New Yorker article about Andrew Tate

[Anonymous]

A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker is clickbait for left wing people, focusing on the extremes while ignoring the extremes on the other end. I wouldn't pay much attention to it. The disconnection between publications like the New Yorker and NYT and the real world is astonishing. I'm out and about every day, see the kids and teens and college kids in my neighborhood all the time, and things are more fine than not.

WTF does this have to do with anything?

Because of what OP said, not such much the New Yorker (which is agony aunt clickbait for left wing neurosis): I found this to be so bleak and depressing. Reading it left me feeling hopeless about the possibility of decent and genuine relations between men and women. And frightened by the idea that men that I work with and know socially share any part of the worldview that Tate has sold and that has been embraced by powerful political figures in the US. What can be done to combat this toxic outlook, hold these men accountable for the harm they have perpetrated, and create something better for the young people who think that this guy’s messages are worth following (and paying for)??

My advice to OP: turn off media, go outside, meet real people, your neighbors and local communities and institutions. There will always be followers of Anthony Tate and Hakan Piker and suchlike. The vast majority aren't.

DP. I’m not nearly concerned about how many followers he might have as that he keeps getting away with heinous crimes, in part because our government is helping him. I’m sick of powerful men repeatedly doing horrible things to women—including minors—and facing zero consequences. Truly, what is wrong with you if you attempt to defend these monsters?

I am OP. Introducing Hakan (sic) Piker’s name into this discussion is a total non sequiter and an indication that your response is not in good faith.

The article gives many examples of the reach and influence of Tate. Of course, not all men (or boys). But there is no question that in the personal and political realms, there has been a sharp increase in misogyny and more open acceptance of hateful and violent rhetoric about women. I don’t think that “touch grass” or its equivalent is the correct response to that.

You're confusing cause and effect. I don't think the Tate brothers are a cause, but rather one of the results from the general increase in misogyny.

DP. You think a general increase in misogyny just comes about organically?

The Tate brothers aren't the root casue for the increase.

What do you think is the cause? (Or causes.)

Dilution of women as a protected class. Certain parties want you to believe there is no difference between men and women. I assure that there are physical and systemic structural differences that make biological women vulnerable.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56399862

Or course bigots would try to blame the increase in misogyny on transgender people.

GTFO, bigot.

[Anonymous]

Why are they out of jail?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why are they out of jail?

The article explains that they basically bribed their way out of prosecution in Romania and that the British police also completely screwed up its prosecution.

Then the American government celebrated these guys.

The article also makes it very clear they were trafficking minor girls and raping them à la Epstein.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why are they out of jail?

The article explains that they basically bribed their way out of prosecution in Romania and that the British police also completely screwed up its prosecution.

Then the American government celebrated these guys.

The article also makes it very clear they were trafficking minor girls and raping them à la Epstein.

Plus Trump’s goons pressured the release.

[Anonymous]

5 years on, still "investigating"

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/romanian-prosecutors-add-hate-speech-against-women-andrew-tate-investigation-2026-05-28/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This guy ➕ his brother (externally) have the good looks of celebrities but inside they are just pure garbage.

You think these men are attractive?? What do you have against hair and a strong jaw?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This guy ➕ his brother (externally) have the good looks of celebrities but inside they are just pure garbage.

Nope . . . ugly inside and out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

While this is true as a general matter, in this particular instance an entire ecosystem composed primarily of MEN protected these guys, starting with the British police who botched the investigations into the first rape allegations against them, to the corrupt Romanian police who looked the other way, to the Romanian prosecutors who are now perpetually investigating, to the American politicians who support the “manosphere.”

There are definitely women who supported these guys and inexplicably still do, but the people in charge of the institutions that failed here over and over again are MEN.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

While this is true as a general matter, in this particular instance an entire ecosystem composed primarily of MEN protected these guys, starting with the British police who botched the investigations into the first rape allegations against them, to the corrupt Romanian police who looked the other way, to the Romanian prosecutors who are now perpetually investigating, to the American politicians who support the “manosphere.”

There are definitely women who supported these guys and inexplicably still do, but the people in charge of the institutions that failed here over and over again are MEN.

So what should we do about this realization?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

While this is true as a general matter, in this particular instance an entire ecosystem composed primarily of MEN protected these guys, starting with the British police who botched the investigations into the first rape allegations against them, to the corrupt Romanian police who looked the other way, to the Romanian prosecutors who are now perpetually investigating, to the American politicians who support the “manosphere.”

There are definitely women who supported these guys and inexplicably still do, but the people in charge of the institutions that failed here over and over again are MEN.

So what should we do about this realization?

The traditional approach is to use very sharp hair pins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

While this is true as a general matter, in this particular instance an entire ecosystem composed primarily of MEN protected these guys, starting with the British police who botched the investigations into the first rape allegations against them, to the corrupt Romanian police who looked the other way, to the Romanian prosecutors who are now perpetually investigating, to the American politicians who support the “manosphere.”

There are definitely women who supported these guys and inexplicably still do, but the people in charge of the institutions that failed here over and over again are MEN.

So what should we do about this realization?

Well I think knowledge is the first step. While I had a vague understanding of who these guys were before reading the article, now I know that they ran a vast underage sex trafficking ring and made tens of millions of dollars doing it. And now they are being feted by this White House. That’s data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A boy beat up a girl at my kid’s school, and a bunch of moms jumped in to defend the boy and cheer each other on while they defended the violence and made excuses for it. The problem of Andrew Tate and misogyny extends way farther than just men and boys.

While this is true as a general matter, in this particular instance an entire ecosystem composed primarily of MEN protected these guys, starting with the British police who botched the investigations into the first rape allegations against them, to the corrupt Romanian police who looked the other way, to the Romanian prosecutors who are now perpetually investigating, to the American politicians who support the “manosphere.”

There are definitely women who supported these guys and inexplicably still do, but the people in charge of the institutions that failed here over and over again are MEN.

So what should we do about this realization?

Well I think knowledge is the first step. While I had a vague understanding of who these guys were before reading the article, now I know that they ran a vast underage sex trafficking ring and made tens of millions of dollars doing it. And now they are being feted by this White House. That’s data.

+1 I don’t think a lot of people fully understand what the Tates were doing and getting away with. I always just thought they were obnoxious podcasters spreading inflammatory ideas—which they were—but the extent of their physical crimes against women floored me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker is clickbait for left wing people, focusing on the extremes while ignoring the extremes on the other end. I wouldn't pay much attention to it. The disconnection between publications like the New Yorker and NYT and the real world is astonishing. I'm out and about every day, see the kids and teens and college kids in my neighborhood all the time, and things are more fine than not.

WTF does this have to do with anything?

Because of what OP said, not such much the New Yorker (which is agony aunt clickbait for left wing neurosis): I found this to be so bleak and depressing. Reading it left me feeling hopeless about the possibility of decent and genuine relations between men and women. And frightened by the idea that men that I work with and know socially share any part of the worldview that Tate has sold and that has been embraced by powerful political figures in the US. What can be done to combat this toxic outlook, hold these men accountable for the harm they have perpetrated, and create something better for the young people who think that this guy’s messages are worth following (and paying for)??

My advice to OP: turn off media, go outside, meet real people, your neighbors and local communities and institutions. There will always be followers of Anthony Tate and Hakan Piker and suchlike. The vast majority aren't.

DP. I’m not nearly concerned about how many followers he might have as that he keeps getting away with heinous crimes, in part because our government is helping him. I’m sick of powerful men repeatedly doing horrible things to women—including minors—and facing zero consequences. Truly, what is wrong with you if you attempt to defend these monsters?

I am OP. Introducing Hakan (sic) Piker’s name into this discussion is a total non sequiter and an indication that your response is not in good faith.

The article gives many examples of the reach and influence of Tate. Of course, not all men (or boys). But there is no question that in the personal and political realms, there has been a sharp increase in misogyny and more open acceptance of hateful and violent rhetoric about women. I don’t think that “touch grass” or its equivalent is the correct response to that.

You're confusing cause and effect. I don't think the Tate brothers are a cause, but rather one of the results from the general increase in misogyny.

DP. You think a general increase in misogyny just comes about organically?

The Tate brothers aren't the root casue for the increase.

What do you think is the cause? (Or causes.)

Dilution of women as a protected class. Certain parties want you to believe there is no difference between men and women. I assure that there are physical and systemic structural differences that make biological women vulnerable.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56399862

Or course bigots would try to blame the increase in misogyny on transgender people.

GTFO, bigot.

Read the article. I can't help your knee jerk reaction to reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The New Yorker is clickbait for left wing people, focusing on the extremes while ignoring the extremes on the other end. I wouldn't pay much attention to it. The disconnection between publications like the New Yorker and NYT and the real world is astonishing. I'm out and about every day, see the kids and teens and college kids in my neighborhood all the time, and things are more fine than not.

WTF does this have to do with anything?

Because of what OP said, not such much the New Yorker (which is agony aunt clickbait for left wing neurosis): I found this to be so bleak and depressing. Reading it left me feeling hopeless about the possibility of decent and genuine relations between men and women. And frightened by the idea that men that I work with and know socially share any part of the worldview that Tate has sold and that has been embraced by powerful political figures in the US. What can be done to combat this toxic outlook, hold these men accountable for the harm they have perpetrated, and create something better for the young people who think that this guy’s messages are worth following (and paying for)??

My advice to OP: turn off media, go outside, meet real people, your neighbors and local communities and institutions. There will always be followers of Anthony Tate and Hakan Piker and suchlike. The vast majority aren't.

DP. I’m not nearly concerned about how many followers he might have as that he keeps getting away with heinous crimes, in part because our government is helping him. I’m sick of powerful men repeatedly doing horrible things to women—including minors—and facing zero consequences. Truly, what is wrong with you if you attempt to defend these monsters?

I am OP. Introducing Hakan (sic) Piker’s name into this discussion is a total non sequiter and an indication that your response is not in good faith.

The article gives many examples of the reach and influence of Tate. Of course, not all men (or boys). But there is no question that in the personal and political realms, there has been a sharp increase in misogyny and more open acceptance of hateful and violent rhetoric about women. I don’t think that “touch grass” or its equivalent is the correct response to that.

You're confusing cause and effect. I don't think the Tate brothers are a cause, but rather one of the results from the general increase in misogyny.

DP. You think a general increase in misogyny just comes about organically?

The Tate brothers aren't the root casue for the increase.

What do you think is the cause? (Or causes.)

Dilution of women as a protected class. Certain parties want you to believe there is no difference between men and women. I assure that there are physical and systemic structural differences that make biological women vulnerable.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-56399862

Or course bigots would try to blame the increase in misogyny on transgender people.

GTFO, bigot.

Read the article. I can't help your knee jerk reaction to reality.

DP. I just read the entire BBC article and I’m not sure what your point is. Are you saying that Andrew Tate would not be emboldened to encourage his followers to rape, choke, abuse, batter and traffic women (or to do all those things himself) if violence against women was classified as a hate crime?