The Andrew Tate Case

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
872

This is something that gets to me. In the current day, men are not are inundated with messages of young women “owning” their sexuality and that they don’t need imposed moderation, protection, or chaperoning from men, including male family members—“because that’s old fashion bro”—yet men are slandered for the misbehavior of some men who are sexually predatory when women fall for their traps and financial rewards.

Women aren’t as adept as seeing threats and some don’t even think of threats. And yes, several have admitted this to me. But 1. Men aren’t to protect them because of this and being weaker than this. And 2. men
are to be blamed when things go wrong.

3 Likes
873

Right.

  • I don’t want your help. I don’t need your help.

.
.

  • Why didn’t you help me??? Why?
3 Likes
874

Exactly.

And this strong-woman narrative frequently pops up in films and music. A few months ago I watched a Netflix series called The Watcher in which a family had repairs being done on their home. He catches the one of the workers eyeing his young daughter. One day he corrects his daughter’s dress. After she leaves the room annoyed, her mother said to the dad, “I thought we were going to let her own her sexuality”, whatever the heck that means for a teenaged female.

These days it’s considered weird by some if one questions a man about his intentions with one’s daughter. And you shouldn’t intervene at all in sons and daughters’ activities because “they’ll rebel”.

Then there’s my favorite line expressing the ultra-permissiveness of the current day: “But when s/he’s eighteen years old you can’t… (insert any expectation or standard upon one’s children’s conduct and activities).”

Pretty much every time I hear of these dangerous positions women find themselves in (and I’ve known well of them even in my own life, not just cases of Hollyweirdos), I’ve wondered what planet their male family members live on.

2 Likes
875

This is actually a cardinal sign of mistreatment/abuse.

I use me for an example because its true, but “normal” women don’t find me attractive. Alarming, scary, “not my type” sure. But someone they want to be around or with? Hell no.

When a normal, well balanced woman who was raised by a kind and loving father see dangerous, threatening, domineering or potentially violent men they go the other way.

But when a woman who was raised by violent, abusive, domineering men see this, they Don’t see a threat, they see all of the comforts of home.

Now some of these guys here can laugh and front and have some guffaws about these women with “daddy issues” but the truth is they are laughing and stroking their egos at the expense of people who are very deeply hurt and broken in ways that aren’t funny at all.

These are the same women that end up beaten and often murdered by men who see them as objects, gimmicks, sources of income any many other things other than a human female who has been mistreated so badly for so long that she thinks its normal. Or even worse- like Tate, who knows this and actively capitalizes on it.

6 Likes
876

I think it’s limited to that, lesbians and college students. In the real world, most women don’t believe that crap.

1 Like
877

Do you know what human trafficking is

“the use of force, fraud or coercion to obtain labor or commercial sex acts”

He struck up relationships with numerous women (as did his brother), duped them into falling in love before flying them out to Romania. After flying them out, he would use physical violence, coercion (threats) and fraud to get what he wanted out of these women.

“Actually, I flew you out here. You’re gonna need to pay for that ticket, you’re gonna need to pay for rent… and if you want to go home you are going to have to pay for that. I love you by the way, but if you oppose I’ll beat you senseless”

What I’ve outlined above is tame if you look at how he actually treated these women. He flew women in on the pretenses of a relationship (fraud), piled on debt and threatened the women with violence (coercion, assault) if they didn’t comply. He has also been accused of rape, and I doubt rape would be beyond what the guy is capable of.

Andrew Tate used many different forms of manipulation to get what he wanted. In the end he had these women on a leash, obeying his every command. He was the ‘pimp’, and what he did ticks just about every box in the sex traffickers playbook.

It’s coercion, and this kind of conduct doesn’t belong in the workplace. If you look up the LEGAL definition of sexual assault, using coercion ticks that box.

One shouldn’t be presented with such an ultimatum, and taking the ultimatum for stardom doesn’t negate the perpetrators culpability… nor does it shift the fault onto the actress…

The perpetrator… shifting the blame onto the victim doesn’t make coercion acceptable. The victim knows they are replaceable in this context, and the consequence for saying no is dropping out yet missing the opportunity of a lifetime.

In Australia, it is illegal for authority figures/people in power to use that power/authority to procure sexual favors. I believe such is the case in America too.

When people push back by insinuating the onus is on the victim, I always wonder what they think of the perpetrator. Even if we were to blame the victims for giving in and doing something they find disgusting for fame and fortune… does this make the perpetrators actions acceptable? Is it somehow ok for powerful men to behave like deviants and use their power to ONLY boost the careers of the stars who are willing to get down with them?

This happens a lot in the modelling business. I saw an interesting documentary covering sexual abuse of male models, and the practice is absolutely rampant. Do you blame the male model for sucking a dick if they’ve been told
“by the way, if you don’t do this I will ruin your career… no one will ever work with you again and your name will forever be tarnished in this industry… but if you do this you gain access to this photoshoot that you already had access to”

Or in the case of Harvey Weinstein… what I’ve said above but “you gain access to this role that you were already rostered on for”… The addition of coercion is not justifiable, and compelling sexual penetration through coercion meets the legal definition of sexual assault

This is out of context… Dario Argento slept with this boy when he was 17… which is above the legal age of consent. Harvey Weinstein slept with girls as young as sixteen… so how is Dario Argento worse than Harvey Weinstein? Harvey Weinstein was also accused of forced imprisonment/rape of a seventeen year old girl…

The lack of insight/emotional intelligence some have in regards to abusive dynamics and how or why they eventuate actually astounds me.

1 Like
878

The age old “looks for the same red flags that were present in my father” dynamic

Many would instantly blame the women, and only the woman. Despite the woman not having access to any kind of support/therapy/role model growing up

Sow the seeds of trauma without intervention and dysfunctional characteristics will seep into your character. Come adulthood and such attributes are so firmly entrenched within the individual so society at large categorizes them as a ‘write off’.

all the while predators smell blood in the water… but it’s the victims fault…

1 Like
879

Good post.

It’s likely from disinterest too. As I’ve said numerous times, being a middle-aged man with children, when I reflect on the permissiveness of some parents back in my teenage years in the 90’s I am astonished. Only someone totally disconnected couldn’t see what allowing some women to do would result in, physical and sexual abuse.

I think some men, particularly the worst elements of the Manosphere, get a buzz out of “daddy issues” discussion, especially in cases of pretty women they know they want. I admit some of such “daddy issue” women are irritating because of their anti-social behaviors but I don’t think their brokenness is funny and I don’t get schadenfreude from bad things that happen to them.

2 Likes
880

And this is what separates the men from the Tate fans.

1 Like
881

Good insight.

1 Like
882

Allegedly, right? I would be curious to read details about piling on debt and “false pretense of love”. Threats of violence I can understand, and if true then sure, he coerced them. And he should have the book thrown at him.

If they’re stupid enough to fly across the world for a stranger and open personal lines of debt,they’re just dumbasses. Not victims. Imagine being held responsible for a crime every time your wife made a dumbass financial decision.

883

So what is the answer? Institutionalize them because they can’t think for themselves and any negative thing their own consequences of choice bring on to them is clearly a crime they’ve suffered through?

Slutty Suzy at the club blowbangs a bachelor party because they told her sweet things and she’s a victim? Bullshit.

A rough upbringing doesn’t eliminate personal responsibility.

884

No, but it definitely explains a lot of behavior.

And what men do with that information says a lot about them too.

1 Like
885

Sure, but sleaze isn’t mutually exclusive with criminality.

Women can think for themselves. Even women with a rough past. And they should be expected to.

You’d think this guy was chloroforming women, driving them off in a van and getting them hooked on heroin for slavery the way people are acting.

Were they free to leave or chained to walls?

1 Like
886

So lets say someone takes a girl in her natural state (clean slate) and beats her sensless from a young age. Leaves her hungry, locked in a shitty bedroom for indeterminate periods where she routinely hears her mom getting the shit beat out of her Then once she gets ripe at maybe 10 or so step dad starts banging her and sharing her with friends. This goes on until she runs away.

Now in a parallel universe we have the same girl, age, etc, except her parents care and support her. Help with homework and take her to extra curricular activities. She turns 18, graduates and goes on to college.

Which one do you think is better equipped to navigate life in our world as an adult?

Both are entirely plausible and actually happening as we speak.Not a trick question. Real answers only.

Go!

Edit: I’ll even leave a hint.

1 Like
887

I can see that you’re fighting pretty hard to maintain your position.

Some things really arent worth fighting for.

This is definitely one of them.

1 Like
888

Neither scenario makes Tate a criminal for their actions. Unless the violence allegations are true. Actual force.

1 Like
889

But I’ve outlined the definition of sex trafficking in my response to you, and presented an explanation as to why he has been charged.

You come out with some schtick about personal responsibility… which has NOTHING to do with why he’s being charged…

Don’t twist my words to suit your narrative.

Your opinion here doesn’t factor into whether Tate get’s charged. The LAW is what matters, and by legal definition Andrew Tate broke the law. By the LEGAL definition, Tate is guilty of sex trafficking (whether that be the legal definition in Romania, my country or the US)

Not only did he break the law, but he bragged about how corrupt Romania was. He fled the UK following pending investigations for… you guessed it… human trafficking and rape… Instead of thinking “phew, I’m a piece of shit and that was a close call” he decided to CONTINUE with his ‘business’.

It is ILLEGAL to pursue a relationship with someone under false pretences, fly them out of country only to tell them they have “debt” racked up and they must pay for that debt by getting involved with pornography… and they’ll get a small amount of income from the proceedings while the ‘debt collector’ cashes in on the profit margins. That is the definition of sex trafficking… sex trafficking doesn’t always involve pinning someone down and sexually penetrating them by force nor does it have to involve getting people hooked on heroin (which takes weeks if not months of daily use therefore I can’t imagine that’s a profitable practice)

That sounds a LOT like pimping doesn’t it…

It is ILLEGAL to procure any type of sex act through malicious coercion whether that be a commercial sex act or behind closed doors

It is ILLEGAL to deceive or coerce for financial gain… that is called FRAUD

The way he bragged and harped on about how corrupt and lawless Romania is certainly doesn’t help matters. There was due process, the RIS (the equivalent in America is the FBI) raided his properties, they had a warrant for his arrest and to seize his assets, search his property etc.

This wasn’t some slap-dash decision. The RSI was sitting on mounting evidence for almost half a year prior to Tate’s arrest. The guy KEPT incriminating himself, when it was “go” time the case was practically ‘already shut’.

890

Reads as “The answer is abundantly clear, but something about manhood and bootstraps. I can never be wrong, god damnit!”

:rofl:

1 Like
891

To note

Using coercion for sexual gain is illegal. If it can be proven in court (very hard to prove, but in Tate’s case he’s practically served himself up on a silver platter) you will be charged with sexual assault.

Deceiving others for personal/financial gain (creating relationships in order to fuel his ring of trafficking) is fraud… and meets the definition of sex trafficking

In Australia sex trafficking occasionally occurs as outlined

Chinese woman who hardly knows English is told by a distant relative that they can procure work overseas. Chinese woman comes to Australia… but oh wait… she doesn’t have any money, hardly knows English and now she has a “debt” to pay off… she needs to pay for the flight in and pay for a flight out… Oh and they’ll have to pay rent for accommodation, so the “debt collector” factors that in when deciding to pay the woman diddly squat.

She has to work at a happy ending massage parlor and/or brothel to make ends meet. Blackmail is used to prevent the woman from going to the authorities, typically under the guise of “if you say a word I’ll show your family what you’ve been doing here” which would result in familial being ex-communication. There is usually no violence, or forced intake of narcotics.

Prostitution is legal here, and therefore there isn’t nearly as much of a demand for this type of crime relative to what you see in the US.

But… it sounds an awful lot like what Tate did doesn’t it?

Lure someone over on false pretenses… use coercion to push the woman into sex work…
In Tate’s case there appears to be a violent component, and the man may be guilty of RAPE…

But no, AnDrEw TaTe is a gift from the gods! ALT-RIGHT UNITE!

To be fair, only portions of the alt right adore Tate. The ‘Alt-Right’ and ‘alt-left’ really need to be split up into a number of different sub-groups… but that’s a different conversation.