TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

Icy_Sunlite Archive

View 0 posts and 63 comments by Icy_Sunlite on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Title Category Author Subreddit Date (UTC)
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
-2

The kid is also here when you get an abortion, it's just convenient to pretend you can define it out of personhood.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 02:46 PM
-6

Women dying from coat hanger abortions, not having medical bodily autonomy is equivalent to not being able to run away after a nut apparently Yes, aborting your child is the same as running from it, only worse because you're literally killing the child. Both are evil.
/r/PurplePillDebate11/06/24 02:44 PM
1

Are you really arguing that children don't naturally result from sex? That's really damaged, dude. "Pulling out" isn't even the safest form of birth control lol
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 08:09 AM
1

I don't think everything is "Magic and fairy dust", but I certainly do think sex is an incredibly important thing meant for specific purposes. Mockery isn't really an argument.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 07:28 AM
1

It's really not special I think some guys want to experience a virgin just because ,it's no diffrent than if you've never experienced a 3 some or anal..except virgins are a lot rarer as most people loose it buy 15. Like I said, there may be something wrong with your moral compass, but you have the minority view on this. Sex doesn't either semen and an egg mixing does that and that can be done without even having sex.. besides there's plenty of time before the baby is born to get it taken care of…
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 07:27 AM
1

The purpose of sex is because I like it thetes lots of ways not to have a kid I've been having lots of sex for a long time longer than you've been alive and I don't have any damn kids. There's no foolproof way of avoiding them if you're having vaginal intercourse. One anecdote doesn't change that. In any case, are you saying you haven't had any children or that you/the mother have murdered them? Also, the primary purposes of sex are objective, not subjective. The fact that you "Like it" doesn't …
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 07:18 AM
1

Children are the natural result of sex., and one of the main reasons for having sex There's no 100% reliable way to have sex without getting pregnant, unless murdering your children is on the table.
/r/PurplePillDebate23/05/24 06:50 AM
1

Obviously a lot of men can't behave themselves, but being politely asked out in everyday life, politely rejecting/accepting and then having the man politely leave shouldn't be a problem.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 09:59 AM
-1

First of all, this is a bit of a caricature. The reality is if you're planning to have a family, it's perfectly reasonable to focus on "practical" questions like (hopefully) moral character or (indeed) the ability to provide a financially stable home. Scoffing at the latter is just a real "Rich modern Westerner" vibe. Secondly, erotic or romantic desire is infamously fleeting. Building your relationship solely on that is probably far less secure than building it solely on need or practical conce…
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 06:58 AM
-1

What's wrong with needing your marriage partner for what he has?
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 06:31 AM
-1

Do you really not recognize that having someone just turn their back and walk away from you when you try to talk to them is hurtful? I understand being afraid of men's reactions, but you're coming off as very unsympathetic.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 06:21 AM
2

Man, this is such insulting condescension towards women who aren't modern Western feminists. I mean, "bangmaid"? This is dripping with bitter venom towards men who want traditional relationships ofc, but idk if you realize that you're seriously putting the women down in the process.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 06:13 AM
1

The difference is one is good and the other bad. One is a lifelong commitment that provides a stable home for any children you might end up creating through intercourse. The other is actually selling your body.
/r/PurplePillDebate22/05/24 05:53 AM
4

Well, no. Love is primarily caring about someone's well being. And if you don't want children then you shouldn't be going about the activity that makes them in the first place. And pursuing carnal pleasure outside and even contrary to the real purposes and value of sex, like children and bringing a couple closer, has nothing to do with "being logical". That sounds like something a 14 year old boy would say.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 04:07 PM
1

Sex is just sex to me nothing specially about it If there's nothing special about it then virginity shouldn't matter, and rape wouldn't be so horrific. But virginity does matter because we all know deep down that sex is special and important, unless something is very wrong with you. Sex is no diffrent than scratching your big toe.. Scratching your big toe doesn't create a new human being that needs to be taken care of and raised for years to come. Sex (At least regular intercourse) does and ther…
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 03:52 PM
0

The data on countries that have legalized it doesn't agree with you
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 03:43 PM
2

Not everything should be a commodity
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 03:40 PM
3

you mature past the whole awkward stuff That's called desensitization. It's what happens when you ignore the feeling that something is wrong over and over again.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 03:34 PM
–

I can't answer for myself since I am religious, but most societies have had it as an institution regardless of whether they've viewed it as a religious affair. It's supposed to still involve a public commitment, among other things. But with the normalization of divorce among modern secular people I don't think marriage is especially different from just living together.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 01:58 PM
1

My opinion is it's sad and disgusting for anyone to sell their body. If she wants to be provided for she should rather find a good husband to give her virginity to.
/r/PurplePillDebate21/05/24 01:55 PM
1

Unfortunately
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 12:52 PM
2

hates whatever is trendy amongst women Has no lady friends because they're "too much drama". Casually call her the b word * Nut on her face * because she is too cool to care about that sappy stuff These are all negatives and pretty big red flags.
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 11:46 AM
-1

That he's attacking women for being women
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 10:50 AM
-5

But we're not
/r/PurplePillDebate08/05/24 05:57 AM
-5

That's bad but also, men and women aren't the same
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 10:02 PM
0

Yeah, most people today are grossly promiscuous
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 06:54 PM
-1

Because promiscuity is bad. Would you want your future wife/girlfriend to have a body count in the 100s. Sleeping with someone on the first date is thrashy.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 06:49 PM
0

The only good thing about girls messaging first if she said anything other than Hey, you know she would hook up on a date. That is not a good thing.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 06:45 PM
-13

Why are you so hostile against women being women? It has nothing to do with mental effort.
/r/PurplePillDebate07/05/24 06:43 PM
1

He'd be right to a large extent
/r/PurplePillDebate03/05/24 07:35 PM
–

I'm not the sex police. I'm not in a position to determine what precisely is improper, but at least those are physically safe. I'm still skeptical of most if not all sadism and similar though, even though I still have those desires to some extent.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 03:08 PM
1

Men aren't keen on actually risking their own lives. We should be, if for the right purpose
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 01:25 PM
–

There is. Not only is it outright, physically unsafe, it's a red flag and bad/immoral/unhealthy/perverted thing to desire in and of itself. I'm saying this as someone who used to be and (unfortunately) to some extent still is attracted to this kind of stuff.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 08:27 AM
–

There is no physically safe way to do it, and anyone who'll tell you otherwise has an agenda. I honestly couldn't care less if it's someone's "sexual preference", violence is not a caring/loving way to express dominance.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 08:23 AM
2

Men are not obligated to put themselves in danger to help women in danger, nor should they feel obligated to. If a man steps in and gets grievously injured without making a difference, then what was the point? Even if the man and the woman know each other well, why would a man consider that relationship worth more than his own life? I agree with most of what you're saying except this. I'm not saying I would be likely to play the hero, but in a better society men would absolutely put themselves i…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 08:22 AM
–

It isn't helpful to shame other men who are okay with giving me what I find sexy. If you don't like it, or don't understand it, that's fine. But it's not fine saying things like "there's something mentally wrong with men who do things that women enjoy" I mean, why? Like culture aside, what underlying moral principle would suggest that "If someone's turned on by it, it's beyond reproach"? What's wrong with a minimal amount of sexual morality? There is literally no physically safe way to do chokin…
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 08:04 AM
–

It has nothing to do with women thinking men enjoy it. Women are the ones who enjoy and are turned on by it. I am painfully vanilla compared to every single woman I've ever been with. This is more likely just you, because statistics don't bear this out. And there's a documented trend of women being choked without warning when they don't want it.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 07:57 AM
–

Not if choking is the way you express your dominance
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 07:54 AM
–

Maybe that's half true. There is a significant gap between dominance and sadism. Dominance, broadly speaking, just means being in charge. In fact if my hypothetical future wife wants to be choked, I will (with my authority as the man) say no. It could, however, be that our pornified culture makes people or women associate dominance with sadism. And/or our lack of healthy gender roles and male leadership could lead to this kind of expression.
/r/PurplePillDebate28/04/24 07:47 AM
–

Among married individuals, our first hypothesis stated that high levels of religious integration in daily life will increase frequency of sex, pleasure from sex, and emotional satisfaction from sex. This hypothesis is generally not supported: higher levels of religious integration are weakly related or unrelated with sexual frequency and with greater emotional satisfaction. Although, the positive relationship between religious integration and pleasure from sex provides some support for this hypo…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 03:44 PM
–

Since I'm not in the mood to fuck up my algorithm with religious nonsense today, I have no desire to search for statistics on what Christian men do in bed. Feel free if you have something to prove. Well, every study I could find in five minutes suggests that stronger religious affiliation (Mostly regarding Christianity) either increases or has little effect on sexual frequency, satisfaction and pleasure among married adults. What does this have to do with the original complaint or this OP? It se…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 03:21 PM
–

That is true, but I'd need to see some evidence of a correlation with religiosity or conservatism.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 03:08 PM
–

Most conservative religious men (At least Christian ones) will at least try to only have sex with their wife (Edi: Assuming they weren't at one point not religious conservatives), so I'm not sure what lies behind this. I'm not aware of any data that suggests people who have tons of sex partners in their history end up having better sex in the long term (Though ofc people will be more awkward the first time), in fact if anything the data points in the opposite direction and needs to be explained …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 02:47 PM
1

Lao Tzu is "scarcely relevant"? Wow tell that to every major country founded on ideals of Daoism, syncretism, or zen. He's scarcely relevant to the topic, or at least the quote in question is. You mean it's not relevant to Plato humping puritanical westerners? Okay. I can't say I'm much of a Plato humper (In fact Plato isn't all that far away from Asian pagan philosophy if you get past the surface) but sure.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 02:30 PM
1

No it isn't objectively bad. You couldn't in your wildest dreams prove that it causes universal imminent harm. You subjectively don't like it and find it bad in your mind. I do not care, because I do not agree with you that moral badness depends on "Universal imminent harm" (Universal harm is an impossible criteria anyway, but that's besides the point). I am not a moral relativist, and so I am not just going to agree with your somewhat strange semi-relativism where failing to meet the "imminent …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 02:30 PM
5

There's a real air of unearned intellectual arrogance here, between the scarcely relevant Laozi-quotes and calling people who disagree with you pre-programmed.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 02:13 PM
2

In some cases, it's true that objective truth exists, but not every case and this isn't one of them. No, this is one of them. First of all because casual sex is objectively bad, so seeking it is objectively bad. It is also not unlikely to end with pressuring some women into sex (Which is already more costly for them than for you), because women are more agreeable. But also because everyone should be able to recognize that it's fundamentally disrespectful to approach a woman you don't even know f…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 02:01 PM
2

Well, no. The fact that people have different opinions doesn't mean there isn't an objective truth of the matter.
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 01:06 PM
1

While we are living things, sentient things, we are objects. Living objects. We can't objectify something that already is an object. That's like solidifying a solid, freezing something already frozen, melting something already melted. Our state is that of an object. Why are we an object? Because we're a thing. This is basically a misrepresentation. Humans aren't objects in the sense meant by "Objectification". We're a sexually reproducing living thing. We have a biological imperative crucial to …
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 10:50 AM
0

Morality is objective so no, it is actually objectively bad to pursue someone "sexually and only sexually".
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 10:37 AM
4

Putting aside explicitly religious convictions, the most obvious reason is that consequence-free sex is a lie. Not only are there generally emotional consequences for the people involved (Because they realize on some level it's not the way it's supposed to be, but I digress) but there's no 100% safe form of birth control. This means that you always risk having a child with someone you'd never pick as a husband/wife (I.e. someone you didn't in any way pick to be a good father/mother to your child…
/r/PurplePillDebate16/04/24 07:51 AM
1

It's literally called a fallacy. Yes, someone somewhere has called it a fallacy, but the Wikipedia page couldn't (Admittedly from a quick glance) cite any sources on that which have authority in logic. And even if they did, there's no universal agreement on fallacy theory within logic or philosophy, especially when you get into the "Informal fallacies". It's quite obvious to anyone reading that you are implying that comments made on the trash-fluencers' videos are made due to some pathological f…
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 07:24 PM
1

It's a stretch to call it a fallacy, as mentioned in the article it's really a type of red herring. Some people on the internet really seem to think "fallacy" is a magic word, so that if someone somewhere labeled something vaguely similar a "fallacy" then it's discussion over. If you'd take the time to read Wikipedia-page you cited, though, you'd find it doesn't describe anything being done here. It's talking about manipulative rhetoric, which I agree is a problem but not one I'd be comfortable …
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 07:02 PM
1

explained "Asserted" seems like a more apt term. Are just typical attempts to blow this out of proportion and appeal to emotions fallacy. There is no such fallacy, and even then this is a misrepresentation of it. It's not a fallacy to make judgements about people's emotional motivations.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 06:46 PM
1

The motivation was much of the discussion. Besides it's very important.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 06:40 PM
1

Do you sincerely believe this is the heartfelt motivation of the people commenting, above sadism or bitterness?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 06:15 PM
1

Are you suggesting there's some nobler goal than the simple pleasure of mocking and possibly hurting someone?
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 05:51 PM
2

This is staggeringly false. The only way you're going to take sex that lightly is if you're okay with killing/abandoning potential children.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 02:06 PM
–

What a load of bullshit. Typical woman comment. Nobody "hates" that woman, they simply mock her stupid behavior, because she's already made a clown of herself. So, you're position is they're merely sadistic? Seems unlikely These kinds of comments have an air of bitterness around them.
/r/PurplePillDebate15/04/24 11:29 AM
–

We need to also give men an analogous right to abortion There isn't even a semblance of a solid argument for this, just the unabashed selfishness of absolutely insisting on having free sex without caring for the children that naturally result.
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/24 10:14 PM
–

There are ways of not having children that don't leave a trail of killed ones
/r/PurplePillDebate13/04/24 10:12 PM
1

In this case it would be more charitable to interpret OP as affirming the norms about hitting women but using them as an example of men and women being fundamentally unequal.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/24 02:16 PM
1

Maybe I'm wrong but I associate "sex tourism" with men who travel abroad for prostitution or at least leaving the women they sleep with behind when they return, while "passport bros" can refer to men who look for long term wives.
/r/PurplePillDebate10/04/24 01:51 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter