TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

stickynoodles Archive

View 1 post and 73 comments by stickynoodles on TheRedPill subreddit and various other subreddits related to The Red Pill community.
Search in:
In subreddits:
More
Filter by year/month:
Upvotes Comment on Subreddit Date (UTC)
1

Yeah.. sorry, but no. Maybe if you had used your real account you'd have more credibility.
/r/MensRights16/07/16 12:04 PM
11

'Only hurts' as in it 'doesn't help blacks, only hurts them'.
/r/MensRights07/07/16 11:36 AM
–

because you have no way of knowing how many of those individuals have overlapping experiences. I think it's safe to assume that Men being forced to penetrate and being penetrated are mostly non-overlapping since the assailants are generally female in the first scenario and male in the second. This is a pretty bold claim, that doesn't match my experience. But your experience is anecdotal and has absolutely nothing to do with what I said. I'm not making a random claim, I provided more than enough …
/r/MensRights06/07/16 06:00 PM
–

But the rhetoric is tough. It feels completely invalidating to my own lived experience and to everything I know from other rape survivors, to have men tell me that there is no such thing as rape culture. At the same time, I can't "prove" that rape culture exists. Do you know what is completely invalidating many men's own lived experiences? The fact that the CDC considers that being made to penetrate someone against their will is not rape and that feminists use this completely this data over and …
/r/MensRights06/07/16 02:52 PM
3

Are you honestly saying you're more qualified to determine whether someone was raped or not than an entire justice system? Do you understand how asinine that is?
/r/MensRights06/07/16 01:02 PM
1

Exactly, he's the potential father, not the father, and as such he has no rights to decide or know what a woman wants to do with her body.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 05:18 PM
15

Two wrongs don't make a right. The current system of alimony and child support system is messed up, but that doesn't mean it's right to remove a woman's right to what happens to their body. This is why I hate people like you, you bring MRA's everywhere a bad name. Instead of wanting to improve the system so men are treated fairly you instead want women to be as worse off as men. That is not what equality is about. That is not what the Men's Rights movement is about.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 03:44 PM
1

It is. For it to be considered a child then aborting must be considered murder. If it is not considered a child yet then abortion is fine, but neither the man nor the woman are considered mother or father. That is why abortion is legal, because while she is allowed to abort it is considered her body and the fetus does not have rights as it is not yet a child.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:55 PM
-1

I already made a solid point, you're just not able to read.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:53 PM
–

You tried to shift the conversation into an off-topic discussion about how men should be allowed to decide when women get to abort or not regardless of their rights to their own body. To me it seems like the ban was very fair. Slavery has been abolished for quite some time now, you don't get a say in what others do with their own bodies regardless of their gender.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:09 PM
–

That is the most complete bullshit analogy you could make. It is not even remotely similar to the subject at hand. Why don't you try to come up with a proper analogy instead?
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:01 PM
0

So you're saying you should have the right to kill your child? That would be murder.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 02:00 PM
–

She is not the sole parent, because she's no parent at all until she gives birth. He's not a father either, so he has no say in it. If you do want to claim that in that situation they're both parents and the fetus is a child then your whole argument is mute because you'd be claiming abortion is murder.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:29 PM
–

Of course it should, it's her body. You cannot dictate what others do with their bodies, it's not within your right. I do agree that a man should also be able to opt out of being a father and having nothing to do with the child, but that doesn't mean you get to decide whether or not your partner goes through with the pregnancy.
/r/MensRights14/06/16 01:27 PM
7

It is not wise to come out in defence of every celebrity accused of beating their wife. What if it turns out that he did it? That's not what's happening here. People are 'coming out in defence' of Johnny Depp because the story is iffy as fuck. None of it makes sense. Even if we assume that he did in fact hit her, it still wouldn't make sense, whether he's a celebrity or not. She was the one who brought their divorce and the DV to social media, so it's perfectly acceptable to judge her however we…
/r/MensRights31/05/16 02:55 PM
2

But yeah, they should be paid equally. I disagree. It doesn't matter if you're a woman or a man, if an actor/actress is more prominent and more people would watch the show because of them then of course they should be paid more.
/r/MensRights18/05/16 02:33 PM
1

45% tariff on foreign goods sound familiar? Not to me at least. I'm 99% sure he wants a 25% tariff on Chinese imports.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:45 PM
–

I think you should practice debating yourself. If the original claim has no sources or arguments to back it up then it is nothing short of impossible for anyone to properly counter it. The burden of proof is on Mikeavelli, who made the claim, not on whoever disbelieves it.
/r/MensRights07/05/16 04:37 PM
1

There is indeed a stigma associated with women in STEM fields, which I find to be a problem. A much bigger problem is that instead of addressing this issue and trying to show girls from a younger age that science is cool this issue is being completely ignored and 'equality' is being forced on to women by making getting into STEM fields/jobs easier for them.
/r/MensRights06/05/16 02:56 AM
1

Yeah, because black feminists certainly don't act exactly the same!
/r/MensRights26/02/16 02:59 AM
–

Yeah.. I'm pretty sure you just ignore all the black chicks on those silly protests.
/r/MensRights26/02/16 02:58 AM
–

Yeah, definitely only white. I have to ask, what exactly sets white women feminists apart from the others?
/r/MensRights26/02/16 12:43 AM
1

You do realize nothing of your post makes sense, right?
/r/MensRights21/02/16 09:09 PM
1

Are you an idiot? Once again, you claim to be smarter than a dog but time and time again you fail at basic logic. Even if the analogy is fallacious, which it isn't, it still wouldn't change the conclusion. Also, there's something called the argument from fallacy, you should look into it when you learn how to use google. Oh, and nice strawman, too bad only a retard would fall for it.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 06:36 PM
1

Do I look worried to you? Why would you be worried? FYI, the flat earth belief rested on faulty 'scientific reasoning', a.k.a. fallacies. No, it rested on false premises. A false premise may lead to a false conclusion without any logical fallacies. Again, do you still not know what fallacies are? You've had days to learn what can be googled in 5 minutes and yet you somehow fail to understand it. At this point I'm starting to think you're not a slow learner, you're simply too dumb.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:57 PM
1

Your slavery "analogy" fails on so many points. I suggest you take a logic class. Hahaha.. No, it doesn't. You're just going through hoops to try and find some semblance of a reason to discredit the analogy, but we both know you're full of shit. Even if the analogy was incorrect, it still has no effect on the conclusion.
/r/MensRights21/02/16 05:52 PM
1

My point is that statutory rape isn't rape, because we already have laws covering rape. And owning black people isn't slavery because there were already laws covering slavery. Slave owners weren't punished for slavery when it wasn't illegal Yes, they would. You couldn't own white or native american people. If you did you would get punished. I hope you see how contradictory your words are? Yes, I'm glad you agree. That quote is incredibly contradictory because I replaced rape and statutory rape w…
/r/MensRights20/02/16 03:11 PM
1

I'm debating posting in /r/justneckbeardthings, but I think you're more sad than cringe
/r/MensRights20/02/16 03:02 PM
1

People thought there was a scientific reason for the world being flat. Thanks for proving my point. I don't think you understand fallacies at all. What exactly do you think a fallacy is? Yes, people thought there was a scientific reason for the world being flat, where's the fallacy in that? Honestly, it takes 5 seconds to google what a fallacy is. I'm not so sure what's worse, the fact that you keep talking about fallacies as if you knew anything about it or the fact that you choose to stay dumb…
/r/MensRights20/02/16 01:31 PM
–

Good, you proved my point. When slavery wasn't illegal, slave owners weren't punished for it. That was not your point. Your point is that statutory rape is okay because at some point in the past it wasn't illegal. Lol. The fallacies. Right back at you. I used the exact same fallacies you used. It's interesting how you start whining about fallacies the moment you're not the one using them. Each situation has to be judged on its merits, not whether its legal or not. Thats exactly why this discussi…
/r/MensRights20/02/16 01:28 PM
–

Are you going to say that the law is not considered an authority on the subject of laws Yes, the law is not an authority, it is the law itself. That's like saying that science is an authority and therefore using science as basis for an argument regarding science is a fallacy. However, there was indeed a fallacy there, made by you: Post hoc ergo propter hoc You have this opinion that because someone can't legally consent, they aren't mentally capable of consent. You claim that they have that opin…
/r/MensRights19/02/16 11:17 PM
–

If it was slavery, owning black people would be punished by the existing laws prior to all slavery being illegal. The fact that the law had to be changed to cover it, beyond the original slavery law, means that owning black people is not slavery. FTFY Remember when it was right to beat slaves? Remember that Germany and the Netherlands allow someone much younger to sleep with someone older, provided they make no complaint? Remember that its 16 in Nevada? You claim its wrong, so go and rally peopl…
/r/MensRights19/02/16 10:59 PM
2

So because you don't agree with the law it's OK to break it? The law is the law regardless of whether it's right or wrong. If you feel that it is wrong then go ahead and try to change it, but you still cannot break it until you do. That woman broke the law, and she should be punished accordingly like a man would be.
/r/MensRights19/02/16 10:43 PM
1

Well, I'm 100% sure you're a full blown retard. GL in life, and be sure to look both ways before crossing the street. That's how most 'special' people die.
/r/MensRights11/02/16 12:17 AM
1

You're just stupid, aren't you? It is simple math, the woman WILL BE OUT OF PRISON BEFORE SHE GIVES BIRTH. Honestly, it's that simple.
/r/MensRights10/02/16 07:27 PM
2

I don't even like her and have never watched anything about her than those joke stealing comparison videos, but every single joke she's accused of stealing is low hanging fruit. I'd be really surprised if she didn't come up with it herself. It doesn't take a particularly funny person to make those observations which she is accused of stealing like women being the ones dressing up their husbands, but it does take a comedian to turn an observation into a funny joke. If two comedians make a joke on…
/r/MensRights09/02/16 12:27 PM
1

You said less serious crimes. In my region, that's what constitutes less serious crimes. In your region less serious crimes are punished with 3 years in prison? Holy crap. It's an invented position that you've chosen because it's easy to take down. Choosing a six month sentence vs. a 9 month pregnancy was precisely that. No, I said that for any prison time under 9 months this cannot be abused, then I gave an example. It is not in any way a strawman fallacy. While she's waiting in a detention cen…
/r/MensRights08/02/16 02:08 AM
0

Summary convictions for non-violent crimes in my jurisdiction (Canada) regularly have upper sentences in the 18-36 month range. Would a woman get pregnant to get out of a year long jail sentence? Absolutely. Where does it state that this applies to every non-violent crimes? And even with your invented straw man scenario of six months, there would still be some women that would rather suffer 9 months of pregnancy than 6 months of prison. Oddly enough, some women actually enjoy pregnancy and don't…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 05:19 PM
-1

So you're saying if a woman got 6 months jail time, she'll get pregnant in order to get out of jail despite the fact that by the time she gives birth she'd been out of jail for 3 months? You do realize that it takes 9 months from the moment of conception to the birth, right? And if she's been sentenced to jail for more than 9 months then it was a pretty serious crime, no one's going to release a murderer or a rapist just because she got herself pregnant.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 03:40 PM
–

Yeah, someone is really going to get pregnant to avoid a few months jail time. It's so worth it, considering that they'd have been out of prison for several months before that happens. If someone has been convicted for several years then it has to be a pretty serious offence in which this would not apply. Downing Street said alternatives to custody would not be appropriate in every case and in some circumstances it could be in the best interests of the child for both mother and baby to be togeth…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 02:23 PM
1

Downing Street said alternatives to custody would not be appropriate in every case and in some circumstances it could be in the best interests of the child for both mother and baby to be together in prison. I think that answers your problem. Also, your quote is relevant to the tagging system, it has nothing to do with the mothers who might be released.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 02:17 PM
–

It's wasting money when someone is jailed despite there being other alternatives. According to the article there's 100 in-jail pregnancies every year, and given the extra benefit of the child actually being allowed to spent time with his/her dad I think those 100 women make for a pretty good test group. Why you think that babies shouldn't be allowed to be with their fathers if the mother is in jail when there's an alternative is beyond me.
/r/MensRights07/02/16 12:19 PM
-3

Yeah, just randomly start taking the babies away from their mothers after 2-3 months and dropping them by their fathers' doorsteps. It's not like it's beneficial for a child to have both parents or anything, and surely it's easy for the father to suddenly have to take care of a baby that hasn't been part of his life for months. Trying to find perfectly good alternatives to sending someone to prison for petty crimes really is disgusting, this PM has no idea how beneficial prison is for newborns a…
/r/MensRights07/02/16 11:54 AM
-5

Am I the only one that thinks this makes sense? It's not like locking people up when there's other alternatives is doing any good other than wasting taxpayer's money, and if these new methods are proven effective then it's win-win for everyone. Not to mention that if the baby's not in prison then the father can actually spend some time his baby, and what's wrong with that?
/r/MensRights07/02/16 11:49 AM
1

There's nothing on google that even remotely suggests his suicide had anything to do with feminism or men's rights, nor can I find any feminist expressing happiness that he died. Where exactly did you find this connection? And instead of being an asshole and giving a lmgtfy link do you mind giving actual evidence for your post?
/r/MensRights06/01/16 01:36 AM
-2

The moment I read 'Debian' I assumed this was /r/justneckbeardthings and then was seriously confused by the rest of the title What the hell, this isn't funny..
/r/MensRights06/01/16 01:25 AM
3

Honestly, it's pretty good. No affirmative action or safe spaces or any of that bullshit. The reason for those 3 "experts" to be horrified is that they take for granted here in the EU like maternity leave, child care, abortion clinics, etc. are non-existent or frowned upon over there, and those are their metrics for equality. In 10 days of course they're only going to scratch the surface, and if they're assessment of gender equality is done by touring the country then it's a lot easier to witnes…
/r/MensRights20/12/15 04:21 AM
13

The fact that he felt the need to say that is very sad. The reason he said that is because there's a difference between rape and statutory rape. If a young man eagerly has sex with an older women then it's statutory rape. If a young man has unwilling sex with an older women then it's just rape. He calls the fact that he has to jail a child sex offender a pity. No, he says it's a pity that a seemingly good grandmother turned out to be a child sex offender. All you're doing is twisting his words. …
/r/MensRights18/12/15 08:06 PM
10

I have no studies to back up this next claim but I have the hypothesis that women have a higher rate of blaming others/the environment when something goes wrong than men, who are more likely to blame themselves. One of the most interesting bits in the video is when Karen explains how testosterone decreases risk-aversion and increases confidence, and so when men are faced with assault instead of blaming society they seek to be prepared for such an emergency. This means that they do the opposite o…
/r/MensRights18/12/15 06:45 PM
–

Before anyone asks, here is the video she is responding to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlXHH3hCGxc Bree's video seems to be very well meaning, but ultimately her message of helplessness when it comes to sexual assault despite having the power to put a stop to it right away seems to be the perfect example of how feminism does nothing but disempower women.
/r/MensRights18/12/15 06:34 PM
1

No, you posted a serious link as satire and got banned for it. Once again, your thread does not in any way encourage a healthy discussion and therefore has no place in their subreddit, just like this thread has nothing to do with /r/MensRights.
/r/MensRights16/12/15 06:28 PM
1

So you went to /r/feminism and posted a video about a guy making fun of two idiots complaining the office is too cold, implying that every feminist is as stupid as those two who didn't understand that men have to follow a dress code. I really don't see why anyone would ban you, clearly your thread was meant to start an interesting and productive debate! It's not like generalizations are a bad thing, right?
/r/MensRights16/12/15 06:03 PM
1

So you're saying you want that company to promote people based on the colour of their skin in order to be more diverse?
/r/MensRights15/12/15 04:16 PM
3

Oh please, she said very explicitly that diversity is more important than merit. That is very very different from a CEO acknowledging that a company should be more diverse. Should it be more diverse? Yes. Should you be hiring and promoting employees based on the colour of their skin? No, and yet it's exactly what you're defending. Your entire posts can be summed up to "we should encourage discrimination in the workplace as long as it solely benefits women and minorities."
/r/MensRights15/12/15 04:14 PM
3

Of course someone would need to be fired. Why would a company have more people than it needs? If you want to diversify that team then someone has to go. Natural diversity matters, if the best person for the job is a woman or from a minority then great, awesome even. However, forced diversity is horrible and is by definition considered discrimination, you can't hire someone who's objectively worse just because you want your company to seem diverse. Oh, and she made it pretty clear that diversity …
/r/MensRights15/12/15 03:59 PM
1

Well, technically he never said anything that was untrue, he just didn't fully explain what the wage gap meant which would have taken at least an extra minute of the show when it wasn't fully relevant to the topic at hand and there were more important points to be made. He doesn't mention diversity in the workplace or anything like that either, which is where a SJW would definitely go, so I'd say it's much more likely that he was just trying to stay out of a huge shitstorm. Even if he did took h…
/r/MensRights15/12/15 03:47 PM
–

So you're claiming that those men who are probably doing their jobs perfectly well should be fired just so the companies can get a more diverse team?
/r/MensRights15/12/15 01:27 PM
3

Yeah, IIRC in that one he uses it as if a black woman makes 66% of what a white guy makes on the exact same job, which isn't true. However, that doesn't change every other reason he gave for disclosing your salary. Also, there's plenty of evidence that women don't negotiate their job offers and raises as men tend to do. Either way, your salary should reflect on the quality of your work, not on your negotiating skills.
/r/MensRights15/12/15 12:51 PM
6

There's a better segment (although pretty similar) on his actual show in the s01E10 of Adam Ruins Everything, just so you know. His show is actually pretty interesting, and the great thing about it is that he gives references to the studies and also provides a solution or alternative to the problems at hand.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 11:21 PM
1

I know. I'm just pointing out the law considers this worse than bribery, which just doesn't make sense.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 01:49 AM
–

It depends a lot on whether it's a public school and it might not be a crime in that state. Also, bribery would be direct proof of corruption while having an inappropriate behaviour just gives a possibility of it, and yet for taking a bribe she wouldn't be sentenced to anywhere near 5 years in prison even if it was a crime in that state.
/r/MensRights14/12/15 01:41 AM
–

Should she? What if she had sex with their fathers instead? They could get better grades because of it but it wouldn't be a crime. What if they bribed her instead? Same thing, not a crime. She should be fired, but 5 years in jail is ridiculous
/r/MensRights13/12/15 05:22 PM
–

Well, she is a victim of a guy releasing a private video of her. There's no doubt about that, we know that for a fact. The thing is, is it a crime or not? In some places it is, in others it isn't. I also don't agree that sex between adults should be considered a crime. Yes, she is in a position of power, but she'd be in the exact same 'position' if she'd been their boss instead and that would be perfectly legal for a boss to sleep with her employees, just wrong.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 12:59 AM
8

They might have by sharing the video. That's what she's saying she's a victim of.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 12:54 AM
–

I don't think she knew that it was illegal, she assumed that because they were all adults and it was all consensual what she was doing was legal. That's why she says in the video she knows what she did wasn't okay, that she'd understand if she got fired and even not able to teach again for it, but not being sent to prison. But both that and the sharing of the video comes down to state laws. In some states it's okay, in others it's not.
/r/MensRights13/12/15 12:39 AM
2

I'd argue the chairman and the student were not speaking in English either, so this is a translation of a paraphrasing of a summary of what a student said several years ago.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 11:24 PM
–

I don't want a burglar to go into my house, so I make sure I lock the windows and front door. If one day I forget to lock my door and my house is burgled I will feel like an idiot and that my carelessness is to be blamed, but the burglar still committed a crime and should pay for it. This is the exact same thing. Yes, you should be careful with videos and photos you don't want leaked, but that doesn't give other people the right to share private videos or photos of you.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 11:21 PM
1

Some time ago I saw a study on /r/science (I think) that claimed that there was indeed a wage gap between men and women with the exact same job positions even if you take into account education and extra-hours. The conclusion of the study is that this wage gap was a consequence of women asking for raises less often and when they do ask they asked for less, and that by disclosing our salaries we eliminate the awkward pay negotiation and ensure everyone gets what they deserve. Sadly, I cannot find…
/r/MensRights12/12/15 11:12 PM
–

Maybe the language used is melodramatic because he was paraphrasing something that happen several years ago and not quoting what the student said word by word.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 10:22 PM
–

She was not the one in charge, and the students are not victims. Her crime was inappropriate behaviour with a student, it wasn't rape. She also claims to be a victim but not of such a relationship. The crime she's talking about is sharing a private video, which is as bad as revenge porn.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 10:07 PM
–

I agree with what you said in your post, but in this case all 5 students were over the age of 18. There was no minors involved, both the woman and the 5 men were consenting adults. The problem really was that she is their teacher, and because they are their students such a relationship brings a whole sort of issues. At the very least there's a conflict of interests, at most there's an abuse of power.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 08:26 PM
8

This was not rape and this was not statutory rape as they were all consenting adults. Her crime was inappropriate behaviour with a student, which is a different crime. I'm not saying that makes it okay, just that we should make a distinction as they are wrong for different reasons.
/r/MensRights12/12/15 08:23 PM
19

Did you even watch the video? Every single word of what you said is 100% false. This woman is a teacher who had sex with 4 students who were over the age of 18. They were not children. They were not minors but fully consenting adults. If they had not been her students then what she did would have been 100% okay. The problem is that they were her students. She was in fact their teacher, and that makes it illegal because regardless of age she still has power over them and that means she can misuse…
/r/MensRights12/12/15 08:10 PM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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