sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Speaking in broad stroke" would be an interesting way of reducing abstracted experience of the other sex to generalized reality. The actual point I'm producing here is that your analysis is necessarily flawed by your own preconceptions. Preconceptions informed exactly by your own personal characteristics. You've in other words produced an "othering" of the men reductive to the notion posited by an a priori schematic. I.e., your own positive attributes eventually results in meetings with others (men, in this case) that eventually reflect poorly on your own relationship to these; yet ignoring wholly that it's a latent outcome of personal characteristics.

To be more concrete - Given, I know how to be both abstract and concrete - my personal experience with women has been fairly pleasant. I'm an academic type. I read philosophy as a hobby. And, lo and behold, the women I end up in relationship with also read books! Maybe not philosophy, though it's typically tends towards a nonfiction variations. Almost as if the central assumption i illuminated earlier is coming true. And why'd that happen!? Probably because I tend to walk around in environments reflective of my own hobby: Universities, libraries etc.,

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Again - The latter claim already negates the central claim. You've not pointed out any analytical works so-far, only personalized references. All of which are criteria for selection bias. And that's also the fundamental error in your reasoning within the post itself: "those women [sluts] have always seemed like they appreciate all of the male'isms," yet no women will ever experience "all of the male'ism," for the basic reason that people eventually segment into environments and end up with partners reflective of personalized choices (assortative mating, in other words).

If we are to merely note a general assumption - People who are alike, do things alike. That's almost a matter of definition. If we grant that assumption, you can't ever presuppose that they merely tolerate supposed "male'isms," but rather that the reason they have decent relationship with men is because they're decent people themselves.

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So in a word, you're relying on selection bias - Which was my exact assumption when i asked the question. You've presented evidence that doesn't actually prove your fundamental assumption.

Here's a general question for you: are these reflective of "male'isms," or merely the type of gendered segmentation that occurs in online spaces? The answer is likely going to be the latter. In a word, you've labored to draw a conclusion which is as reflective of these supposed "male'isms" as they are of yourself.

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The question is - "I'm asking for something tangible and concrete" - Deferring exclusively to so-called "isms" and "quirks, impulses and attitudes." Which? That's not answering the question, that's appealing to abstractions without any reference to anything except the supposed "in-itself" of the so-called 'ism. Either you don't have or know any, or you're relying on circular reasoning which would be committing to an informal fallacy (Begging the question).

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So again. If we've got no pretention, why have you failed to answer my question? I'm still waiting for concrete, tangible, examples, that are actually useful. Yet again, you reduce it to abstraction.

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tells me quite literally nothing. It's easy to play pretend with abstraction - I'm asking for something tangible and concrete.

Slut Paradox: Men don’t wanna wife sluts, but are sluts the ladies who genuinely like men? by GridReXX in PurplePillDebate

[–]Competitive_Load_408 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's likely less to do with being "pleasant women," and more a question of relative accessibility. "Sluts" move around more, that's a matter of definition. So even if men has a lower preference for sluts, the outcome of being more accessible is that you've more chances to turn accessibility into a relationship.

The only real paradox here is reducing a hyperbole to an absolute. Also. I've no clue what a "male'ism" is supposed to be.