Is "Andrew Tate" still the forbidden word no one should say even if you disagree with him or...?

[CenotaphGirl]

Only 25% of men admit to cheating. Only 15% of women. That's not a lot, honestly. Yes, I know, that's the one that admit it, but still. As for you claiming it's all about the stats and only the stats, that's not exactly true, since you did say that you could convince a man halfway the world to cheat with you.
No one is attacking you here, they are just pointing out that you are contradicting yourself a bit.

What I say is not contradicting, whats getting confused is that it was a old way I used to behave. I no longer behave that way. I no longer respect that way. I can and have convinced men in America, Australia, Spain other places to stray but its not something im proud of.

Nah you arent attacking me, I called out the person who was throwing the personal attacks around directly. Not lumping you all into one category. But to say no one is… is not true Callie. Respectfully.

The stats are the stats, my experiences are my experiences. I believe you know men that are loyal to their wives, I dont know any and thats the truth.

 

[Cherubino]

you're like me

 

[TheRealCallie]

But to say no one is… is not true Callie. Respectfully.

Oh please, you know darn well I know what it's like to be attacked on this forum. lol But, there are attacks and then there are perceived attacks. I'm not saying you've never been attacked here, but I wouldn't call what happened in this thread an attack. A little harsh maybe, but not an all out attack. Besides, if that's not who you are anymore, then it isn't about YOU, it's about someone who doesn't exist anymore, right?
And I'm not out to offend you, but some of the things you said in here did come off a little egotistical. People often focus on the negative, so when they see it, they latch on. Doesn't matter how many good things you say.

 

[MysteriousTelephone]

I find Andrew Tate to be an interesting character, because he's basically playing a character, or a caricature of himself. He knows that by saying outrageous and offensive things, the people who like him will watch his videos, as well as the the people who hate him. And the only way for him to stay relevant is to keep saying ridiculous things such as agreeing with parts of Shariah Law, or that women's place is in the kitchen, you get the idea.

I will say, not all of the stuff he says is bad. He's very vocal to young men about bettering themselves; physically, mentally and financially, and becoming the kind of man a woman would want to be with, rather than telling them there's nothing wrong. I think there are too few people talking to disillusioned young men, yet when someone like Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate does it, we go after them for talking to disillusioned young men. It's very odd.

 

[CenotaphGirl]

Oh please, you know darn well I know what it's like to be attacked on this forum. lol But, there are attacks and then there are perceived attacks. I'm not saying you've never been attacked here, but I wouldn't call what happened in this thread an attack. A little harsh maybe, but not an all out attack. Besides, if that's not who you are anymore, then it isn't about YOU, it's about someone who doesn't exist anymore, right?
And I'm not out to offend you, but some of the things you said in here did come off a little egotistical. People often focus on the negative, so when they see it, they latch on. Doesn't matter how many good things you say.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on that one, I felt I was attacked, but nothing I cannot handle sometimes I think its a fetish to attack me, but that… may be my ego talking (i joke for ppl who cant tell)

I feel rather bad, like I derailed this thread when I really tried to get it back on track…

Okay okay looking at Andrew Tate, is he red pilled? Yes. Are red pill views controversial? Yes. However, sometimes I feel things make more sense when we understand the social norm behind it. Sometimes looking at life in general terms is easier than looking at things case by case and catering for every exception to the rule.

However! I do think he exploits men, promising them wealth knowing full well he’ll never make them “top g”

 

[maybetrollingmaybenot]

I find Andrew Tate to be an interesting character, because he's basically playing a character, or a caricature of himself. He knows that by saying outrageous and offensive things, the people who like him will watch his videos, as well as the the people who hate him. And the only way for him to stay relevant is to keep saying ridiculous things such as agreeing with parts of Shariah Law, or that women's place is in the kitchen, you get the idea.

I will say, not all of the stuff he says is bad. He's very vocal to young men about bettering themselves; physically, mentally and financially, and becoming the kind of man a woman would want to be with, rather than telling them there's nothing wrong. I think there are too few people talking to disillusioned young men, yet when someone like Jordan Peterson or Andrew Tate does it, we go after them for talking to disillusioned young men. It's very odd.

I'm kind of fed up with his "pay me $19.95 a month and I'll teach you how to stop playing video games and be a man", he's clearly yet another marketing guru, just better than the other marketing gurus, but that's about it. My question was rather the level of brainwashing the masses have so to speak. On reddit for example (a largely left leaning website with many STEM women) I've seen many messages saying basically "if someone is following Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan or Tate I block him". So again it's not if I admire a random scam artist on tiktok but if women use this as a moral compass, especially to a point where the sole mentioning of the same gets in trouble.

Relevant, don't mention the name lol:

 

[user 139760]

I'm kind of fed up with his "pay me $19.95 a month and I'll teach you how to stop playing video games and be a man", he's clearly yet another marketing guru, just better than the other marketing gurus, but that's about it. My question was rather the level of brainwashing the masses have so to speak. On reddit for example (a largely left leaning website with many STEM women) I've seen many messages saying basically "if someone is following Jordan Peterson, Joe Rogan or Tate I block him". So again it's not if I admire a random scam artist on tiktok but if women use this as a moral compass, especially to a point where the sole mentioning of the same gets in trouble.

Relevant, don't mention the name lol:

If these artists do it, it's because it works. Rogan has one of the most successful podcasts in the world, Peterson quit his private practice for this.
If it didn't pay, no one would do it. The business model of the platform is to blame a lot more than those it gives a voice to. Tiktok isn't very different either.
Everyone is saying whatever garbage they can just to get a following. Wether it's actually helpful or not is incidental. That's what people should really be up in arms about.

 

[MysteriousTelephone]

To be fair, Joe Rogan doesn't market himself as a self-help guru like Peterson & Tate. He does a fairly good job of getting guests from every side of the spectrum on his show, and just playing devil's advocate with them, he's had everyone from Bernie Sanders to Alex Jones on his podcast, and just done his best to pick holes in their rhetoric.

 

[alchemy333]

I prefer Bottom G:

 

[SquareBin]

Honestly Apexie its tough because I dont even think im being brutal, just honest. Its like everyone pretends the world is governed by exceptions to the rule.

Men act as if they don’t understand having access to money brings women, its impossible to think it doesn’t as everything proves otherwise.

When men cant provide, family breaks down, because their role is made obsolete.

as more and more women outearns men in the younger 18-30 year old gap, I'm worried that my stayus as a woodworker won't cut it... despite probably having enough to live a good life :/

I just want a normal family with kids, and a strong bond with my (future) wife. if money is a necessity then I'm at a loss, I don't know what I could do.

 

[SquareBin]

also, this thread would probably prove some of Tate's points (I think)

I don't watch him and don't plan on watching him, best to not think about it too much

 

[blackdot]

Luckily I have no idea who Andrew Tate is.

 

[MysteriousTelephone]

Luckily I have no idea who Andrew Tate is.

Some people choose the most odd things to brag about

 

[TheSkaFish]

I mean, it seems to be true that women generally like strength/skill/ambition/performance/achievement/success in men, as men generally like beauty in women. That seems to be a general truth. But you can be a strong guy without hating women, you just have to be good at something and that will probably make you feel good about yourself, and your life, and you'll have more attractive energy going forward, and people generally like to talk to and be around that kind of person, a person who is happy with themselves and their lives, male or female. It's easier said than done, I would know, but that seems to be the gist of it.

The trouble today, is because of all the economic bs, because governments barely pretend to give a flying f about the people anymore, it's getting harder to have a life you can feel good about. If they want to "make America great" we need to go back, not necessarily culturally but economically, to 1945-1973 or so, 1945-2005 if we're being really generous, that's when I feel like the rot really started setting in, with Hurricane Katrina causing the first modern major gas price increase, and things have been kind of on-and-off sucky ever since, becoming increasingly "on" more frequently and for longer periods of time - but that's another story.

Anyway I never watched an official Tate video, but from what I've seen on YouTube, he doesn't seem to stop there, at "you need to get stronger, here's how to do it". He seems to sell all these nonsensical courses, cartoonish macho image, and go into all this misogyny. He's not trying to help people, he's trying to fleece them, and fill their heads with nonsense along the way, including needlessly hateful stuff. He doesn't live a "top G" lifestyle because he is a genius, he lives a "top G" lifestyle because he suckers people into thinking he's a genius. That's the problem with him - not to mention his actual crimes.

 

[NoxApex(N/A)]

This thread is now about the Aghori instead.
It's both more interesting and more controversial.





Andrew Tate who??
I give about as much of a **** about Andrew Tate as Andrew Tate gives a **** about Rian Stone.

 

[TheRealCallie]

Sorry, is that skull hiding the man's junk trolling us?

 

[NoxApex(N/A)]

Sorry, is that skull hiding the man's junk trolling us?

It's still a more interesting topic than Andrew Tate.

 

[SquareBin]

Sorry, is that skull hiding the man's junk trolling us?

I mean, this skull has its reasons to be happy I guess...

 

[mr.meeseeks]

men with money and fame are usually targets of such attacks.

 

[NoxApex(N/A)]

men with money and fame are usually targets of such attacks.

Men with money and fame don't actually have money, what they have is debt, credit, interest rates, loans, and tax breaks. It's a misconception. Basically it's like when someone walks up to you and says: "Hey man, lemme get a $20, for two $10's, but I gotta owe you $3, cause I only got $8."

I will give Tate credit, he is aware of this. He's even acknowledged it in a very tongue-in-cheek kind of a way, "it is true that you don't own your things, your things own you."