Reply to New Yorker article about Andrew Tate

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "New Yorker article about Andrew Tate"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. [b]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.[/b] [/quote]

WTF does this have to do with anything?[/quote]

Because of what OP said, not such much the New Yorker (which is agony aunt clickbait for left wing neurosis): [i]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)??[/i]

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.

[/quote]

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?[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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. [/quote]

DP. You think a general increase in misogyny just comes about organically? [/quote]

The Tate brothers aren't the root casue for the increase. [/quote]

What do you think is the cause? (Or causes.)[/quote]

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[/quote]

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

GTFO, bigot. 
[/quote]

Read the article. I can't help your knee jerk reaction to reality. [/quote]

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?[/quote]

The US can't enforce our laws in foreign countries. If his followers decide to go through with attacks on women, there needs to be additional hate charges. If someone attacks someone specifically because of their race, it's a hate crime. Women are targeted specifically because biological women are known to be physically weaker. These people don't attack biological men, despite being universally misanthropes. [/quote]

The US certainly can use influence to pressure other countries to enforce THEIR OWN laws. In this case, the US did exactly the opposite. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics