TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

fishermans-frienemy Archive

View 1 post and 63 comments by fishermans-frienemy 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)
40

It's disgraceful that judges know the legal system is flawed and biased against men, and yet nothing changes, except more rules created in further favour of women.
/r/MensRights05/02/26 02:31 PM
22

Basically, kick up enough fuss, and get as many others as you can on board (especially women - there are still plenty of reasonable women who actually want true equality out there!), take it to local papers, TV anyone who will listen and put your side across. That can sometimes have an effect. Just don't assume it'll be an easy task, like it is for women.
/r/MensRights22/01/26 12:09 PM
42

They write this sort of discrimination into law as "positive discrimination" (as if it could ever be positive). The excuses I've seen from other councils around the country that do either this, or offer women's only swimming slots but not men's, is that they are trying to encourage women's health, because it's so hard for them to find the time or afford the prices. Nevermind it's actually men who tend to be in poorer health and that, as ever, feminist lobbying leads to women being treated like c…
/r/MensRights22/01/26 12:07 PM
7

I'm glad he went to live with his father. Hopefully he'll protect him better than his mother. I bet, despite whatever she said or did to help her son, the mother had doubts about him and didn't stick up for him enough, such is the brainwashing of women these days.
/r/MensRights20/12/25 04:12 PM
2

I honestly now believe it would have been better for his son to have been taken after all. And I'm not saying that lightly or in jest. OP has both admitted and shown from his described actions that he wouldn't protect his son like a proper father would. Maybe he acted the way he did preciselybecause he had something to hide from the staff. Maybe his relationship with his son looked suspicious enough to the other guests and staff that they felt they had to intervene, and perhaps the staff were ac…
/r/MensRights18/12/25 12:21 PM
0

The only thing worse than the tiny number of actual pedos in the world are the Karen's who feel the need to invade everyone else's lives pretending it's "for the kids". No, don't just accept this intrusion into your family lives. Protect your own kids from all creeps, including the ones who claim they're also just trying to protect your kids by taking them off you. We must have sunk so low as a society, or be so fearful as a society, to be allowing such damaging intrusions into private family li…
/r/MensRights18/12/25 12:03 PM
6

It infuriates me that experiences like yours go ignored and girls and women are just seen as wonderful and innocent flowers when in reality most are as far from as any typical male.
/r/MensRights18/12/25 11:11 AM
7

So we've gone from "boys will be boys" from the previous generations of middle aged women to "boys are all misogynists" from the current gen of middle aged Karens. "Boys will be boys" was harmful in its own ways, of course, by excusing and enabling some bad behaviours, but it was also a real-life, experiential explanation for some of the more instinctive but harmless young male behaviours as well. While I think boys should be taught to respect women (albeit in the way I was taught "back in my da…
/r/MensRights18/12/25 08:44 AM
6

You've described "Schroedinger's Feminism", where women are both of those cases at the exact same time, until such a point as one of those cases benefits them more. It's a somewhat humorous (although also correct) observation of feminism, with the name based on Schroedinger's Cat, a thought experiment by Erwin Schroedinger from 1935. A cat is in a box that you can't see into. Is it alive or dead? Well Schroedinger suggested it was both alive and dead until the point when you open the box and get…
/r/MensRights29/10/25 12:38 PM
3

Yeah, and most people (many men included) are willing to jump on the bandwagon to defend a female accuser purely due to a protective instinct towards women, and decades of feminist propaganda, even without any evidence other than her claims. and don't think that propaganda hasn't had an effect on many of the prosecutors who decide whether to bring charges, meaning the thresholds are often less in practicality than for either less serious, or even much more serious crimes. It can often make a cas…
/r/MensRights22/10/25 07:02 PM
10

Unfortunately not. I'm remember there have been polls in the UK showing that most people, men and women, will use it to colloquially mean any sort of non-consensual sex, even if a woman forced a man to penetrate her, then most people in the UK would say she raped him if they're not aware of or not considering the exact legal definition. There have been calls to change the definition because of that opinion most people hold, and in the interests of equality, but hard core feminists (you know, the…
/r/EverydayMisandry22/10/25 06:45 PM
10

These people go to great lengths to justify being an OF sex worker or argue that it shouldn't be mentioned in articles like this because, despite what they say, they see it as something to be ashamed of themselves. It's projection. Remember these people consider themselves "wordsmiths", twisting words to suit their meaning. When the truth is stated plainly, even without any hidden meaning behind it other than stating a fact, they will see the worst possible interpretation. Says more about them t…
/r/MensRights15/09/25 08:41 PM
1

I won't lecture you on how Islam works. But I'm also not going to assume you know it better about Islam's teachings than a non-muslim who has studied the quran just because you were brought up Islamic. It all depends on how fundamentalist the practitioner is, anyway, the same as Christianity. But there's an awful lot more fundamentalist Islam in the west than fundamentalist Christianity right now. And there seems to be an awful lot of mistreatment of women from particular parts of the Islamic co…
/r/MensRights10/09/25 12:27 PM
4

It seems to work. It only didn't work for me when using a VPN, but threw up an error stating such. It's a YouTube Short if that affects how you're able to view it? Otherwise it's here: https://youtube.com/shorts/JzD1MUJU7qg
/r/MensRights10/09/25 12:16 PM
14

I don't think they want "low status men to still get laid". I think "low status" men just aren't on their radar so they don't care about them. And they don't care about the "low status" women those men partner with either. Because you're right, it's all about control and power for the feminists, so they target those they perceived to still have more power than them. Not even power over them, or oppression of them (but they'll lie about that), just people who are more successful in life than they…
/r/MensRights28/07/25 09:13 AM
3

Well, at least she's wiping up for the men, after using the gym equipment. She said she just hands the women the spray and towel to do it themselves. Not sure if it's some sort of backwards chivalry thing she's trying to make men feel "lesser", but it won't work. I know she said she takes an age to clean up for the guys, but it's still a self-own in my view.
/r/EverydayMisandry16/07/25 08:41 AM
72

Oh, well, check out r/psychology. There's already been a few posts this week of a rather shite study saying women actually aren't more attuned than men to hearing a baby crying in the middle of the night (as has been thought and observed for centuries) and men are just lazy for not getting up to provide the child care. Ya know, to go feed the child with their lactating breasts men have these days... (Well, actually I guess some "men" do!) Of course all the feminists in that sub (psychology is un…
/r/MensRights05/07/25 07:55 AM
3

There's no "epidemic" like you say. Look that word up, FFS. It happens to a marginal number of women when considered in context of the entire bloody population. In other words, not worth the very specific and sexist policies that feminists push, or demonising all men. Feminist women need to get out of their pathetic echo chamber, look at the real stats and get a f'ing grip, stop taking dodgy shortcuts after a night out in their stupid outfits. Most men consider the same risks when they're out, w…
/r/MensRights02/06/25 03:42 PM
1

I've seen an increasing number of false allegations being revealed over the last few years as well, both current and historic. I think a lot of people, men and women (who aren't part of the extreme feminist mindset) are sick of the gender divide that feminism has been pushing, and are pushing back on that narrative, whether consciously or otherwise. And, of course, the press are noticing which way the wind is blowing and have started feeding whatever works into the algorithm to increase clicks a…
/r/MensRights14/05/25 12:59 PM
11

As with all emotionally charged actions between the genders.
/r/MensRights09/05/25 07:16 PM
5

Let the Cambridge dictionary explain some reality to you: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/paragraph "👏 consisting 👏 of 👏 at 👏 least 👏 one 👏 sentence 👏 and 👏 beginning 👏 on 👏 a 👏 new 👏 line 👏".
/r/MensRights11/04/25 10:45 AM
4

Yeah, it's called "real life", and it runs completely counter to your crazy imagination.
/r/MensRights11/04/25 10:41 AM
8

It seems western feminists could have more of a beneficial impact by targeting those middle-eastern countries, than fighting for further privileges above men in countries they already have equal rights. But they won't do that for the same reason big organisations don't put pride versions of their social media profile pictures on their middle-eastern company socials.
/r/MensRights26/03/25 01:47 PM
2

Were they real adverts? There have been a lot of activism posters being put up on the tube, as well as adverts they don't like being torn down, I hear. But then again, Sadiq Khan was the mastermind behind the "Maaaaate!" adverts.
/r/MensRights24/03/25 05:03 PM
1

Say something often enough and it becomes "true" in a lot of people's eyes. That's how the Mail got the reputation you speak of, and also how the BBC got it's reputation for being unbiased.
/r/MensRights24/03/25 10:45 AM
8

And don't forget, "words are violence" now too!
/r/MensRights24/03/25 10:42 AM
2

I don't want to project my feelings onto others at all. I'm aware many have concerns and issues with their own circumcisions. But not all do. I do not. I'm glad you haven't tried to convince me that I do have issues and am repressing them (I'll admit, that's where I thought your comment was going), and the point I was merely making was that many Intactivists do that and can actually cause a false PTSD in men who may be susceptible. I almost was, and went so far as to try restoring before I reali…
/r/MensRights11/03/25 09:02 PM
2

In my experience, die-hard "Intactivists" have never had a particularly strong relationship with the truth. They exaggerate some of their claims (such as this one you've brought up) to try and make their points hit harder. They also deny any man's experiences who says he hasn't had any issues with his own circumcision. Yes, believe it or not there are plenty of men out there who are happy with their circumcised penises, get enough pleasure from them, have no aesthetic issues like skin bridges or…
/r/MensRights07/03/25 12:20 PM
3

The first thing I asked when I heard about feminism and its "fight for equality" was "Then why is it called feminism?" I can't believe more people don't ask that question, or at least don't believe the lies told in defence of that name. Words have meanings, and the names that people and organisations choose can reveal a lot about them.
/r/MensRights06/02/25 11:49 PM
4

The very name "feminism" shows it was never about equality. They may have had to fight for equal rights in some regards early on (they must still be fighting hard for the equal rights to be drafted though, I guess? 🤔), but the name itself showed the real aim was to swing beyond equality and towards female superiority. If it had been about equality they would have called themselves egalitarianists or similar and fought for the same rights for both men and women where it was found that men also la…
/r/MensRights06/02/25 11:40 PM
2

A bit more bad from the Vax though, as that was designed to make the body produce spike proteins with no care for an upper limit of that production being set, and ended up with a hell of a lot of it in the gonads. Studies showed people's bodies were still spike protein factories at least 6 months after their last jab. Natural infection, on the other hand, means the upper limit of spike proteins is far, far lower, as it ends when your body has reacted and fought off the infection and killed all t…
/r/MensRights19/01/25 12:50 PM
8

Just another one of the lies they tell in their propaganda campaign to further build the feminine-bias in society and all its legal systems.
/r/MensRights06/01/25 12:24 PM
9

I also highly doubt their HR departments would just say, "OK, enjoy your retirement, Joan" without also asking how they intended to pay for it!
/r/MensRights18/12/24 07:55 PM
9

But working involves responsibility being held accountable for the quality of their output. Best to get out of there quick!
/r/MensRights18/12/24 07:54 PM
7

I'm not going to comment on the truth of what you've said other than to say that no one other than the two people involved in cases like this actually know the truth (unless there was video evidence or someone else watching). You believe your friend, and that's great, everyone wants their friends to believe them, but that has also led to many cases going through the courts that shouldn't have because some women are willing to lie for each other based purely on their belief of their friend's word…
/r/MensRights17/12/24 10:09 AM
4

No one is defending those men, they're disgusting. But you're verging on "whataboutism" here. We're discussing the ridiculousness of blaming men, as a whole (which Bindel does for almost everything) for this woman's choices. Yes it can, and probably should be seen as a problem in society that men who are willing to do this even exist, however Philips saw those types of men as a golden opportunity. She made a conscious decision. She didn't need to lean into making use of those types of men in ord…
/r/MensRights16/12/24 10:22 AM
9

She'd say Philips was forced into it as the only way to keep growing her business because it's content that men want to see.
/r/MensRights16/12/24 10:02 AM
2

I think women are more likely to push for this type of response as well (the Karen effect). Men will just suck it up and probably pay, to their own detriment. But I also think these types of articles are more likely to be written only so long as they can highlight that the issue has affected what are generally viewed as protected demographics. I agree articles like this are not what the battle for men's rights should become about, but I think they're an interesting, if very subtle, nod towards m…
/r/MensRights15/12/24 12:14 PM
-1

Ok, that has nothing to do with this. I'm just pointing out that this article made me think how the media never takes on these sorts of stories just for men, unless it also includes other demographics. I even said it's not a clear case of discrimination. Not intentional anyway, but it might highlight media unconscious bias. Just an interesting discussion point but you've decided to derange the conversation onto something entirely irrelevant.
/r/MensRights15/12/24 12:07 PM
1

I don't think it's clearly a men's rights issue, but I think it highlights how these companies react to the sexes. They probably also dropped the guy's fine in case he saw this story and went to the news with his, highlighting unfair treatment. A preventative measure. They'll gladly treat women differently to shut them up (the Karen effect), but if there is a man currently on their books too they know they've got to look to be treating everyone equally. But if it was just men affected, who would…
/r/MensRights15/12/24 11:59 AM
-3

I agree, it's not really a "... because woman" story, but I also think the media only picks up on outrageous fines like this for women and elderly couples. Never seen this kind of story backing up a man's rightful claim against outrageous fines.
/r/MensRights15/12/24 11:51 AM
5

It's Indian women coming from a more traditional society desperately trying to catch up with the modern West's version of feminism, skipping a few steps along the way and not being able to quite piece together why they now suddenly think the way they do. Don't get me wrong, western feminism hasn't exactly followed a logical path from the point of view of any reasonable person, but at least there was a path through the different waves. Indian feminism seems to have suddenly just taken off and alr…
/r/EverydayMisandry14/12/24 09:28 AM
1

That's why a lot of these liars will convince their friends it happened before they go to the police. Then their friends can "vouch" for them and even create their own lies in support. Sometimes it's not even lies, they get that convinced it's true by their friend (because why would their "friend" lie to them?!) that their memories of events get corrupted, so they see the guy who they might also have known well, and liked, through a different lens. That cheeky smile across the room is then recon…
/r/MensRights14/12/24 09:12 AM
4

12 hour difference between your post and the one you're replying to. I'm not saying you're wrong, or who you're replying to was or wasn't lying (that's the whole point of this thread surely, not to believe everything or jump to conclusions/accusations), but a lot could have happend in that time. And we all know how Reddit works by now. The activists are generally the first to jump on any of these stories and post their diabolical rhetoric. Then, eventually, normies with the real opinions of the …
/r/MensRights14/12/24 09:04 AM
3

Actually they don't. Women's statements are counted as stronger evidence than the denial, as it's viewed that if they were willing to go to the police, there must be something behind what they're saying, so it tends to make it through the initial hearings. That's not just a sex accusations thing though, it's the way society views the system - people are generally taken at face value as being honest so an initial complaint/police report is generally seen as having at least some truth to it otherw…
/r/MensRights14/12/24 08:57 AM
9

The current justice system allows them to come forward with very little and spice it up with further unfounded accusations from their friends, so it becomes a "she said, she said, she said, he said" case. This automatically makes most people (who haven't already believed the first woman) definitely #believeallwomen against the one guy, even without actual evidence, and even though we know a lot of women will lie for each other just on the word of a friend if they think it will get their friend "…
/r/MensRights14/12/24 08:50 AM
7

It'll do well at first, as all the staunch feminists make sure they buy something they don't even want from the aisle. Then, after a few weeks, the staunchness of their feminism will wither as they realise the aisle doesn't offer anything different or innovative that they can't get for a more reasonable price elsewhere.
/r/EverydayMisandry25/11/24 01:01 PM
8

Of course they did. They had the privilege of being sent to war on behalf of the bankers, in order to protect the women, elderly and children left back home. And hopefully, someday soon, we'll be granted the same immense privilege of being sent to the front lines of the latest bankers war in Eastern Europe. The ladies are just jealous! /s
/r/MensRights23/11/24 06:33 PM
1

She should have had the chance to say "no, that's not the man who did it", even if just through being shown the arrest photos. Or maybe, "in the interests of protecting the 'victim'" they couldn't show her any photos. You know, in case of PTSD. Maybe she didn't see the guy clearly when it happened. In which case she should have made that clear, and maybe she did, but the police don't care about the truth if they've got the chance of a prosecution. The police and prosecution service are very much…
/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates18/11/24 04:18 PM
13

Men don't need a button to mute women. We have a natural filter. I'm not joking either. I used to think it was just a spiteful joke from feminists annoyed that their husbands ignored their tormented squeals, but I've found more and more that I subconsciously tune out my own wife when I'm concentrating on other things but she feels the need to vent about her day. But it's a win-win in my mind. She's had the chance to vent, and I didn't have to listen to it, even though technically I did! But to b…
/r/MensRights23/09/24 12:54 PM
10

Yes, but I'd say 90% of that 90% (so about 80% of society overall) have no idea what they're supporting. They just assume anything labelled feminist is good. The other 10% of that 90% are the hardcore feminists pushing for all their anti-male nonsense. I find it strange so many people fall for feminism, even just when you think about the word itself. As a child I questioned the very name "feminist". I didn't think it sounded all that inclusive or representative of what they claimed they wanted (…
/r/MensRights20/09/24 08:29 AM
1

Absolutely. It boggles the mind!
/r/MensRights17/09/24 09:11 AM
8

Anything that doesn't include the word "dominated". That's the problem word in the term. "Male dominated" suggests there are women in the same space/industry, but they are ruled over in an unfair way by the men in that space. In most cases that's just not true. Where I work now there are mainly men at my level, but the CEO is female. Technically, that makes my work a "female dominated" place. But it's not seen that way, so let's stop manipulating language against men, white people, straight peop…
/r/EverydayMisandry17/09/24 09:07 AM
2

Men don't have their own spaces or groups anymore, particularly in work places. Almost every organisation will have a women's group to promote their own agendas, but men aren't allowed men only groups. Look up in and out-group bias. You'll find that women have in-group preferences that put their own gender ahead of men. Men have the opposite, an out-group bias to protect women over men. On nature this allowed for success of the species (need less men than women to make babies). In modern day it'…
/r/MensRights16/09/24 01:26 PM
1

I'd rather see tit for twat. (For those who don't get the pun: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tit-for-tat )
/r/MensRights16/09/24 09:53 AM
6

And yet the producer in the article is equating penises with breasts. I, and I think most others here, agree with you that they should be viewed in the same way as a woman's vagina or vulva, which is why we're calling this article/producer out. If she wants equality, she needs to show a vulva for every penis, not a penis for every boob.
/r/MensRights16/09/24 09:46 AM
2

It might be true, but surely it's ridiculous and unnecessary? Anyone with a penis, or with experience of one, knows they can and do change size (even while remaining flaccid) from one instant to the next, same with testicles. I certainly wouldn't be pointing it out as a "continuity error" if I happened to notice an inch difference from one shot to the next. Strange to expend so much effort on this only to miss the Starbucks cup in a fantasy setting.
/r/MensRights16/09/24 09:42 AM
2

That can make it even more unrealistic. I can't remember the last time I had sex movie-style (under several layers of neatly tucked in bedsheets). Normally I throw my wife on the bed and raw-dog her on top of the covers. Anything that doesn't match with that in movies, I just can't identify with anymore! /s
/r/MensRights16/09/24 09:38 AM
5

I was thinking about the comedic view of male nudity the other day having seen an increased number of videos on Instagram of those degradable swimming shorts. The guy, although a bit embarrassed, takes it well and usually laughs along with the women, usually including his wife/gf who gave him the shorts (without him knowing they'd break up in the pool/lake/sea), even though the women are laughing AT him. Imagine if a group of guys did that to a woman.
/r/MensRights16/09/24 08:21 AM
2

Unfortunately the real men (or should I say, real people, because there are plenty of decent women out there too) are all out in the suburbs or further out, living their best lives, for now. They have too much going on in their lives to worry about the latest "crisis" on the news, or even pay attention to sinister changes in policy. That currently goes on mainly online and in the cities. Alas, those cities, and increasingly the online spaces, are what's slowly overturning a lot of previously wel…
/r/MensRights16/09/24 08:14 AM
6

I thank you for your efforts, but I wish it wasn't necessary. If these laws were originally meant for true equality, they would have written "men and women" everywhere they refer to just women, and your work wouldn't be necessary. It's like the "misogyny is extremism" laws the UK government is currently plotting. If they really cared about extremism, they'd recognise misandry can be (and often is from rad fems) extreme too, and they'd word their policies to combat both. But they won't. Because i…
/r/MensRights15/09/24 01:21 PM
3

Men have a built-in bias to protect women, called out-grouo bias (which is why you feel this way). Women have a built-in bias to protect women, called in-group bias. These biases are as nature intended, in order to protect women, the child-bearers, and assist propagation of the species. Feminists know this and abuse the system with it in unnatural ways it wasn't meant for, but works wonderfully (for feminists). It's why laws have become gynocentric and #believeallwomen is a thing.
/r/MensRights12/09/24 09:09 AM
6

What's there to be proud of anyway? After all, "a woman's work is never done", as they say! And as the legend that was Sean Lock once said, "maybe that's why they get paid less!"
/r/EverydayMisandry01/09/24 10:08 AM
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

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