TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

SlickShadyyy Archive

View 0 posts and 91 comments by SlickShadyyy 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)
1

are you intentionally conflating public nude photos with being nude in public or is it actually relevant in any way
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:52 PM
1

people like you really just ruin the world for others. consider that you're a detriment to humanity
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:48 PM
1

It's unprofessional to be naked on your own time? You understand this mentality is literally the most cancerous imaginable neo-puritan bullshit, right?
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:46 PM
1

no, but how I personally conduct myself is completely irrelevant
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:34 PM
1

> but it is a way of saying that we are open to sexual activity it absolutely is not, that's pretty close to rape aplogism tbh > We wear clothes because it is a way of saying that we do not want people to see our private parts. This doesn't establish why people who are comfortable with others seeing their private parts should be forced to adhere to the same conventions > It is a way of saying that we do not want to engage in sexual activity. again, just completely wrong. most sexual activity beg…
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:19 PM
1

yeah so maybe trying to prohibit behavior which could potentially arouse someone dont make so much sense
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 07:13 PM
1

Men can be aroused by covered breasts as well. If you were to actually take this argument to it's logical conclusion things like burkas would be necessary. Additionally this assumes that it's incumbent on people to dress such that they don't arouse anyone, which seems very stupid if you hold and liberal values whatsoever, and furthermore the issue was never even about public exposure in the first place unless she was topless in public when the photo was taken
/r/AntiFeminists11/04/19 05:09 PM
1

Haha imagine someone either A. Pretending to have kids on MRA for some(?) reason or B. That someone old enough to have kids is still taking this sub's bait Not sure which is sadder
/r/MensRights26/04/18 03:06 PM
1

I have literally done exactly that. I believe women have been oppressed throughout history because they have been categorically denied rights based solely on their gender, examples including the right to vote, personal autonomy, and higher education. You likely would have noticed this had you not been frantically sperging out, but sometimes that's just the way it is, I guess
/r/MensRights25/04/18 06:19 PM
1

Damn, that's interesting ty for sharing
/r/MensRights25/04/18 04:53 AM
1

Even if I were to cede the word thing, which I don't because you're wrong, you still haven't addressed a single argument of mine. Do you want to take another swing at it or is whichever parent you live with's turn on the computer?
/r/MensRights24/04/18 08:01 PM
1

The dictionary agreed with me, as your arguments are(while ig not subtle as they're pretty blatantly retarded) textbook sophistry. What your time with a dictionary apparently didn't lead you to is that sophist is also a term used to refer to pseudointellectuals, which also fit perfectly. In addition, you still haven't addressed a single argument, and this is somewhere around your fourth(fifth?) try, so maybe just take the L on this one and leave the discussion to non-brainlets
/r/MensRights24/04/18 07:16 PM
1

00ph not sure I'm accepting psychoanalysis from MRA rn but I'll drop you a line if I ever suffer a sever head injury or am in need of a laugh
/r/MensRights24/04/18 06:55 PM
1

MRA asking someone else to self reflect s e l f a w a r e w o l v e s
/r/MensRights24/04/18 05:49 PM
1

I don't know if you're a troll or just stoned. I have zeroed in on the fact that you're a fucking idiot It's just amusing in the extreme that you brought race into a debate for the stupidest of non-reasons. Lmao re-read the thread, you're the one who zeroed in on race and then tried(emphasis on try) to explain this by saying black people didn't exist in the country. and you chose the fact that a practically all-white country had white people in power. Show me where I said this, please. Better ye…
/r/MensRights24/04/18 05:48 PM
1

Haha it's amazing how you think you can so blatantly mischaracterize an argument with written records. Like if you're gonna try to strawman put a little more effort in
/r/MensRights24/04/18 04:32 PM
1

I remember back on my ninth birthday when I learned what a loaded question was, wow, those really were the days
/r/MensRights24/04/18 03:34 PM
1

At a time where 0.02% of the population was black, you think whites holding power was evidence of oppression. Nice strawman buddy clearly I need to apologise. I said everyone was white back then, when in fact only 99.98% of people were white. You've destroyed by argument entirely. The argument was over who had the right to vote, which you tried to justify by saying "well there were no black people so why would they have the right to vote" which was really dumb, but nice shifting of the goalposts…
/r/MensRights24/04/18 03:34 PM
1

So you made a retarded claim and now you look like a retard Better call the person who proved you wrong a pedant! Any other dumb shit to try to argue? I would move away from history because you really seem to have a terrible grasp of it
/r/MensRights24/04/18 04:32 AM
1

It isn't splitting hairs when your claim is that everyone was white(which is 100% untrue and easily falsifiable btw) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_British#17th_and_18th_centuries So get fucked ig
/r/MensRights24/04/18 04:18 AM
1

So you're telling me there were 0 non whites before the twentieth century? In a country with slavery? That imported slaves? Are you sure about this?
/r/MensRights24/04/18 04:07 AM
1

You keep using that word, but I do not think it means what you think it means. I know exactly what it means, and I think you're well aware of what you're doing. In fact, this whole response is a great example. Take for instance, using an example of one woman getting a degree to brush aside the staggering educational inequality that persisted for hundreds of years Yet nonetheless the idea was to privilege them. Through this vessel women were spared the hardship and sacrifices demanded of men. Eve…
/r/MensRights24/04/18 12:01 AM
1

Everyone was white! I'm going to need some sauce for what I can only hope is pasta Who's trying to find victimisation??? Wait do I need to explain why non-whites were oppressed too? Please don't do this D:
/r/MensRights23/04/18 10:12 PM
1

See this is what I mean by furiously pivoting. We're talking about who was oppressed, and now you're trying to find victimization in the fact that less attention is given to the group that was less oppressed lmao Also the fact that only white, property-owning men could vote is common knowledge bud
/r/MensRights23/04/18 07:22 PM
1

Haha wow I guess they could in rome nevermind then all women had to do was say they weren't happy and they could leave their marriages for all of history! You did it!
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:08 PM
1

Uh, every bible-believing Christian sect is this way. Just by and large modern ones don't punish those who do divorce. One sect was more or less founded specifically so that it wouldn't punish widowers, even if it isn't really permissive of divorce either. So you agree with the point you've been arguing ? (which almost always favored the man) Pre - alimony times were pretty fuckin rough if you left your husband, as you were used goods without many good means of sustaining yourself
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:08 PM
1

Comparing 100% of women who couldn't vote to 60% of men The whataboutism was in reference to the random ass sob stories people roll out instead of arguments, so try again. I know reading can be hard
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:06 PM
1

Are you another one of the retards that jumped in without comprehending that we're talking about history? Because I've never argued that they are currently
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:04 PM
1

You've given 0 facts and addressed nothing I've said this whole time lmao, you're literally just repeating talking points
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:03 PM
1

So pretty much everything you wrote exclusively applied to working class women, which is incredibly dishonest. Upper class women were denied a right to vote or pursue higher education, so trying to reframe this as a class issue is incredibly dishonest, especially since not two posts ago you were focusing on upper class women to distract from the disadvantages of working class women. Things like This traditional system was not without faults and I have no desire to return to it. However, it was d…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:03 PM
0

Ok so to be hyperspecific I was referring to divorce as would pertain to cases of women leaving their husband. Historically, it was nearly impossible for women to do so unless in extreme cases, and I think it's pretty disingenuous to act like divorce has been easily accessible(or even existent) in much of christianity - there are still massive sects that don't permit it or only permit it under extreme circumstance(which almost always favored the man) and for much of history said sects were the m…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 06:02 AM
1

Working class men were obliged to work long hours doing backbreaking, dangerous and dirty work to provide for their family, and were obliged to fight in wars at the whim of their betters. And still they didn't have the vote. Nice pivot, and I think this nicely encapsulates the whataboutism this sub embodies. Rather than just admit that women were oppressed, or even engage the idea, you constantly bring up examples of how some men were fucked too. We could go tit for tat on how men and women had …
/r/MensRights23/04/18 06:00 AM
1

Lower class women having somewhat more than lower class men, middle class women having somewhat less than middle class men? I think we do. What? Do you factor in personal autonomy or liberty when considering oppression? Or is it just a matter of filling out a checklist of particular privileges to you? Would you argue either is unimportant?
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:57 AM
1

class played a much larger role in oppression than gender ever did, but that seems to have been forgotten in the rush to paint all women as oppressed. This is sooooo disingenuous You seem fairly reasonable in your approach, so the fact that your perspective seems so dishonest is bizarre. If all women are significantly disadvantaged when you control for class, how is it unfair to categorize them as oppressed? You could use the same argument you laid out to argue that slaves owned by the incredibl…
/r/MensRights23/04/18 05:18 AM
2

ok if the idea that women are more oppressed strikes no cognitive dissonance in you there probably isn't anything I could ever tell you to change that anyway and if the fact that I dont give sources for basic history drives you away I can live with it
/r/MensRights23/04/18 04:37 AM
1

So when they, exclusively on the basis of their gender, were denied education, voting privileges, pretty much every right when married, etc, this was in no way unique and was just a huge coincidence that it happened to every woman on the basis of their gender?
/r/MensRights23/04/18 04:35 AM
1

That's funny because I seem to remember a certain King founding a new branch of the religion because it wasn't allowed hmmmmmm
/r/MensRights23/04/18 04:34 AM
0

It isn't at all you fucking retard the argument was always that women's lack of voting rights was a form of oppression, and that was my rebuttal to his attempt to counter it by saying some men didn't have the right either Seriously learn to read
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:55 AM
1

Ok You're an idiot who doesn't substantiate anything so that really means nothing to me
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:34 AM
0

That is literally what you quoted lmfao So I guess it's really 'about' you learning how to read
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:33 AM
1

I'm guessing it's undisputed fact that black people are discriminated against This has to be troll lmao almost got me buddy
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:31 AM
1

"Men had a right to vote, so what if they had to die for it. Womyn deserve it by right of vagina but not those dirty men, they need to die for it." You're so close! You're almost there! Keep trying buddy, I truly believe that eventually you'll parse our argument and figure out what we were talking about "Men beat womyn, womyn are victims, boys will be boys, amirite? Haha mixed up your strawmen there, but good effort! No laws to protect womyn, none whatsoever." You are tantalizingly close to the …
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:17 AM
1

I mean all he's done is repeat that he's right over and over to himself lmao I didn't need to twist anything
/r/MensRights23/04/18 12:09 AM
-2

So you unironically think in cases where 60% of Group A can vote and 0% of group B can vote there is no oppression of group B? Being disagreed with by someone this fucking retarded is actually a nice self esteem boost, so thanks buddy
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:33 PM
1

Holy shit, this is actually peak sophistry "I'm right, you're wrong, and I don't have to prove it because I'm right" I can't believe I'm seeing this degree of circular reasoning nakedly stated in the wild... Its beautiful
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:25 PM
1

Hahaha imagine pulling that "you know that isn't all you've said" condescension and then not being able to pull a single example there is so clearly just 0 thought going on right now
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:16 PM
1

Why don't you hit me with some examples bud
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:09 PM
1

Saying that women have been oppressed ever anywhere is hyperbolic SJW ok retard
/r/MensRights22/04/18 11:06 PM
1

If someone tells me divorce has always been a part of christianity, I'm not going to waste time sending them links they won't read. If any of these had any more research depth than one google than I would be happy to help, but a lot of what I'm having to respond to is willful ignorance Just post something credible to back up your side the argument and people will believe you. lmao
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:58 PM
1

Gonna post any evidence of there being a law that allows men to beat their wives? The only thing you can reply with is "it's socially acceptable" but even that is flat out lying to yourself. jfc so many dipshits trying to weigh in that are apparently to illiterate to figure out what was being discussed. You have pointed out just how stupid people can be, you have provided no facts, no evidence, you rely entirely on emotion and lies you've been fed. I mean women were literally their husband's pro…
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:56 PM
2

good bot
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:38 PM
-2

hahaha "im right ur a cultist >:((((" Excellent argument, especially without engaging a single thing I wrote gj buddy you've reached peak sophistry
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:31 PM
1

because if you believe women could legally be beaten by their husbands IN THE WEST (since you bring up all the western talking points feminism loves to talk about) then you are insane. If you think that's never been the case then you are incredibly ignorant. Not really much to say outside that, you're just fucking wrong lmao You need to be prevented from having any kind of power because you are the reason men are turned away from help they need at shelters, all because you believe they deserve i…
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:24 PM
-1

feminism loves Islam You guys honestly need to browse information outside of your circlejerks, it'd probably blow your fucking mind
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:17 PM
-5

You are talking about something that has been abolished for nearly a hundred years (unless you count contemporary Muslim countries). "You're talking about something that doesn't exist, except for the many places it exists" Also the argument was literally over whether it had ever happened in time, so this point is completely moot either way but thanks for playing ig Besides, you are speaking pure nonsense - being beaten was certainly a cause for divorce as far back as Christianity existed, I even…
/r/MensRights22/04/18 10:16 PM
1

What does men being turned away from Womens' shelters have to do with the fact that women could legally be beaten by their husbands lmao? You've literally just brought up an issue men face that is completely disconnected, which is the literal definition of whataboutism
/r/MensRights22/04/18 09:02 PM
-8

Again the point is that as a man you would have the opportunity to. IF you had a pussy you just didn't have access to one of the most basic right in a democratic society and there wasn't shit you could do about it. Like you're trying to act like men were more victimized because they had an oppurtunity women didn't?? 'Unbelievable.' (added a period to that one word because i am VERY srs btw)
/r/MensRights22/04/18 09:00 PM
-8

Lmao @ the arguments on this sub sometimes. What does that have to do with anything? I know whataboutism is the big meme at this point, but so much of this sub just seems unironically dedicated to it
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:59 PM
-4

Here, at least, there were only ten years where all men could vote but some women couldn't. So to establish oppression, 100% of one group has to be able to vote and 0% of the other? So, in your eyes, when 60% of men vote, and 0% of women vote, there is no disparity there? That's fair to you? I'm asking because that seems like the only interpretation of your argument but it seems untenable There's no actual reason to think it was ever legal to beat your wife. I seriously wouldn't recommend trying…
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:49 PM
-15

You realize men couldn't vote unless they signed up to be drafted and killed right? So you're saying that they had the opportunity to vote lmao, women didn't even have a choice. In addition, draft dodging has always been incredibly easy if you're at all wealthy and is obviously a non-issue in times of peace women were given the privilege of lacking autonomy or being granted basic rights wow I never thought about it like that, all those women who had the shit beaten out of the, every night for ye…
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:34 PM
5

It's a bold man who will admit his mistakes, I respect it
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:26 PM
4

Dearth is a word lmao
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:21 PM
-7

So, when women couldn't vote/weren't considered citizens, and legally could be beaten by their husbands, this was not a form of oppression?
/r/MensRights22/04/18 08:20 PM
1

Hot take from someone who uses 'darling' in every post but ok
/r/MensRights30/12/17 12:43 AM
1

Darling - I'm actually disabled A perfect summation of all your comments tbh
/r/MensRights29/12/17 11:16 PM
1

whimsey Cyber vocabulary P¬) Is the difference a lack of both the self awareness and being funny, which leaves autism and time wasting?
/r/MensRights29/12/17 10:46 PM
1

This is bad trolling, and you should feel bad
/r/MensRights29/12/17 09:27 PM
1

Yes darling - living whimsical and not taking the Redditarati as seriously as they take d'emselves. No darling, that't not a point. Unfortunately for you, condescension doesn't actually make you smart. In fact, pro tip: This level of condescension doesn't even make you seem smart.
/r/MensRights29/12/17 08:12 AM
4

He gave you a specific criticism and you listed an array of other, hypothetical critiques and strawmen rather than actually responding like a functioning adult. Do you have a point?
/r/MensRights29/12/17 12:04 AM
8

🤔🤔🤔
/r/MensRights28/12/17 10:57 PM
1

Can you show me what you mean? Nothing I've seen in myreally cursory research about OHRT really illustrated your point, but I'm loathe to underestimate Canada's ability to be hyper-autistic about this kind of thing
/r/MensRights09/12/17 09:17 PM
2

That isn't how the law works in the slightest. Clearly you have no idea regarding the legislation, or how it's enforced. To try to prosecute someone for this, you would need repeated instances with clear malicious intent from someone who legally cannot discriminate against you, ie employer or landlord. What you're referring to is a common misconception due to a preponderance of misinformation and propaganda on the subject
/r/MensRights09/12/17 03:59 AM
3

Yeah not sure how this is in any way a bad bill, let alone 'harmful to men'
/r/MensRights09/12/17 03:13 AM
-2

More of a straw man than an ad hominem, because this shit literally never happens
/r/MensRights03/12/17 10:22 PM
2

What a stock photo lmao
/r/MensRights24/11/17 12:24 AM
1

I don't think subreddit size has much to do with it- there are very small, VERY radical small subs. I think subreddit culture has a lot more to do with the cross section of people interested in its subject matter present on reddit than most other commonly mentioned factors. In this case the throbbing hate erection held for all things SJW on reddit(and much of the internet at large) has turned this into more of a reactionary anti-feminist sub than one interested in grappling with actual issues
/r/MensRights14/11/17 12:49 AM
1

I can kind of agree with that, but I don't think becoming a circlejerk is by any means inevitable(there are subs that haven't become them). It really seems like MensRights was a circlejerk from jump, though
/r/MensRights13/11/17 06:06 PM
2

I agree. To be fair, it seems like the vast majority are either exactly that, completely retarded, or both, so I see where people are coming from when they mock the movement. It's a real shame tbh this sub mostly accomplishes the exact opposite of what it intends to
/r/MensRights13/11/17 04:16 AM
1

Right? The lack of self awareness in this sub is fuckin crazy
/r/MensRights13/11/17 01:59 AM
1

Are you seriously arguing the only grounds to criticize Tucker is his party? And then arguing this guy is an obtuse partisan? Nice fucking meme
/r/MensRights12/11/17 08:38 PM
9

People are downvoting but none are actually able to mount a defense of Tucker... Really makes you think
/r/MensRights12/11/17 02:10 AM
12

/s ????
/r/MensRights12/11/17 02:09 AM
1

Listen man, I don't know if you're new to online discourse, or are just fucking stupid, but unironically bragging about how badass you are and how pussy you fuck doesn't make you look cool or alpha. You just come across as sad and insecure. Also I am well aware of the definition, and I stand by it. Faggot.
/r/TheRedPill10/11/17 09:01 PM
0

Thanks for the new copypasta man, it's pretty rare to run into this level of obliviousness in the wild. I suggest you check out the sidebar if you think acting tough online doesn't make you a massive faggot lmao
/r/TheRedPill10/11/17 08:28 PM
1

we actually like women sex FTFY. Have we been reading the same sub lol?
/r/TheRedPill10/11/17 07:44 AM
2

I don't think most people would argue that there is 0 basis to saying TRP might at times have adverse effects for women, but the kinda shit people circlejerk about 'misogyny' is just 100% ignorance usually
/r/TheRedPill10/11/17 01:05 AM
3

Multiple people on TwoX were discussing how this step wasn't far enough, and how TRP is an example of another 'misogynistic' sub in need of deletion
/r/TheRedPill09/11/17 12:22 AM
1

We've seen many examples of these types of classes and we know much about the 'safe space' echo chambers of the left. This is not how statistics work. The idea that all colleges are safe spaces/hugboxes whatever buzzword is autistic right wing propaganda propped up by extreme anecdotal cases. That comes off as incredibly naive, but thank you for your opinion that's all I wanted to know. What's truly naive is your perception of American colleges. I would strongly suggest you diversify your media …
/r/MensRights26/10/17 02:37 AM
1

That's a bit of a cop out, do you believe this class would, do you believe most liberal colleges would? It's not really a cop out to not have a definitive answer to a question I have no background information for. I get that you really want to fish for a certain answer to make your point, but it's pretty dumb to expect me to have insight on a class I know nothing about in a school I know nothing about with roughly 0 supplementary info Yes but what do you believe? If it's relevant to the class I …
/r/MensRights26/10/17 12:31 AM
3

I guess it would depend on the class? I would certainly hope people wouldn't censor data that interrupts their narrative, or cough cough whine about it on certain subreddits
/r/MensRights26/10/17 12:22 AM
11

Not seeing any actual refutations to these stats...
/r/MensRights25/10/17 11:58 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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