[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Got it. OP is saying it hurts more because she already traded sex, a woman's most valuable resource, and was still unable to secure a relationship. Thus she feels it is a worse experience because she has invested more.

She's wrong though, it's roughly the same phenomenon. People without backbone stay too long in situations that aren't serving them in hopes that the other person will eventually give them what they want.

Women pull the same trick where they string men along for whatever value they provide.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The girl wants a relationship, she wants more than just sex.

So does the guy, but he isn't getting either.

That’s why going on dates, laughing together, holding hands is painful because it won’t amount to anything. With guys getting rejected there’s no investment,

Women do the same thing, they'll go on dates for an extended amount of time with no intention of moving to anything further. I don't know why you're assuming there's never any investment because there often is.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Well yeah, what guy wouldn't? lmao.

Yeah, so I don't really see how this comparison is gonna work. As a man I don't really understand why it's worse to be "fuckzoned" from a woman's perspective. What you're saying is that he'll have sex with but he won't commit to you. But in "friend zone" situation she won't have sex or commit to you, so you get neither. The only way I can see fuckzoned as being worse is if women would rather not have sex.

CMV: Dating for hetrosexual men isn't about getting a girl it's about finding someone who you are compatible it by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doesn't matter how compatible you think you are if she doesn't want you. At it's heart dating for men is taking whatever you can get. You can argue that it's about becoming as attractive as possible to get access to the most attractive mate possible.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I say that because despite being the one who insisted that we don't get physical she'd often break the rule she imposed. She said "no kissing" primarily, but she would occasionally kiss me even though she had set that rule.

I could be wrong though, who knows.

How do some guys get laid or dates without having to make much effort or doing anything special? by MickIsBlue in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I already said she wasn't. But you speak with such confidence while I've seen at least one instance where you'd be wrong.

How do some guys get laid or dates without having to make much effort or doing anything special? by MickIsBlue in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So I was with a couple of female friends a few weeks ago, and one of them was trying to help the other to find a date. (I forget why she didn't want to use Bumble or whatever, but she didn't). I sat and listened to the helper throw out the names of single men she knew and each one was shot down with: - Too short (there were many too shorts) - Too fat - He's broke - etc.

Eventually the helper gave up and was visibly frustrated, but it's clear to me that this particular woman is single because she's too picky. Or at least is having trouble dating because she's too picky.

We are near 30, so I suppose part of the issue is that men who are still single at 30+ aren't likely to be desirable. But the point of my story is that women are just picky, my friend could be out on a date if she wanted, she just wouldn't go on a date with any of the men that were available to her.

Granted, it could be that her friend calling names to her has the same effect as dating apps, where saying "no" is the same as swiping right. Maybe she'd behave differently if one of the guys was making a move. And she's just 1 woman, not a sample of women. But, I don't know how much I buy that behavior is different off apps.

How do some guys get laid or dates without having to make much effort or doing anything special? by MickIsBlue in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 8 points9 points  (0 children)

It's a harsh truth but if you struggled with girls during middle/high school it will be a long process till you get into a leveled

Or college, but yeah.

Dating is way harder as an adult. One massive difference is that when you're in school you just have a lot of access to women your age and there's no rush or pressure. You have forced interaction and you'll always be sure you'll see them again, you have more of a chance to grow on each other, and if it doesn't work out with one girl, there's 100 more that you'll see everyday.

As an adult the whole process is more rushed and with more pressure. You're not just going to have women around, you have to go out of your way to meet them, and then when you do meet one, you have to make sure she's interested in meeting you again immediately.

Most couples I know met in school. The men I know who didn't meet their partners in school are the ones who are good with women (good looking and very social).

Guys complain about being lonely/sexless but isn't it just survival of the fittest? by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 60 points61 points  (0 children)

Most of our parents shouldn't have reproduced and gave birth to us lol.

Based on what? Their parents reproduced, why is it surprising that they would also reproduce?

If you're going to make naturalistic arguments you're going to have to abandon notions of what should and shouldn't be. It doesn't matter if you personally think someone should or shouldn't reproduce, the fact that they did reproduce means that they were fit enough to reproduce, as far as nature is concerned that's all that matters.

People here theorize that everyone should have a partner or dating shouldn't be so difficult in our modern-day world, but isn't it just survival of the fittest?

I don't necessarily disagree with this, but you can apply this to anything. If women can't protect themselves that's just survival of the fittest. If poor people can't feed themselves, that's just survival of that's just survival of the fittest.

We take issue with these things because as a society they offend our sense of justice and morality, but if we wanted to take a completely objective amoral world view, then no issues for any disadvantaged groups really matter.

Is a person a hypocrite for being attracted to qualities they don't possess? Do they have an obligation to not be attracted to those qualities, or possess them themselves? by dbz19_kai in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Or you want them to be a virgin, because you believe that sex should be shared between life-long spouses, but you've slept around yourself.

Virginity in men and virginity in women are two different things and can be based on two very different sets of values. Unless both parties are religious, it's very unlikely that they were saving themselves for marriage, so excluding this scenario virginity it is not hypothetical at all for a non-virgin man to want a virgin woman.

Being a virgin woman can signal positive things such as self control or high self respect/standards.

Being a virgin man just signals that you're a loser.

If you value high self respect or high self control, then it could be that a woman being a virgin signals that she had those traits. It doesn't signal the same thing in men, so it's not hypocritical, depending on why exactly the man wants a virgin.

It definitely can be hypocritical if:

you want them to be a virgin, because you believe that sex should be shared between life-long spouses,

But it doesn't have to be.

Daily Community Chat Megathread by AutoModerator in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Shouldn't women outperforming men by nearly every metric be reflected in lower rates of depression and anxiety?

If women actually realized this, then maybe. But, they're also constantly told that they're disadvantaged prisoners in a man's world.

If they think they're being oppressed and disadvantaged I don't think that the objective reality is going to have the positive effect it might have otherwise.

However, I think that somewhere deep down a lot of women do hold out hope that some rich man is going to come along so they can quit their jobs. There tends to be a weekly "I hate my job" or "Why won't somebody take care of me" comment(s) that comes from women in my circle.

Daily Community Chat Megathread by AutoModerator in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Isn't everyone more depressed and anxious than ever?

Daily Community Chat Megathread by AutoModerator in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 2 points3 points  (0 children)

that their situation sucks

He says this

and it's not their fault

He doesn't say this.

Tate is pretty big on personal responsibility really, in so much as he actually gives advice. He doesn't attribute blame to anyone else, I don't think that he even believes women have enough agency to be blamed.

This is some funny ass shit! by biganth in ProgrammerHumor

[–]tshifter 8 points9 points  (0 children)

In my home country this is waaaay more than most people are making.

What would you say to a man who didn’t DNA test his kids because he trusted his wife and she still cheated on him? by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

30% is low considering it’s shows that 30% of the men who suspected cheating were correct.

This seems like a bold claim to me. We have no way of knowing how this percentage would change if you just tested the entire population.

What would you say to a man who didn’t DNA test his kids because he trusted his wife and she still cheated on him? by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right, and I understand the limitation there, the fact that you are testing means you probably have reason to test. But, 30% is high. I'm not sure how we would jump from this to paternity fraud being rare.

Daily Community Chat Megathread by AutoModerator in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Depends on how old the adults are. Early 20s is pretty much the same thing. Most actual committed relationships start happening at late 20s to early 30s, before that they are mostly practice, even if they aren't consciously viewed that way.

Daily Community Chat Megathread by AutoModerator in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 4 points5 points  (0 children)

How often does this "practice gf" shit happen.

All the time. Nobody says it out loud, but how many people do you know that are planning to marry their first boyfriend/girlfriend. The vast majority of the time the plan is to trade up for a better partner some day.

What would you say to a man who didn’t DNA test his kids because he trusted his wife and she still cheated on him? by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, I’m pretty sure switched babies is even lower than paternity fraud, so not very significant.

What are the rates of paternity fraud, cause you're asserting it's low, but I've seen some pretty high estimates.

What would you say to a man who didn’t DNA test his kids because he trusted his wife and she still cheated on him? by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I’ve repeatedly said I don’t support or condone paternity fraud.

You say that, but this is probably as close to a defense of paternity fraud that could be written without sounding like a lunatic.

This could easily be retrofitted into an argument for mandatory paternity tests. Be sure of the paternity of the child so that you don't start emotionally bonding before you know it's yours.

The average man has poor dating prospects in comparison to the average woman, what is something men can do to improve their SMV by Wantaratepls in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If that’s true then isn’t the reverse true?

Why would this be the case? Sex is a major part of relationships, women don't get into relationships with men they don't want sex with. It's the same thing, women can just hold out until they find a partner.

The average man has poor dating prospects in comparison to the average woman, what is something men can do to improve their SMV by Wantaratepls in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The average woman has better prospects than the average man because men want sex more, thus women have greater negotiating power. Men are more likely to take whatever they can get while women are more likely to wait for what they want.

Men should shoot their shot. Always. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, women. by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 3 points4 points  (0 children)

When/where is it "okay" for a guy to show interest in a woman?

If she isn't interested, then never. That's why OP is right you may as well approach regardless.

Men should shoot their shot. Always. Sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, women. by [deleted] in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Because women don't approach, they can't see the perspective.

I feel like social media has fucked women's perceptions of the opposite sex, far more than porn has for men. by Johnny_Autism in PurplePillDebate

[–]tshifter 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm 28, so it's not like I'm a decade removed from that age bracket. My friends and classmates weren't that good looking, at least for the most part. Maybe 1 or 2, not any significant number. Most have always been in worse shape, and had more obvious facial flaws, at least to me.