM
1

When you see women regularly making bad choices, even though they are well-aware of the risks, you do begin to question claims about safety. Dating amazingly quite often means dating men who are attractive, and often not those who are safe.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:32 AM
1

People who say that can have their dicks or pussies serviced if they really want it. But okay, let’s cater to all of women’s preferences in dating as long as there are men who want to date them. But then stop criticizing men for not preferring women who are obese and/or over forty.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:16 AM
1

People who say that can have their dicks or pussies serviced if they really want it. But okay, let’s cater to all of women’s preferences in dating as long as there are men who want to date them. But then stop criticizing men for not preferring women who are obese and/or over forty.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:14 AM
1

The very same women who preach about how often women are abused often don’t stop dating. It’s much more about personal preferences than safety. And if men ever voice how they don’t prefer older and/or obese women, they are seen as bigoted and backward, whereas women are not only free to state their own preferences, but are encouraged to do so.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 05:12 AM
1

Women quite often sacrifice their boundaries already if they find a man attractive. The risk is high enough as it is currently, yet it doesn’t stop women from dating. It’s much more about selfish but also malleable preferences and desires. And again, considering how women often berate men for their preferences, it’s at least hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/12/25 04:51 AM
1

The problem is that there is correlation between the men who are currently not given a chance and the risks women have to take while dating. There are many men who have no problem with dating even though it would be better for everyone if they had. Yet somehow this doesn’t make women less enthusiastic about dating. Giving socially awkward people a chance won’t make dating anymore dangerous for women than it already is.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 11:59 PM
1

Tell me you weren’t a boy growing up in the 90s without telling me you weren’t a boy growing up in the 90s. Pp Obviously, people should be equally taught not to abuse this trust and openness (or any other kind opportunity trust). Boys should be taught that memo
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 08:56 PM
1

No, this is definitely not how most women thinking dating should be completely free were educated, or if they were, it was done in a very inefficient way. And mind you, I know a whole lot of educated, liberally thinking women. The overwhelming majority of them are not incentivized to put kindness over charisma. What exactly constitutes creepy is also very broad. If a man is seen as creepy just because he doesn’t look in your eyes constantly during a conversation, then the problem lies much more …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 07:13 PM
1

Not through laws per se. I would make dating culture much more inclusive for socially awkward people who are visibly trying to improve themselves. Girls should be taught to give a chance to socially awkward boys and men both by their parents and teachers at sex ed classes.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:13 PM
1

Not being allowed to discriminate for becoming pregnant goes straight against the economic law of your value as a workforce decreasing if you are unable to work for years and accordingly is an obvious violation of employers’ interests. Still, it’s the right thing to do. Similarly, women’s standards are neither sacrosanct nor unchangeable.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 06:04 PM
–

Not being able to work for years in the near future objectively decreases your value as a worker if we judge the situation purely by the standards of economics. It’s not even fundamentally about gender. Men with medical conditions creating the same situation are treated exactly the same way by employers if they are allowed to. If you are willing to to violate the standards of employers, women’s standards should not be sacrosanct either.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 05:37 PM
–

And somehow those who claim sex is not a basic need are always those, regardless of gender, are those who can have sex with people they find attractive if they really wanted to, while those who actually recognize it’s fundamental importance are those who can’t. Also, it’s not impossible for women wanting to have children to restart their career again even without any laws specifically supporting them. Maybe they won’t make CEOs, but they can find a decent job if they upgrade themselves enough to…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 05:04 PM
–

Sorry, but by your logic, women should just as easily accept that they might never be able to build a career as men, or at least not if they want to have children. If we were as laissez-faire about work as many women want relationships to be, it would be perfectly acceptable for employers not to have workers who might be out of work for years, and others demanding them to change their preferences is a violation of their economic freedom. Which it isn’t, but people simply stop claiming interferen…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:13 PM
-1

Pointing out that what women say and do regarding dating is often at variance with each other doesn’t necessarily translate to what you say. Nobody forces women to claim they appreciate kindness the most when it comes to long term relationships when at least charisma is more important for them. No one forces women to support obvious interferences with male sexual preferences while deriding every reciprocal attempt made by men. No one forces women to demand employers tailor their demands for wome…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/12/25 03:00 PM
-1

Having to repress your desires for a romantic relationship because standards are inviolable (even though they are obviously not in other cases) kind of destroys your confidence.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 05:42 PM
1

And a lot of people want to have girls circumcised and their breasts flattened. Do you think it should be allowed?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:47 PM
-3

And it’s a lot harder to be proud of your social standing if it depends on meeting impossible standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:37 PM
1

Circumcising anyone if it’s not for health reasons should be illegal, period. What’s so complicated in that?
/r/PurplePillDebate05/12/25 03:30 PM
1

I would say the body positivity movement, especially in areas of life which obviously impact sexual attraction, such as the fashion industry, do attempt to influence male sexual taste. Even if I believed this was initially to make an end to the harassment of obese people, the two are inseparable, and I do have a hard time believing the supporters of obese women being shown in fashion shows are not aware of this. Also notice how overweight men are not represented in a similar way, and how feminis…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 11:35 PM
1

The very same feminists would be outraged if men declared it’s up to women to improve their situation. And they would be right, but expecting men to take care of their issues completely on their own at the same time is hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate04/12/25 10:12 AM
–

“Teenager” seems to be a very flexible category. Treating a 20-year old like a 14-year old is both infantilizing and pear-clutching. A 20-year old dating a 30-years old is not the same as the same man dating a 14-years old.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/12/25 07:26 PM
1

OP herself doesn’t deny that “obnoxious assholes” (sic) find a partner easier than “Kind Guys”. Neither did you actually. You claimed that they might be unkind only in the outside, but they may be kind to their partners, which I tried to rebut.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/12/25 07:21 AM
1

If you are content with being together with someone who is an obnoxious asshole (sic) to most people besides you, you should contemplate whether you actually value kindness, especially if you consider yourself a liberal, which presupposes the appreciation of kindness towards all average people. Also, if you are that willing to look beyond superficial traits when it comes to obnoxious assholes, you should be able to do that with awkward, but kind men as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:39 PM
1

If you are content with being together with someone who is an obnoxious asshole (sic) to most people besides you, you should contemplate whether you actually value kindness, especially if you consider yourself a liberal, which presupposes the appreciation of kindness towards all average people. Also, if you are that willing to look beyond superficial traits when it comes to obnoxious assholes, you should be able to do that with awkward, but kind men as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 03:39 PM
1

Depends on proportions I think. When you can see what percent of people are successful at attracting potential partners in spite of them being unkind, you are right to question the validity of kindness as an important factor.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 09:58 AM
1

When you are taught that kindness is essential to successful human interaction and you see people being very successful without it, you are right to call out those who still claim it to be important. Also, wanting a prize doesn’t make anyone a bad person. The overwhelming majority of people do good things because they receive at least the psychological reward of feeling virtuous in return. Those who demand others to do things without reward are often those who never fail to get rewarded for thei…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 01:52 AM
1

Interestingly enough, the small minority of women who can’t persuade men to fuck them also experience it as a trauma.
/r/PurplePillDebate30/11/25 01:42 AM
2

Let’s just not pretend that unrealistic appearance standards haven’t been present for a very long time. Tricking with camera angles to show men taller than they actually are is almost as old as film itself. And that’s without mentioning how muscular body dysmorphia disproportionately affects men and how many of them destroy their bodies with artificial augmentations and hormones to meet standards. The argument for “there is more body dysmorphia among women” is not relevant because it is quite pr…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 05:53 AM
2

Then it’s not fat-shaming to exclude fat women from the dating pool either. You can’t complain about anyone having body image issues and it being a systemic problem while claiming that dating, the aspect of life where your physical attractiveness is more important than anytime else, is inherently discriminatory. The very article you posted claims that this perceived difference exists at least partially because of both society and the scientific community ignoring male body dysmorphia: “In conclu…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 04:59 AM
2

He is talking about the general social acceptance, or rather, the difference in the degrees of acceptance. I don’t see how “tall people exist” is supposed to be an effective defence of heightism, given that there are also plenty of women who meet the standards the body positivity movement fought against (and that’s without mentioning how female body positivity promotes the other extreme of unhealthy bodies with Tess Taylor and the rest). And considering how men literally broke their legs to beco…
/r/PurplePillDebate29/11/25 03:28 AM
4

Not hiring women if they’re about to give birth in the foreseeable future has more to do with employment based on the natural laws of economics than having to hire them.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/11/25 06:51 PM
13

Then women should stop complaining why no one wants to date single mothers and why employers are wary of women wanting to give birth soon. Life shouldn’t be less fair to men than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/11/25 03:09 PM
–

Not more than 5% of US women are as obese as Tess Taylor. Obesity is a wide spectrum.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 08:21 PM
–

The fashion industry is probably risking losses with such artificial interventions. Yet they do it because social pressure is so strong. Employers are just as entitled not to employ someone who probably won’t be able to work for years as women are entitled not to date socially awkward men. Wanting complete equality at work but opposing it when it comes to dating is hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 10:50 AM
–

Male body dysmorphia is simply underresearched, but it does exist and it is underresearched exactly because everyone, including supposedly progressive women, thinks it doesn’t exist. Women’s standards probably do contribute to this and it proves that liberal society does care about the problems of women more than that of men. Also , the multi billion dollar fashion industry is willing to risk huge losses to appease obese women by featuring them on their ads. No, it’s not because of any market be…
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 10:02 AM
–

Again, trying to artificially influence people’s preferences is a thing. The body positivity movement was able to influence the multi billion dollar fashion industry to risk losses just to try to present morbidly obese women as attractive. Similarly, many feminists who detest autistic men would be probably outraged if an employer would reject an applying woman because she wants to have children soon. Whether such interventions are feasible is another story, but the hypocrisy is clear.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 09:22 AM
1

https://www.psypost.org/how-a-woman-dresses-affects-how-other-women-view-her-male-friendships-study-suggests/ https://academic.oup.com/jcr/article-abstract/37/6/921/1868588?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 07:55 AM
2

I do know how sexy women dress up for events where there is an opportunity to impress men. That is definitely at least for men as for other women.
/r/PurplePillDebate18/11/25 12:01 AM
–

Women do care about how men see them physically at least as much as how other women evaluate them. Wanting to be sexually attractive to the people you yourself find sexually attractive is one of the basic principles of fashion.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:31 PM
–

The multi billion dollar fashion industry going at great lengths to try to present even morbidly obese women as attractive doesn’t imply that.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:25 PM
–

We really should stop pretending trying to convince men that conventionally undesirable women weren’t actually undesirable wasn’t a thing. Also let’s not pretend exerting pressure to artificially limit natural selection is often not expected by many current feminists either. Many of them would probably frown upon an employer asking of a potential female employee when she plans to give birth, and even more if she wasn’t accepted because she actually plans to give birth soon. All that even when lo…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:22 PM
–

Again, considering how the body positivity movement was actively trying to influence men’s sexual preferences, I say that is at least hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 11:00 PM
8

And I’m begging you not to pretend defending women’s current dating standards equals to defending their basic rights.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 10:50 PM
–

No, women can have sex with attractive men practically every week. Except for the physically attractive ones, which do resort to exactly the same practices they are so ready to berate men for. Some of which practices can be done ethically, I believe, such as escorting, which is why I have nothing against it as long as it is done ethically. But it is not the same as someone being honestly attracted to you. And yes, the answer to that is that women should bring their standards down. Yes, it is pos…
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 09:59 PM
11

That fails even at a mathematical level. There are vastly more men attracted to women than men attracted to men. And women do have the possibility to have sex with attractive men, and they react exactly the same if they can’t get sex at all, see disabled women seeking out male escorts in Australia or older, unattractive women going to sex trips to Jamaica. Enough of hypocrisy.
/r/PurplePillDebate17/11/25 08:48 PM
2

And you are doing that right. I also hope that you wouldn’t condemn people unfortunate enough to resort to this.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 10:42 AM
6

Another reason why you shouldn’t take every lonely man as another Andrew Tate. Men not liking fourth wave feminism doesn’t necessarily translate to them wanting a traditional arrangement. What Tate is correct about is the hypocrisy of said feminism, but criticizing that is possible without wanting to relegate women to bangmaids.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 10:34 AM
1

OP openly states that women can and probably will resort to this too, even if they would use it differently. I personally wouldn’t, but can’t bring myself to condemn the people who do as long as the AI is not sentient and doesn’t have actual emotions.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 10:22 AM
1

You did mention that there will be both men and women who would resort to this to end their loneliness. And honestly, I’m not sure they deserve to be called insensitive slavers as long as the AI in question is not sentient. It’s easy to talk off a high horse when you can find a partner at all, let alone one you’re compatible with.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/11/25 10:19 AM
4

Edit: Doublethink exists, unfortunately, and exactly that’s why many see many manifestations of feminism as actually gynocentrism. Feminists fighting patriarchy when it harms women but advocating for it when it’s about the roles of men is very widespread.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 04:29 PM
2

If you were that conscious of men’s problems and current feminism as you believe yourself to be, you would be able to objectively grasp reality by being aware that holding women accountable for things they do against men doesn’t necessarily invalidate struggle against misogyny. Oppressed groups should not be considered above criticism. Women having it worse in several scenarios doesn’t give them the right to make the life of men more difficult in others.
/r/PurplePillDebate12/11/25 12:07 AM
1

And there are billions of people demonstrably and dramatically worse off than Western women. By your logic, the problems of Western women (and everyone else) can be set aside until those people are safe, which would also induce a wave of positive developments beneficial for Western women. Fighting against misogyny and misandry is and shouldn’t be mutually exclusive. Calling out women for laughing at men who earn less and/or are not sexually successful is detrimental to fighting misogyny only if …
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 11:05 PM
1

“It could be worse” is another argument which should die. There are numerous situations and lives which are much worse than that of women living in Western countries currently. I doubt that would be very uplifting for Western women feeling oppressed though.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 10:10 PM
4

And do you think men and conservative women were right about not caring or often downright impeding the struggle of women wanting equal rights?
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 09:53 PM
1

If feminists are not obliged to care about men’s rights, don’t be surprised if MRAs don’t care about women’s rights. Neither of them should be exclusive to their own gender imho, but that’s where this attitude leads to. Also, prostitution doesn’t have to be about raping sex trafficked minors. It is often like that because in most of the countries the prostitutes come from it is not regulated at all, and police does an abysmal job at fighting it. If men weren’t pressured, they probably wouldn’t c…
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 09:43 PM
1

Being fucked up doesn’t give you the right to fuck up others. Feminists should learn that.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 09:02 PM
2

By that logic, manosphere also exists only online. Expecting men to be more competent and successful than women is something which most conservatives and liberals actually agree about.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 08:58 PM
1

No movement equal to body positivity has ever occurred to aid autistic men in their struggles. Its efficacy is debatable, but at least the intent was there.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/11/25 07:37 AM
1

Because the very same feminists who claim they are so enthusiastic about human rights are stubbornly against treating autistic men as a disadvantaged minority needing help. Mostly because yes, it would need some mental and emotional effort on their part to actually realize this. And no, this doesn’t necessarily mean sex, but a chance for autistic men to be able to show their own values as partners for a few dates.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 06:01 PM
1

You dying without a home is absolutely not a given in the 21st century. You can survive as a homeless person. For the rest, no. Learn to communicate your issues and people need to be educated to pay attention to the needs of their partners. Excluding men from sex altogether is not the solution.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/11/25 07:59 AM
–

Considering the active attempts of the body positivity movement (something caring almost exclusively about women) to portray conventionally unattractive women as attractive, this seems rather hypocritical.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 11:24 PM
–

Education and communication are a thing. The solution is not “let’s hoard sex toys and let men rot.” And you won’t die without a home either, but I don’t think you would bring that up to a homeless person. The “it could be worse” argument should die.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 11:20 PM
–

I wouldn’t necessarily say oppressing men is a conscious goal. It’s more like a blind spot about a group which historically has been indeed oppressive and the inability to acknowledge that the oppressed can become oppressive themselves.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 03:52 PM
–

Unfortunately, the Venn diagram of conservatives, regardless of gender, believing that men always have to be successful, charismatic and productive and liberals, regardless of gender, believing that men always have to be successful, charismatic and productive is almost a circle.
/r/PurplePillDebate09/11/25 03:44 PM
1

We can. I just presuppose she is intelligent enough not to want to keep the child under these circumstances just because she wants to be a mother, whatever maternal feelings may come up later.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 04:04 AM
1

We used protection and abortion is available. I’m more than willing to help her with the abortion process and all its consequences, and even support her financially, but the whole situation would end up probably far worse than if she just aborts the baby, and it will be her fault.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:57 AM
1

A lot of kids shouldn’t be born. If you don’t know for sure that you can’t raise your child properly, don’t have the child. If you still do because you want to be a parent , it’s a clear sign you shouldn’t be a parent.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:47 AM
1

The premise is that both sides agree to use protection, a clear sign that they don’t want children initially. Either party wanting to keep the child without consent from the other is an anomaly.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:35 AM
1

No, it’s mostly about teaching the younger generations who have no opinion on the subject yet that it is not murder. The outdated thinking will go extinct naturally. The child does not have to grow up fatherless. That’s what protection and abortion are for. Men are not monsters for not wanting to be forced to be parents just because women can’t bring themselves to abortion although they are aware it’s not murder and it is available (in the world envisioned by liberals and feminists). Don’t keep …
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:20 AM
1

Better sex education resulting in everyone understanding that abortion is not a murder by itself is an important goal for liberals and feminists alike. And they are right. Supposing this happens, would you consider the man morally (not legally!!!) wrong for not supporting the woman raising the child even if they use protection and abortion is available (which the man is willing to support)?
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 03:00 AM
1

Why should men be considered heinous for not paying a child neither party wanted initially, but the woman now wants to keep it because her maternal instincts kick in? Men are not morally obliged to cater for women wanting to be mothers at all costs. If your standards of responsible men is catering for misaligned maternal instincts, then it’s not men’s moral compass which needs addressing here.
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 02:42 AM
1

Actually, 60% of unwanted pregnancies end with an abortion. Mostly after consensual sex. Again, why does it matter who fathers the child in most cases? Do you presume “responsible men” are willing to pay for a child they did not want to begin with, and initially neither did their partner, but do it anyway just because her maternal instincts kicked in? Some interesting interpretation of individual freedom you got here. You are not entitled to be paid just because you want to be a mother of a chil…
/r/PurplePillDebate06/11/25 12:29 AM
1

No one forces you to rise a baby alone. If abortion is available, it’s your decision. If women want children that much, and only from Chads, then it’s their decision again, and might be a good argument against the introduction against abortion beyond rape and health risks. It definitely is a good argument against maternal alimony. Want to give birth to children fathered by Chads that much? Fine, but don’t expect the rest of society to cater for this, and actually expect your children to be taken…
/r/PurplePillDebate04/11/25 08:12 AM
3

This doesn’t mean you can settle only for a high level of desirability. Being more attracted to a high level manager than to a call center agent is natural, but not settling for the call center agent even if he is kind, still makes a decent income and treats you well because you really need a high level manager is your decision.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 07:58 PM
1

Or, just as the researchers say, fat men are simply not taken into account by these companies in spite of the potential they have as buyers. If they did , the research conducted at the behest of these companies could be backtracked. Yet it cannot.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 06:50 PM
1

“According to fashion psychologist Anke Vermeer, we need to get back to basics: there is very little research on the impact of showing plus-size men on the catwalk, in fashion brands' campaigns or on social media. Vermeer sees research focusing primarily on women and the impact of body positivity on them, but also on the impact of social media on their self-image, eating disorders and self-confidence. "It's not that men don't have image issues, it just seems like researchers and [in this case] f…
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 06:23 PM
1

Then let me rephrase it: No. “The lack of diversity in menswear is at odds with average male sizes. Research from Mintel shows that a fifth of British men have a 38-inch waist.” It’s not about a lack of market.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 06:08 PM
1

No. “The lack of diversity in menswear is at odds with average male sizes. Research from Mintel shows that a fifth of British men have a 38-inch waist. “The other problem is that there is this feeling that in films and on TV, large men are the comic stereotype,” says Freeman. “It’s sort of emasculating.”” https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/2015/aug/27/where-are-all-the-plus-size-male-models
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 05:32 PM
1

Even supposing that’s true, the point about autism still stands: if influencing dating tastes can be supported in the case of the body positivity movement, it can be done in the cause of autistic men as well.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 05:16 PM
1

Men shouldn’t be obliged to contribute to raising a kid if abortion and protection are both available. If a woman wants to keep the child, it’s her responsibility, and the man has no more obligation to contribute to the raising of the child than she has to give birth. And most women probably wouldn’t forgo sex just to avoid accidents currently.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 04:53 PM
1

Nobody says men shouldn’t contribute to protection and abortion. They should, as outlined above. And considering how women don’t have less sex than than men anyway, the possibility of accidents is always there, and the solution is always the same (abortion or raising the kid), even if she is in a LTR. So actually, the best solution is women actually stopping having sex overall.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 02:24 PM
1

Yeah, heaven forbid men have standards. And don’t you dare talk about the fucked up genetics of short and/or obese women, who are, of course, entitled to tall, at least moderately handsome men, because women were mistreated in the past.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 12:35 PM
1

Experts themselves admit it’s not because of a lack of market. Obese women have a whole movement supporting them, one expected to exist by the liberal community. Women often do expect to be treated as attractive, even if they aren’t.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 12:27 PM
7

64 % of US men between 18 and 29 are single. No, this goes beyond autism. About autism itself, see my earlier comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 09:32 AM
2

Again, considering how much the body positivity movement cares about making obese people attractive, expecting society not to change their views about autistic men is at least hypocritical c
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 09:26 AM
1

Like, no, the majority of the men impregnating women during a hookup don’t even want to know about the child.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 08:40 AM
1

Yes, there are exceptions. Still, plus size male models are very underrepresented and body positivity as a movement aimed at, in a large part, making obese people attractive, is aimed at women in the overwhelming majority of the cases.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 08:02 AM
1

If protection fails, she should have the legal right to ask for contribution to the abortion process. If she wants to keep the child in spite of all of these possibilities, the man should have the right to say no.
/r/PurplePillDebate03/11/25 07:55 AM
5

Most men are willing to have a long term relationship. And nothing here contradicts that the lack of desirability stems from women having high standards.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 11:57 PM
1

Yet somehow there are no fashion ads featuring obese men. The goal is to present obese women as sexually attractive, since they are considered unattractive otherwise. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2xjd41g33o https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-45354696 https://fashionmagazine.com/style/plus-size-male-models/
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 06:41 PM
1

No, most men engaged in hookups don’t want kids. They want sex. Men want children only in LTRs, and even then, they might change their minds, hence the milk meme. No species mates because they explicitly want offsprings. They do it because they obey a deep, abstract instinct. Humans are no exception, that’s why way more people want sex for itself, not for the explicit purpose of having children.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 03:39 PM
1

Elon Musk can afford it. And yes, it’s very hard to believe most men would like to have children born as a result of a one night stand in a world where dads going out for milk is a meme. Most probably never want to recognize the existence of these children. Men should pay attention to protection and should financially contribute to the abortion if it has to be performed. If the woman wants to keep the child in spite of all of this, the man has a right to say no.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 01:24 PM
1

Still doesn’t mean that obese women, especially those promoted by the mentioned ads, would be attractive for men in general. https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_feminism
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 11:27 AM
1

I doubt most of those men would be very enthusiastic about meeting their children. If they were that enthusiastic about the prospect, they would have tried to convince the woman to start a family together. This might change later, but I doubt either the child or the mother would be very interested in meeting a man who has never really been involved in their lives.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 01:56 AM
2

There were multiple replies distinguishing between requirements and preferences, and my reply clearly does. Nowhere was this distinguishing forbidden in the post.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 01:46 AM
2

It’s a preference, not a requirement.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 01:33 AM
1

Requirements: Age 20-33 Has at least a Bachelor’s degree Is interested in history, sociology, anthropology, fantasy, science fiction or anime Not obese or unhealthily thin White, preferably light-skinned Liberal, but is willing to criticise the blind spots of liberal society Preferences: Is into fiction writing Sexual, but without too extreme kinks or fetishes C-cup natural breasts
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 12:47 AM
0

Sure, that’s why fat feminism is a thing and that’s why a multi-billion dollar industry is willing to risk losses just to appease obese women.
/r/PurplePillDebate02/11/25 12:10 AM
1

Women have claimed to appreciate kindness the most in general. And I believe it’s you who fell for the WAW effect if you actually believe that many kind women don’t fall for asshole men.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 07:44 PM
2

You missed the point. If women were actually as attracted to kindness as they provably do, they wouldn’t even consider dating an asshole, however attractive he otherwise might be.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:57 PM
2

Do you know how much effort a man has to put into looking good in general, let alone for dates in particular ? A hell of a lot of training, taking care of facial hair, body care, body fat level optimally at 12% (I daresay it actually requires an even stricter diet than that which women have to maintain to look good)…
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:40 PM
2

But attractive men can afford to be rude. Which still pretty much contradicts everything many women say about their dating habits.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:22 PM
1

The point is the fact that the 9/10 guy still can afford to be a rude asshole.
/r/PurplePillDebate01/11/25 04:21 PM
1

It is pretty much alive and kicking, and a billion dollar industry was willing to risk huge losses just to be seen as accepting of obese women. Let’s just not pretend there wasn’t a huge social impetus behind the support of conventionally unattractive women.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 01:58 PM
1

Considering how illiterate people are about mental disorders impending the romantic prospects of the people, especially men, suffering from them, the collateral damage is disproportionate and the stigma should be restructured.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 10:28 AM
4

Yet somehow conventionally unattractive women have an entire mainstream movement supporting them with fat feminism and actively featuring them in clothing advertisements and in fashion shows. There is a whole lot of double standards here.
/r/PurplePillDebate31/10/25 08:44 AM
1

Dated once is just not the same as having a healthy amount of options. 28% of young men haven’t had sex for a year. That’s not what most young men would agree to by choice. And no, it’s not because men have objectively fallen that much behind women. Yes, more women are employed and have a college degree, but the actual difference is way smaller than the percentage of single and sexless men. And considering the support objectively below average women get from fat feminism and obese models being f…
/r/PurplePillDebate30/10/25 11:46 PM
0

[ Removed by Reddit ]
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 10:09 PM
0

Don't confuse competent with nice either. A lot of those charismatic people are the worst kind of manipulators and abusers. And they are well-aware their charisma might get them out of any resulting trouble.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:46 PM
2

Still much better than having no options at all.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 02:44 PM
6

I would wager most women engage in it during their college years.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 12:07 PM
4

Choosing the right partner from thousands of potential ones is still easier than choosing one from zero potential ones. I do agree that men should pay attention to the pleasure of women, but still, women are much better off when it comes to dating. Proportionally, men need more help in this regard than women.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 11:45 AM
1

Pettiness? Women in general don’t want less sex than men.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 09:42 AM
2

I honestly doubt that would be your opinion if no one was willing to have sex with you.
/r/PurplePillDebate29/10/25 12:00 AM
–

The problem is not that being impressive is a plus in dating. The problem is when you refuse to date people who are not above you at least to a degree. And based on statistics, I see that many young women simply refuse to consider dating men who are not above them at any field. I have recently spoken with a woman here who claimed women shouldn’t bring their standards down because men are falling behind women in general. Yes, there is a trend, but the main caveat of the phenomenon is that althoug…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:46 PM
1

Society being able to create an order where we don’t rape whoever we want as long as authorities don’t pay attention is not the same as being able to, or even should, try to make one of the most basic instincts of a sexually reproducing species vanish. Wishing the overwhelming majority of people to forgo this instinct completely is just not possible.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:30 PM
4

Gates has 3 children, Bezos has 4. Putin is officially childless, but probably has several unacknowledged children.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:13 PM
2

No sexually reproducing species does it because they explicitly want to, or at least because they are aware that they do what they do to reproduce, ultimately. They are doing it because they’re trying to fulfill an instinctive call.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:10 PM
3

You can turn this around quite easily: you can do all of those things, but unless you are asexual or aromantic, you probably will still feel there’s something missing from your life. See how disabled women seek male prostitutes, and undesirable women go to Jamaica for sex tourism. That’s why the whole “just learn to live with the lack of sex if you’re a man” is fallacious. And yes, I do believe that sexless men, especially young men, deserve more care than women on a social level, simply because…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/10/25 11:06 PM
–

But women pretty much do control dating. It’s not equal. They worked for those because they believed they would be a better position if they work. As long as patriarchy doesn’t hinder that process, many of them don’t care. They are perfectly content with toxic masculinity as long as it serves their interests.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 10:19 PM
–

They do if they want a relationship, or at least sex. And the problem remains: many women who fight against patriarchy do it only as long as it hurts them, or at least as long as it is up to others to change. As soon as it’s about something specifically they as women have to change about themselves, it’s natural and should be left alone.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 09:38 PM
–

So an equal number of women and men in high positions and as caretakers is not something feminists supposedly strive for?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 08:17 PM
–

So women have to be the the caretakers, while men have to be in a better position status-wise? It pretty much seems like defending a mostly traditional social model just to avoid admitting that women’s standards regarding dating are often unhealthy and go against the principles they supposedly follow.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 07:54 PM
–

But even if they didn’t want to be extraordinary, women would expect them to be. Sexism is a huge part of the problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 07:49 PM
–

Or maybe, maybe non-autistic people get integrated into society, like supposedly liberal and progressive people like to emphasise so much. Yes, it’s harder than going to protests, voting for certain candidates and financing transportation designs suitable for disabled people, but it’s doable.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 07:15 PM
–

And there are women who would smash an autistic guy. Most wouldn’t, though. The same goes for men and obese women. So yes, fat feminism and those ads are an active attempt to influence male sexual preferences. And if that’s progressive and to be followed, so is advocating for women to give a chance to autistic men.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 06:59 PM
–

Fat feminism and clothing ads featuring obese women beg to differ if you can connect the dots.
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 06:45 PM
–

How is your categorisation above not a description of tradwives?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 06:38 PM
–

So many women would rather be tradwives than admit they have unhealthy expectations and tone them down?
/r/PurplePillDebate27/10/25 06:32 PM
1

Women in the very few cases when they can't get sex: https://www.bbc.com/news/disability-65422489 https://oursite.wwda.org.au/sex-and-your-body/information-for-supporters-and-services https://oursite-easyread.wwda.org.au/sex-and-your-body/sex-and-consent/sex-therapists-and-sex-workers/ It seems women are also just their pussies after all. Sex is a necessary, but not sufficient part of life. That's something many women never realize, as they can get sex pretty easy.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 07:37 PM
1

A fantasy, sure, but one you would definitely not expect from women who supposedly desire freedom and independence. Most men don’t claim not to be at least interested in combat related topics, and definitely don’t condemn it as something oppressive to men in general.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 02:20 PM
1

Doesn’t change the fact that it is bad and actually way worse than many presume. The assumption that it doesn’t have negative effects because it is not physical violence is false.
/r/PurplePillDebate26/10/25 01:38 PM
3

And it’s still the same overall. Just because it’s not porn per se, it’s only minimally less harmful to society than violent porn. Women reading those books don’t have a moral high ground above men who watch violent porn.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 07:02 PM
3

I edited the comment.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 06:40 PM
9

If the argument is that “because porn has real life harmful effects” then it is a correct answer, since romance novels probably do have a harmful impact on society. Physical violence is not the only form of harmful effects.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 06:32 PM
2

Let’s just not pretend James Bond movies didn’t appeal to women at least to a degree similarly to how romance books do. It’s not like Brosnan, Moore or Craig weren’t popular with women.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 06:23 PM
13

And women having unrealistic expectations of men, even if only partially because of romance novels, does have a negative impact on society. The argument that “it remains a fantasy while porn doesn’t” is moot.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 06:18 PM
13

Without dwelling on how healthy BDSM itself is, it is interesting how many women were in Fifty Shades even though it is universally detested by actual BDSM practitioners.
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 06:12 PM
2

But women who don’t want to allow men to have financial abortion mostly do, and exactly that double standard is problematic. I actually see no problem with those men who don’t want to be fathers not contacting their children. They didn’t want them to begin with and they mostly see them as a burden from a past mistakes. I wouldn’t want a father like that. I think men should have the duty to help women through the abortion itself financially and pay attention to protection. If the woman wants to k…
/r/PurplePillDebate25/10/25 01:39 PM
1

This doesn’t mean women should immediately reject a man who is shorter and/or in a worse financial position. And they do exactly that by dating older and/or supposedly financially better-off men, even though the pay gap is actually rapidly shrinking.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/10/25 06:36 AM
2

Problem is that you get no real help for your frustration in most of the cases. The real solution would be educating women and girls that their standards and dating customs are not healthy. And no, considering how there are actual feminist movements and advertisements promoting obese women sexually, I don’t think it’s that impossible to try to influence romantic and sexual behavior in a targeted way.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/25 12:11 PM
2

Are you allowed to say that current dating culture is toxic without being called an incel (so to avoid generalising)?
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/25 11:51 AM
4

Yes. But this again boils down to men having to foot all the work, even if they are medically proven to be having difficulties with it, while women are entitled to all of their expectations. And no, considering how there is an actual movement within feminism itself which promotes fat women and there are actual clothing advertisements featuring obese women, I don’t think actively trying to influence romantic and/or sexual tastes is such a no-go.
/r/PurplePillDebate20/10/25 06:34 AM
2

No. If the woman doesn’t want an abortion, although she does have the opportunity to have one, it’s solely her choice and responsibility if the man doesn’t agree.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/25 10:33 PM
8

And a woman usually has nothing to work on during those years. That’s why the comparison fails.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/25 10:21 PM
13

The fact that you have to pass shit tests to begin with tells a lot about how problematic the expectations are.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/25 10:17 PM
7

A very poor analogy. Women tend to be unattractive because of aging mostly after 35, so they have like 20 years when men are throwing themselves at them. Not even a healthy man would be able to attract that much attention ever in his life in average.
/r/PurplePillDebate19/10/25 10:07 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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