If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Andrew Tate (and people like him)
JustV
Community Manager Posts: 5,313 Part of The Furniture
Genuinely wondering - does any of what he says resonate with you (particularly the guys here)? And if so, what do you like about the things he says? Is there anything specific that connects with you?
I'm not asking if you endorse his crimes or anything (I know he's recently been arrested for human trafficking and other things) - just whether what he says resonates with you in any way.
I'm not asking if you endorse his crimes or anything (I know he's recently been arrested for human trafficking and other things) - just whether what he says resonates with you in any way.
The truth resists simplicity.
1
Comments
However, the existence of Andrew Tate and people like him is definitely indicative of some of the problems that young men face, it's just a shame that the people who end up filling that need for a male role model always seem so predatory. The more nuanced discussion that nobody ever seems to have is about those that end up turning to people like Tate and why. So I guess I'm glad you asked the question, since it's not something I like discussing anywhere else because of the stuff surrounding the topic.
I'm honestly not really sure what else to write about but this is interesting actually to see what others opinions about him are.
Thanks for sharing your perspective, @Supernova.
Also, super true about the money-making thing. It's funny how there's always some kind of hustle going on behind it all. I was watching a video recently about how to calculate your 'sexual market value' which was full of the usual incel talking points. Right at the very end, it turned out the guy was advertising a service where he would calculate yours for you, for a fee. It's quite sad to see people weaponising this type of loneliness and social alienation for profit.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts too @Amy22 - even though you're not a guy it's still super interesting to get your perspective. I think I hear what you're saying, like irrespective of everything else, he's obviously tapping into something real for a lot of young guys out there.
I'm cautious of parasocial relationships of any kind to be honest, but I'm especially cautious of those that would constitute a kind of pseudo male role model. My Dad died when I was 15 and I have struggled socially ever since, so I'm precisely the kind of person people like Tate might prey upon. The things you miss by not having a person like that in your life, especially as an adolescent, are broad and can hurt you for life. Bonding in general sure, but how to shave, ambition and planning for the future, friendships and romantic relationships, finding a place in society, what it even means to be a good man or dealing with mistakes for example, are all things I wish I could've discussed with my Dad. I was lucky in that, despite his many flaws my Dad was a good man, and I can remember his example despite only having a view of it when I was young. I had a lot of amazing women in my life too. My Mum, Aunties and Nanas are/were amazing people who did so much for me and I respect them immensely, so reflexively most of the Tate or incel rhetoric disgusts me. But I understand that many might've been even less fortunate than me, might've had no good role models at all, male or female. Many might have grown up witnessing abuses of many kinds, or having been poisoned by particular views and experiences. Many of these people are just vulnerable and looking for some support and affirmation of any kind, and then the word incel gets brandished like a stick to beat them with. It makes me sad because I see some of my own issues. I realise that when we approach those people with hostility, they are only ever going to respond with hostility, and as a result we are going to drive them into the arms of people like Tate and whatever clones come after him. No problems are ever going to be solved like that. My follow up question is, do people want to solve those issues or not?
You're absolutely right, it's very sad to see people manipulate that kind of loneliness and isolation for their own gain. It's sad but it's not surprising given there's clearly a market for it. Perhaps we can address it by looking into WHY there is a market for it, but maybe I'm just a raving lunatic for suggesting such a thing. I've actually been thinking about why people like Tate, or at least my second hand information of Tate, hold the views they do. It always seems to revolve around mistreating or dominating women in some way, and I think one of the reasons is that when you don't respect somebody, they are less intimidating and rejection is less frightening. That respect seems pretty paramount for any of us to actually get along, and perhaps that's the advice male role models are supposed to give, and those are the male role models that need to be platformed. Of course, that also means giving that advice without screeching, in a non-confrontational and non-condescending manner, otherwise people are never going to listen. I feel like some compassion would go a long way.
Happy to hear others' views on all of this because I tend to steer clear of these types of "personalities" and I'm not going to claim to be an expert.
This is a great question, and I'm not sure I know the answer. Speaking 100% personally though, I do think there's an issue in some progressive circles of people being hostile to the idea that men - particularly white or otherwise privileged men - should be empathised with. ESPECIALLY if those people are incels or hold problematic views about women. I like to argue talk with people online about these kinds of social issues and this is something I've noticed.
There are a lot of incredible social movements now about empowering marginalised groups and reforming patriarchal systems, which is indisputably a good thing. But I do wonder if it's led some folks to think young white guys shouldn't be empathised with because they're the group that holds the power in society (despite potentially feeling powerless in their individual lives).
Then maybe that's the entry point for people like Tate - there are young guys out there feeling disenfranchised, lonely, and without a role model for healthy masculinity, while simultaneously being dismissed by progressives, told that they hold the power and their lives are easy.
Someone validating you and providing an alternative narrative is so powerful when you're in that position, you know? In some ways it makes you ripe for exploitation.
100% - I think you're right. My two best guy friends really, really struggled with rejection and low self-esteem in their teens, and both nearly fell down this exact pipeline. I don't think people realise how excruciatingly painful that is for a lot of young guys, and how difficult it is when you can't talk about it or identify it, because we're socialised to have no emotional intelligence or awareness.
I was really moved reading this - thank you for sharing @Supernova. I can relate to a lot of what you said (I grew up with a lot of great women around me, but few good male role models) and I think you're spot on with the impact that has. Your kindness and ability to empathise so genuinely here is wonderful and maybe these are the discussions that need to happen more.
I disagree more than I agree here, but that's not to say that I don't see where you're coming from. I try to be more critical of those I find myself agreeing with than those I don't, and you're right to point out the "traditional narratives" that Jordan Peterson seems to espouse. I think actual analysis of these beliefs and the things he says proves them to be more intricate than just those narratives. He speaks more about masculine and feminine traits than he does about men and women specifically, and points out the statistics which show that men tend towards the former, and women the latter. He does however, always note that the split isn't a massive one - about a 60% chance that a random man will skew towards more masculine personality traits and vice versa for a random woman. This leaves the other 40% that don't follow those trends, which is anything but an insignificant amount. We could probably discuss this at length, I just think it's worth pointing out that it might be more complex than either of our perspectives would suggest.
When you say that he's openly hostile to trans people, you're definitely not wrong in saying so. His comments to Elliot Page for example, made me really uncomfortable because they were directed and felt, as you say, hostile and mean. Again though, if I try to understand his point of view, his objection seems not to be towards individual trans people, and is more an objection to a change in social climate that he believes will harm young people. If I'm understanding his views correctly, his most poignant example of this, is an unprecedented increase in dysphoria, and a shift in medical practice towards accepting a patient's dysphoria without critique. He believes that doctors move forward too quickly and uncritically with irrevocable hormone therapy and surgery, to solve what may in the first place, be misdiagnosed issues. I can point to a few things that might demonstrate these beliefs. The first would be examples of those who de-transition, and Jordan did an interview with one such person. Her name is Chloe Cole if you're interested. The second would be a personal observation, of a few friends who were very dissatisfied with their genders when they were younger, but later went on to change their minds or realise they were gay. These aren't perfect examples, and I would like to be more knowledgeable about the other side, but nevertheless they are what I've personally witnessed.
I don't agree with everything Peterson says completely, or anybody else for that matter. I do however, based on observation, think that he's a particularly sensitive and empathetic individual. His seeming inability to keep his emotions in check when faced with the suffering of others, makes it difficult for me to believe that he wishes harm to anybody. The example that sits most with me here is the interview he did with Yeonmi Park, which is both excellent and demonstrates why I think that to be the case. Of course I might just be a sucker, and he's an incredible actor, but somehow I doubt that's the case. I would love to see him have a one to one conversation with a happy trans individual, in a constructive and non-combative way, because there are certainly critiques that you can level at his beliefs and a helpful discourse to be had.
I could discuss, agree, disagree, argue and clarify a bunch here, but since this thread is about Tate, I will leave things just having played devil's advocate for now.
Edit: Oh and I'll respond to everything else separately, later.
Those are definitely things that I've observed as well. As a white man, I'm acutely aware that my perspective on this might not be valuable or wanted, but I think if you're deciding who should and shouldn't be empathised with, then you've already lost. The whole point of empathy is that it should be universal. Putting yourself in someone else's shoes in order to understand how, and perhaps more importantly, why they feel and do the things they do. This has to apply to those you disagree with too, even the most disgusting and evil people in society. The minute it doesn't, it becomes self serving and isn't empathy any more as a result. This is my opinion sure, but I'm passionate about this point because I just believe it to be true intuitively. Maybe my brain has fully gone and I'm delusional, what does everybody else think? To clarify, empathising with somebody doesn't mean that you agree with, justify or even fully understand their beliefs and actions.
There are many different types of privilege, and admittedly it's not a topic I'm confident enough on to speak with any authority, but I don't see much of that privilege in effect where I live and with the people I know. I really enjoy, respect and appreciate Akala's view and knowledge around this point. He said in one of his Fire in the Booths: "...poor people are dirt regardless of shade, but with that said lets not pretend that everything is the same..." He then goes on to specify some of the ways in which those racial privileges and injustices (have) actually manifest(ed). It's important that we acknowledge injustices and the disparity in which people are treated generally, but I think it's remarkably dangerous to tar everybody with the same brush based on any immutable quality, when you are completely unaware of their individual circumstances.
I suppose everything brings me back to my previous point. If you approach people with hostility, it doesn't matter who they are, they aren't going to accept it and are going to respond in kind. Saying that having someone validate you and provide an alternative narrative is powerful, is an understatement. People band together when they feel threatened and become capable of some pretty horrific things that they wouldn't have been previously, all in the name of "protecting themselves." Where does that end? This might be a reach, but my mind is drawn to Germany after WW1, with all of the reparations being seen and treated as a "national humiliation," hyper-inflation and a struggling populace. They were ripe for somebody like Hitler to give them an alternative narrative, and to provide them with a new purpose. If you ever want to ask how normal people become capable of pure evil, then that's not a bad place to start... Perhaps I'm naïve, but I wish that people would behave as and treat each other individuals, and have some consideration as to what the "enemy" is going through. Seems to me like the only way things will improve, tribalism will only hurt us all in the long run. Never mind, I'm definitely naïve.
One thing I would caution about is that he's become more militant in his opposition to trans people than your post suggests. He tweeted the other day in support of a proposal by Donald Trump to eradicate trans healthcare and education about trans issues for people of all ages in the US. It seems to have gone beyond his original talking points linked to concerns around young people, to a more systemic erasure of trans people people as a group.
(Detransitioning tangent!)
A study was also conducted on trans kids in the states - it looked at 317 trans kids as young as 8 who had socially (not medically) transitioned. After 5 years, only 2.5% retransitioned, and most of those who did, did so before the age of 10. And this is after a social transition, which is a notably low commitment level.
Also worth noting that puberty blockers are 100% reversible - as soon as you stop taking them, your puberty kicks in as normal. Interestingly, we've also used them for decades to treat something called precocious puberty (something I found out the other day).
Anyway, I'm going off beat here (seems we could talk for ages about this stuff!) - my overall point is that I think we agree on Peterson's character and his intentions, but maybe less on his impact. I suppose I'd need to see more substantial evidence that his concerns are valid.
I think you might have gotten to the core of it all with this. I'm 100% with you here.
I'm a huge believer in asking why people do or think things, and asking that until you get to the bottom of why they believe what they do. We've gotten pretty good at thinking this way about things like black crime rates (i.e. it's not because there's something inherently criminal about black people - it's systemic and sociological). But I think it's often more comfortable for people - and an easier narrative to process - to assume that people are just born a certain way and there's nothing you can do but cast them out and vilify them. You see this logic used to justify just about everything bad in the world - racism, sexism, classism, etc. This kind of essentialisation (if that's the right word) might be the single biggest impediment to all forms of social progress, to be honest.
Have you considered a career in sociology @Supernova? I think you'd be good at it!
PS, looks like it might just be us interested in discussing this, so happy to keep this discussion contained here, but we can always break it off into separate ones later if needed
JP seems to hold many conservative views and values, which is actually extremely interesting given the idea that his audience consists in large part, of young men. On top of that, I think his messaging skews even more conservative owing to the fact that he's primarily platformed by the daily wire now, though how much of that is a direct result of being pushed away from other mediums? Many of his "fans" also do him no favours, when they misunderstand his ideas and post them as "Jordan Peterson DESTROYS x, y and z." Side note, I do find it extremely amusing that his interviews are punctuated with sponsor messages from the Church and gold investment groups, and I wonder whether they're really suited to his audience, but maybe that's just me.
Thank you for the compliment I suppose, I do find this sort of thing engaging, which is significant since not much else ever gives me that. I am and have been a bit hesitant to get too invested in this stuff though, because I don't think it's particularly conducive to my mental wellbeing. I often find myself upset at the thoughts and experiences I have to expose myself to, and wishing that I could bash my head against the wall to make those thoughts stop... I'm not certain yet whether these conversations are beneficial and fulfilling, or if they're just another self-destructive impulse. That's a tad hyperbolic of course, but you get where I'm coming from I'm sure.
Hey if nothing else, I'm learning the BBCode as the discussion progresses...
I do get where you're coming from. I think it's a feeling that empathetic people share. I feel similarly about my interest in politics and social issues - I find it can lead to a gloomy or warped view of the world if I get too swept up in it. It's about finding a healthy balance, I suppose.
I agree with this. He seems misguided but (like most) I don't think he's trying to hurt people.
Ha! Yes - this reminds me of a Ben Shapiro video I was watching a few weeks ago, where half way through he had a sponsored segment about digitally archiving your physical tapes and photos(?!), it made me laugh and I guess it's indicative of TDW's audience.
I agree that some of his conversations are interesting (I'm listening to the one you linked now) and they do provoke thought for me. There is part of his fan base that seems a bit cult-like, and maybe that's a wider problem about the cult of personality, or maybe it's a problem with that deep-thinking group of creators online (Russel Brand, Sam Harris, etc).
I really enjoyed this conversation with you @Supernova, and I'm interested in where this wave of support for Tate goes next. It's good to see there are other people out here thinking empathetically about his audience and thinking pragmatically about what might be underneath it all.
I've always wondered what the BBCode was actually as I never heard of it before.
BBCode colour test!
Thank you David wherever you are!