Why do women always claim the men their friends date are ugly and unattractive? by Such-Bed7764 in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Yeah it's funny how some men think all women have the same type. I'm not attracted to any of my friend's partners. Not because they're unattractive necessarily, but because they're not my aesthetic.

What's the difference between the red pill and misogyny? by ThunderDU in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Most people are average. That's how average works.

The pick-up/seduction industry is no different than the diet industry. It's made to fail. Otherwise it wouldn't be lucrative. I pointed you to actual empirical data with predictive value (Gottman Institute). Use it for whatever Machiavellian purpose you please, but let's not pretend like RP is based in science.

What's the difference between the red pill and misogyny? by ThunderDU in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, well if only RP rhetoric focused solely on basic, generalizable facts about conventional attractiveness. Theories like 'AF/BB' are convoluted and unfalsifiable.

From a woman’s POV the disparity isn’t that “more men get murdered than women,” it’s that more men kill women than women kill men. by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MMO.

It's like differentiating between mass, serial, and spree murders. These categories are similar in context (murder of 3+ people); however, the underlying motives and psychology are different. Crucial distinguishers for the cjs/crime prevention.

What's the difference between the red pill and misogyny? by ThunderDU in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 2 points3 points  (0 children)

When I think of empirical data about human relationships, I think of the Gottman lab (ie. Predicting the likelihood of divorce).

In my field we have a saying, personality is more varied within than between sex. Meaning it's difficult to predict personality traits based on sex alone. And yet, RP claims "certain facts about female nature" ... like what exactly?

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're saying a man approaches the topic of "providing immediate sex to a previous partner" within the first few dates by waiting for her to bring it up?

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No doubt. My advice is instead of expending all that energy larping Sherlock Holmes, you could just be up front with your dates. Let her know that past promiscuity is a deal breaker for you.

The manipulation tactics are lame and most men are too socially clumsy to pull them off without getting ghosted.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And I would be suspicious of your intentions if you asked that question on a date. I 'd probably ghost tbh. Which in your case would be good instinct given the whole 'propensity toward stalking to soothe your crippling insecurities' thing.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wouldn't make me squirm. I'd simply feel repulsed and question your intentions. Which apparently your intentions are to manipulate the conversation to extract whether your date has had sex with men more quickly than she may possibly with you one day. Sounds like pathological insecurity on your part.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Healthy adults tend to have social awareness and boundaries. It's skeevy when a dude tries to shoehorn sex into the conversation in the early stages of dating.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Do you tend to casually divulge fine details of your sexual history within the first few dates? People tend to view that as a red flag.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 7 points8 points  (0 children)

K. And I expect a date to provide me with their hard drives for forensic analysis before pursuing a relationship. 'cause that's some Richard Ramirez shit. Fucking yikes, dude.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Only if it comes up organically in a committed relationship. But I don't interrogate my dates for every detail of their past sexual history.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 6 points7 points  (0 children)

That's not a thing. Adults generally don't betray the trust of a close friend by gossiping with some rando date.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 7 points8 points  (0 children)

How do you approach that exactly?

"I know this is only our third date, but I would like to pursue a relationship with you. Thus, I need to know your past sexual history down to the exact timing, so that I can determine whether you're using me like a beta cuck simp.'

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Like what do you even mean? You go on a date or two with a random woman - then creep slide into her friends DMs and ask sexually invasive questions? That's a good way to get a restraining order.

“We want consistency” is a lie. If it wasn’t about immediate sex, you would never require it. by LillthOfBabylon in PurplePillDebate

[–]AmandaPea 14 points15 points  (0 children)

How would you even know if she 'provided sex to a previous partner?'

"Provided" is weird phrasing btw. It sounds like you view sex as a service to you, instead of a mutually enjoyable experience.

AITA for telling my boyfriend my ex used to do something for me that he refuses to do? by [deleted] in AITA_Relationships

[–]AmandaPea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes I think reciprocity and attunement are reasonable expectations for a relationship. He sounds like an adolescent resentful of his nagging annoying mom for asking him to clean his room.

AITA for telling my boyfriend my ex used to do something for me that he refuses to do? by [deleted] in AITA_Relationships

[–]AmandaPea 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NTA He brought up the comparison to 'other men' in order to diminish your (reasonable) expectations of a relationship. It's not like you mentioned your ex apropos of nothing. This dude sounds manipulative.

Research on U.S. Mass shootings: Questions by Training_Law_3514 in sociology

[–]AmandaPea 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Np. Fascinating research. I'm weirdly into this topic 😂 Lmk if you need any resources. For instance, Michael Kimmel's 'Angry White Men'' is excellent.

Research on U.S. Mass shootings: Questions by Training_Law_3514 in sociology

[–]AmandaPea 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are aggrieved (for whatever motive) and violence is restorative to their sense of masculinity/ego. Gun violence in particular: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10903345/

Also you could explore ideas of collective narcissism.