But a lot of it (that I have read) is women feeling bad for their choices. Here’s an example from the article.
“She added that rough sex turned into something she had not consented to.” = Very bad and from how I understand that is rape.
" I was so intent on just wanting to please him and just wanting him to be happy. But looking back on it" = So she did consent at the time she just changed her mind later on.
I think people stuck in abusive relationships and the Tate women + the Women @BrickHead is describing are totally different.
One is stuck in a relationship where they “Love” their partner but get abused and in most cases are financially dependent on their partner.
The other loves the lifestyle someone offers them but are free to walk away but choose to do things which they later regret and consider abuse.
The Irony here is that these female victims are victims because they chose to take advantage of emotionally and psychologically weak men who were vulnerable to make money.
Let’s not act like these ‘victims’ got tricked into signing all their assets to a man who claimed to love them… They willingly took advantage of people for their own benefit but cried when they realised the same was done to them.
“After talking to him online she agreed to travel to his home in the Romanian capital, Bucharest.”
This wasn’t some poor dear in a vulnerable spot in life who a man took advantage of. She moved to Andrew Tate to be thrilled and make easy money.
There are many things one can do in life to alleviate boredom and she likely was in a position to be bored (I can’t be sure) because she had a comfortable life.
She likely is pretty and young and if she chose to be caring and nice she wouldn’t even have to work and could get plenty of luxurious experiences through a normal, well-adjusted rich man.
Some people also don’t seem to realize that some women are incapable of being attracted to normal men.
@Dani_Shugart this came up on my podcast feed. It’s about what we discussed in this thread previously. I think Peterson is late in addressing this issue compared to other authors I’ve recommended but he is likely more popular because he hasn’t been as abrasive as they have been.
They chose to work for Tate as “cam girls” to make money. Whether they made as much as him is besides the point. And from the looks of it, he provided some of them with housing.
Coincidentally last night (and I’m not saying this to make it like I’m some perfect parent), I told my wife while we were discussing the state of the world, “If C___, when she’s older, leaves the home half nude or I catch her baring her body on the net for all to see, we’re having a problem!”
I’ve discussed this exact issue you brought up with other men who have daughters.
So i think Tate is an incredible example of Social Media algorithm outcomes. I pointed to this earlier but figured it’s worth mentioning again.
I actually found very few clips of Tate i didn’t agree with. Others will look at that statement thinking im a misogynist, but in reality - i saw clips of him almost exclusively talking about these things. I don’t think this clip is him being misogynistic at all, rather honest (albeit in the most rude way possible) about misconceptions presented by feminism.
I think many others have seen clips almost exclusively of him saying deliberately misogynistic things, and hate him for it.
Why would so many people support someone who has actual misogynistic messaging? Perhaps because thats not the message they’ve seen or heard; almost like they were reading a different book with the same title.
Algorithms are designed to keep the viewer’s attention.
If that means you want to watch videos of sandwich reviews, it will show you those.
If you want to watch part of the manosphere (that doesn’t hate women), it will show you that.
If you want to find reasons to hate Andrew Tate, it will show you that.
Trump is another perfect example of this.
If you hate him, you’ve never seen anything from him you agree with - only soundbites and clippings of text that intentionally leave out context.
If you love him, you’ve never seen some of the actual downsides to what he did in office, only the stuff you want to see.
I think the reason why Andrew Tate is so divisive is because he says some very truthful things in ways that need to be said, but he also says things that are genuinely unkind and mean spirited (alongside the umbrella of misogynistic comments/things he’s said and done). Blame the algorithm; most people who hate him have never watched a long-form interview with him. Same could be said of those that love him.
I have a serial-monogamist acquaintance with two kids who has been called an incel numerous times because he’s politically incorrect.
Ain’t it funny how if some guys offend some people, their ability to get women is questioned? It’s weird. “This guy offended me. Hmm, does he have a woman?”
The same goes for the accusation of misogyny. “This guy made unflattering remarks about women. He must hate them!”
I work with nearly all women and spend much time with female family members (I don’t know how a misogynist could bear that) and if someone asked them, “Is B a misogynist,” they’d likely respond, “Are we talking about the same guy?”
I’ve been told I “sound like an incel” before too. I guess they had to go with “sound like” one because they knew I was married with kids.
Several famous men of the past “sounded like incels,” though they sure weren’t.
The biggest poon hound I ever knew “sounded like an incel” according to today’s standards.
We really have let our grasp of definitions slip as a society. I believe this is due to the times (in part) but also intentionally via certain extremist groups with intent to cause a societal collapse, but that’s a derail for another day.
My issue with that clip is, who is he talking to? To women? Is that his audience? We know his fan club is mostly young men and boys. Also, these women he is describing are not the majority of women. Most women want families. Look at the tv shows and movies, the romantic comedies, that are popular with women. I think weak, immature men, with little to offer as far as personality, charm, intelligence, confidence (like Tate himself), are afraid of women who have a sense of individuality, self awareness and are capable of independent thought. Women who are with a man because they want him, not need him. Plenty of couples are made up of people with two careers and they manage to make it work. The best advice to give boys is to learn how to cook, do laundry, keep a clean home and do what’s hard because it’s hard.
Well, kind of. For the first time in history, more than 50% of women over the age of 30 are childless, and i don’t see that trend reversing - perhaps you do?
Who is this directed at? My larger point has nothing to do with this. I’d also argue that weak men now beta orbit women in a desperate attempt at getting laid. They are now “male feminists”, but that is not the point being made nor what I’m trying to say.
Sure but data points towards better outcomes for children and marriages with nuclear family roles (mom stays at home to raise the children, dad goes off to work). There are a million examples of this not working as well, so it’s not needed to be poked at - I’m saying the majority of families in this situation have better outcomes for all parties. This also doesn’t work for everyone for sheer financial reasons.
Agree whole heartedly, particularly with the last part. With the only addition being that girls should be taught this as well (as they used to). While I’m out working 12 hour days and double-timing college courses after work while bringing home a 6-figure salary, i don’t need more money; i need someone who can watch after my children, raise them into the good humans we need them to become, and help take some of the burdens off my plate. A woman bringing home 70k a year won’t help me with that, but a wife who will stay at home will.
^when women decided to start saying “I don’t cook, i don’t clean” like it was a good thing to be celebrated, it decentivised men from working to their potential. I simply don’t think women want to hop on board the wage slave until death situation men have - at least not as badly as they think they do.
Can we be objective here and say that most women would be happier raising children than working to pay bills until they die? I think the feminist argument going against this is silly and self-imposed victimhood.
with him here, and I don’t think that’s a surprise to anyone considering what I’ve written.