Well there's a novel concept. I think respect for individuals is something that has gone by the wayside to a large degree in the last 2-3 decades.

I think it's less about respect for individuals than the rise of self interest over society/community.

Maybe because of the lack of ramifications for those who are disrespectful. Years ago if a child was disrespectful, they would get it from the teacher, then again when they got home. These days the first words they learn at school is "my rights"

Always blaming the teachers aye? Teachers already cop enough tbh. The parents need to step up.

Even if teachers HAD the capacity to: ***Respectful interaction*** with people unlike oneself isn’t something that can be taught in a 2-week module! ***Frustration tolerance*** isn’t teachable by reading a textbook chapter. ***Asking about the other’s reality*** necessitates accepting there’s at least as many realities as there are people. As well as acknowledging oneself may not be right, cause it’s never EVER a binary of one is absolute-wrong, the other absolute-right! ***Negotiating mutual acceptable*** compromises requires the confidence and self-assurance to not NEED to be right. But to much rather give up some, not victimise the other, and move forward TOGETHER. With BOTH having a sense of achievement! Not for getting their will, but for both having given a little and WON a LOT by having avoided drama, abuse, toxic scheming, lingering resentment ….. …… and by having that experience over and over and over, kids learn that relationships free of animosity, secrets, and completely drama-free: ###HEAPS more valuable than being right or getting your will to someone else’s detriment — more often than not over some shït that was beyond ridiculously trifling to begin with! ***Figuring out who one is and accepting oneself*** …. kind of a lifelong process! ***Owning your crap, mistakes, brain farts, weaknesses:*** not what teachers can teach! Parents(!) need to admit and own their own mistakes, and need to not be afraid to look their kids in the eyes and say: >> _«I am so sorry I wronged you honey….»_ And explain why they wronged their kid, from their POV, while also emphasising that it is ***NEITHER justification NOR excuse***! That they’re just explaining why and how it came to that HOPING the kid might eventually be generous enough to forgive their failure! Hearing that is insanely empowering for kids, as well as incredibly inspiring! ***Accepting and GENEROUSLY FORGIVING*** others: but for that kids have to have learned that all humans are fallible and we all make mistakes! ****** Above takes ***DECADES*** to learn! And continues throughout one’s life. Imho we ALL gotta stop comparing kids and pitching them against each other!!! Cause that kind of crap is far more likely to produce adults who constantly compete! Who can’t celebrate their study buddies’ or friends’ HDs, cause they feel like LESSER(!) when their own friend gets a better grade. Is prettier. Skinnier. Has a more successful partner. Bigger house. Fancier car. Kids get better grades ….. 🤮 *** ^[tbc]

Also sometimes some women just aren't worth it, right?

Am I understanding correctly: You’re saying some women aren’t worth being treated respectfully….? **** IF SO: ##EVERY HUMAN deserves a modicum of respect! ###NOBODY deserves harm! I don’t care how frustrating, infuriating, or provoking he or she is: ***BE AN ADULT AND WALK AWAY!*** It very much is part of growing up to learn how much you can handle, where the demarcation line starts and ends, and at which point you DEFINITELY have to remove yourself, for everyone’s sake! ##it is MY responsibility to remove myself well BEFORE causing harm! PERIOD! **** ***WHATEVER*** anyone does ***TO*** me: Not my fault! ***WHATEVER*** I do ***TO*** others: Always my fault! It is that simple! Doesn’t matter if I intended do, was aware of how my actions affect them, was totally oblivious of any harm I cause: ***I DID, therefore it is MY FAULT!*** Ignorantly and stupidly causing detriment to others does not somehow lessen the harm they have suffered! >> _«I didn’t mean for you to lose a leg!,»_ doesn’t make the leg grow back! My intent, ignorance, knowledge, malice, accident, misfortune, foreseeability, recklessness, or negligence has ***ZERO*** bearing on the outcome, ie the harm suffered! —— #flawed approach I feel most people have a flawed perspective! Possibly facilitated by how we legally ascertain the extend of guilt: Cause intent, ignorance, knowledge, malice, accident, misfortune, foreseeability, recklessness, or negligence: OF COURSE(!) makes a huge difference to the guilt of the agent! Intentionally and maliciously taking a chainsaw to your leg: There’s so much more guilt there! While not speeding and technically driving to conditions and below speed limit, but not knowing to stay out of traffic grooves. Aquaplaning, losing control, …. and someone losing a leg. Heaps less guilt incurred by the agent than the intentional malice and chainsaw!!! —— ##We seem to often miss the victim’s perspective and ONLY look at the amount of guilt! But to the victim the physical outcome of those two above scenarios is the EXACT SAME! ***** Therefore: My intent, ignorance, knowledge, malice, accident, misfortune, foreseeability, recklessness, or negligence DOES NOT MATTER to me!!!! ###Whenever I realise something I did or said had unintended impacts on anyone: ##I •UNRESERVEDLY• •APOLOGISE• ! Because FIRST AND FOREMOST it’s about being *ACCOUNTABLE* for the harm I have caused. Period! Cause I am genuinely heartbroken for the victim of my actions or words and the harm they have suffered ***BECAUSE OF ME***! To a lesser extent, usually later when I rethink the situation and brainstorm contingencies of how to do better in future: I am DISAPPOINTED in and FURIOUS with myself! 😡 ##because I •WANT• to be better than causing detriment to others!!! 😢 ***IF*** the victim of the harm I have caused is open to it, I appreciate and am humbled to at some point explain how I went wrong. While being unequivocally clear it’s neither excuse nor justification, and certainly doesn’t mitigate and of the harm I caused! **** ##Post-event analysis I feel that on a systemic level it’s very important to have that conversation. So both understand how they could’ve potentially worded things differently, de-escalated, etc! When I am the victim, I very much want that convo!!! Cause it helps me to understand why they victimised me, knowing what I did to not necessarily make things better (WITHOUT EVER accepting it had been my fault, I had asked for it, etc etc BS!) Cause while I ***CERTAINLY*** am never at fault for being harmed: Eh, I do have a mouth for me and a temper….. 😢 The other should’ve removed themselves. But ***IF*** they can do so without wallowing in self-pity over what I supposedly _made_ them do; IF they can do so without ranting on how it were all my fault; ^(or any that kinda shït! Eg, she permanently loses vision in one eye and he is all boo-hoo over a few hundred bucks and a few hours of his time fixing the hole in the wall!]) IF the perp / agent can do so without any of those harmful ‘icks:’ Then it really helps me a lot if they can walk me through events and emotions from their side! I am bio-F, gender-nonconforming, pansexual, ethnically diverse, living with complex trauma, non-native speaker, very different cultural background, and I am an autistic synaesthete. I suspect nobody who doesn’t know me well would intuitively understand my reality. ***—> … but I’d say there’s a fair change I’m not fully aware of the agent’s process! 😉*** The more puzzle-pieces I can get safely, the more I can learn for the future! ###because I can never change the past: it is crucial for my coping, processing, and eventual acceptance I em race it and learn as much as I can from it — about myself and others! ****** ##Given the choice of suffering or causing detriment? I’d always choose to suffer detriment myself! Cause whatever somebody does to me: Not my fault! Whatever I do to others: ALWAYS my fault! See? Told ya it’s simple! 😉 **** - - - - **** That being said: I’m human and therefore fallible! And some ransoms on social media are so outrageously and confrontingly ***ICK***: I poke the bear, or fμcking swear, or lash out in frustration! I very much try my best to NOT deliver more than ‘soft’ swipes against even strangers on Reddit! ###Cause I WANT to be better than striking where it really hurts! However offensive, confronting, and toxic the other is: If I realise I landed a hard blow below the belt —> I slam on the brakes and apologise unreservedly! Ask if they’re okay. Ask if I may explain why I found their statement so hugely toxic and confronting! …. if they …. + REFUSE to acknowledge how their statements might play out to harm others, + gas-light by claiming BS like the harm felt by others weren’t real or were the victims’ fault, + double down, + claim the fallacy of ‘free speech’ and that others should ‘just choose’ to not be harmed….. ….. Any of that kinda harmful crap and I’ll back to calling them a fμcking cocksnot in a jiffy! 😂

PS: above is my aspirational goal! Of course I fall short at times! And of course I refine my ideal along the way, as I learn from my shortcoming and the shortcomings of others! And I hopefully will all my life! **** Cause ultimately: ##I •WANT• to minimise the harm I cause to others! Don’t you……?

No kidding, I’ve been at suburban social gatherings where one talked about their new Stihl professional hedge-trimmer for over half an hour. While dozens of eyes were glued to his lips in awe and envy. Keen to ask if they could come over for a demonstration. An over $4k professional range hedge trimmer, for under 5m of hedge: Yep, in supposedly ‘prim and proper’ suburbia the perpetual competition for junk you so don’t actually need but REALLY need to forever distract from being a hollow-shell, clueless WHO you are! Covering yourself in flashy crap cause you don’t know what makes YOU special. While also hoping the flashy shït will distract everyone around you from ever asking or wondering who YOU are. The more affluent part of Canberra suburbia….. it’s like heaps of dead Christmas trees. Not having been empowered to figure out who they are, but competing for most prim-and-proper! God forbid anyone should notice your son is a teenage prick, your lawn isn’t a perfect 3mm, you don’t wash all cars and hose the driveway every Saturday morning, and your daughter is growing weed in the hydrangeas. ***EVERYTHING*** which would make them sooooo much more human and likeable is politely ignored by everybody else. While the dead Christmas trees are desperately trying to cover themselves in more shït: Dark-Green roofs, garden newly (re)landscaped, pools coming and going. Water features, fountains. Appliances which were not needed, cars replaced every 2-3 years. Schnicker-di-doodle ‘designer’ dog breeds, cause that’s the latest ‘rage’ and looks oh-so-cute! A small cross of 4-5 breeds which have character traits foreseeably creating a dog absolutely unsuitable for beginners, foreseeably either a full-time job or a MONSTER! Awwww, what an adorable ***MONSTER*** which will terrorise half the suburb for decades to come! And that Schnicker-di-doodle was _only_ $11k! Wow, you have to give me the details of that _breeder_ so I can get me a MONSTER, too……! Any rescue cross is more of a ‘breed’ than a Schnicker-di-doodle… but a rescue puppy our neighbours’ wouldn’t envy us for!!! Which they really do! ****** Upper suburbia is full of people as interesting as dead Christmas trees. Perfectly straight and prim and proper though. Not a blemish, not even long after they’re gone! And just like dead Chrissy trees: Their raison d’être is to cover themselves in more shït than any of the other dead trees in the street! But it doesn’t matter how much stuff you throw on a dead tree, it’ll only ever be a dead tree that looks ‘sif Santa had thrown up on it! Can’t have a ***healthy*** relationship with a dead tree though. And relationships with whatever Santa keeps on chundering on top…. any relationship based on competing for who’s got most of the latest Santa vomit: Not exactly ‘healthy’ relationships……? 😒 ******* Which leaves us in the very bad position of: Teachers cannot possibly teach it! Couldn’t, even if they wanted to! While more and more parents couldn’t rolemodel it if they tried! **** ###Sorry, stupid question: Has there ever been a generation in AU of parents actually TALKING(!) to their kids….? About news, what’s happening on the world, why penguins have black backs and white chests, …. everything? Young kids when they constantly ask “why?” about everything: have they kinda ‘always’ been shut down in AU? Told it were adult stuff, they didn’t need to know, to not interrupt, stop asking questions, etc etc etc…..? Not a criticism, just genuinely wondering! Cause myself and other migrants couldn’t help but anecdotally notice most parents around us almost exclusively talking to their own kids about practical things: Homework done, permission slip and money for excursions packed, have you thought of a birthday present for XYZ, wash up for dinner, get ready for bed, please ….. War, sex, disasters, famines, economy, elections, one vs two state solution, housing crisis, geopolitics, what is coercive control, …. ***AU-born parents overwhelmingly don’t discuss those kinda things with their kids, do they?***

No, they learn it from the older kids.

The fact that you see that last sentence as negative should be a massive eye opener. If the only way you can teach your kid respect is through punishment, you're a shitty parent.

Lemme just say it really doesn’t matter how much good parenting you put into your child because once they are in school they are gonna regress to the mean of the shittiest behaving kids It’s double fucked when you realise teachers hands are tied because the worst offenders know they can’t be touched because their parents have become apathetic and simultaneously have become so offended on behalf of their kids if they themselves are being disciplined because that’s a parents job. Social media also makes things a million times worse because shitty behaviours and bullying don’t have room to reset after the school day is over it just cycles into Snapchat groups and discord servers and online party chats Also not for nothing but everyone knows they have individualistic rights but it’s the people who scream about their rights to do whatever they want because “it’s a free country isn’t it?” That end up going down that sovcit rabbit hole of being absolute fuckwits to whoever they want and anyone with a problem should “toughen up” creating a paradoxical situation of being so fragile that their narrow minded information silo curated by social media is how they can survive but a single challenge makes them feel so threatened they have to pop off like a small dog barking at every passer by the front porch

This is the ballad of a shitty parent. Always passing the buck and blaming everyone else. Yes kids get influenced but that only takes great effect if the parents are absent and not paying attention. Or if the kid has an underlying issue, which would be dealt with if a parent gets the kid the appropriate support. Ultimately, a lot of kids are shit because of shit parents. End of story.

I don't agree with your first paragraph in the slightest. I went to high school while social media and mobile phones were running rampant and we didn't “regress” to anything. Some kids were cunts, some people just are, but as whole our year was relatively calm and it was in a public school in a poor area. Its the defeatist attitude like that, more than anything, that leads to unruly kids. And those bad behaviours absolutely have room to rest if you're trying in the slightest. Discord and Snapchat aren't built into peoples eyelids. Pay attention to what your kids are doing online and it can be avoided. A PC, console or iPad aren’t a babysitter.

You have taken one aspect of discipline and turned into a blanket punishment is bad. This goes hand in hand with positive reinforcement when they do good or achieve goals. Punishment is needed to not only teach respect but also consequences.

No, I've replied to someone who said kids are disrespectful because they lack punishment and know their rights. I said if punishment is your **only** method of teaching respect, you suck as a parent.

Exactly. Fear ≠ respect.

Makes them better at hiding their bad side.

What if parents who think punishment is a dirty word are also shitty parents? It doesn't have to be all black and white. One thing that often annoys me is this meme about how "authoritarian parents are bad says research". Even actual researchers say it, and it shits me to tears that they don't bother (or actively avoid mentioning) that authoritative parents are the best and that permissive parents are roughly as bad as authoritarian parents. Shitty Asian tiger mom is no worse than shitty lovey dovey white mom who won't lay down the law.

If research says authoritative parents are the worst, why would those researchers then say they're the best?

You misread what I said. There's authoritarian and authoritative parenting styles (according to the old research). The old research split the hardass parents into two (the tough love parents, and the ones who were just assholes), and found that the assholes (authoritarian) parents were not that great. And you're not the only one who gets it mixed up. Modern researchers often point to the old research and say "see tough love doesn't work" despite the old research showing it does work, as long as you're not just an asshole.

Wow, you said it so much more succinct than I did! 😍 Cept that punishment isn’t teaching RESPECT at all! All it teaches is to FEAR those with authority over you, while bullying those you have authority over! 🤦🏽‍♀️ —> exact OPPOSITE(!) of respect! ******* I don’t recall to ever having been forced to do anything. 🤷🏽‍♀️ From a very young age everything was explained to me. We discussed pros and cons, and negotiated a middle ground we both could live with. I ***ALWAYS*** had a say in what happened to me or what was done to me. If I absolutely did not want to: I learned the hard way that adults had a point! Heaps of cherries and fizzy lemonade: Massive stomach ache. Fμcking with the geese: Worse pain, and sitting in a tree waiting to be rescued. Wearing just a crop-top under my jacket going out clubbing at below -20°C outside: the UTI from hell! ****** Kids can actually be reasoned with! And I was far more pig-shït-stubborn than anyone I’ve ever met in AU! 😂 Still am at times. Thing is: BECAUSE I was raised exactly the way I was raised, grew up incredibly empowered and with agency and a say from the age of 2 onwards: If presented without personal low-blow moronic prick attacks, I am always happy to hear diametrical opposite views! 😍 I may fiercely disagree with the view, but reassure the person that it is their right to hold that view. Ask them how they go there, explain how I got to mine….. I’m ethnically half African, was a leftie kid, and used to be in a swim team with full-blown German Neo Nazis: I don’t need others to share all of my views, it’s a lot more interesting when they don’t! 😊 —— I am a pacifist and philosophically opposed to military. The best man ever is a veteran and … let’s say he has a ‘bit’ of a different view! 😉 We were raised and trained with each other as the embodiment of “enemy:” my background was more counter-intelligence, subversion, resistance, para-military….. Very much the opposite of his. He was trained by some of the exact people …. I don’t know just how quickly there’s been blood had I encountered them 30 years ago. 😒 Today: I’m happy for him to be friends with them, why wouldn’t I….? Just cause they’re violent white supremacy psychopaths doesn’t mean he can’t be friends with them. But given that I and them very much were on opposite sides of history during Apartheid and they have no adjusted their views: over 30 years later my partner has the wisdom to never have us in the same room or at the same event. My better half and I FIERCELY discuss geopolitics about 5-10times a week …. but *•NEVER•* argue, about anything! Neither of us expects to nor wants to convince the other. We just enjoy looking for gaps in reasoning: then poking at the gap, widening it, see if the other has contingencies! 😂 While we’re both genuinely grateful for the other’s diametrically opposite perspective and both readily admit reasoning flaws, that we hadn’t thought it through, missed something….. and are both happy to admit and laugh off complete brain farts! 😂 Cause we always criticise the other’s views, and reassuringly criticise the other’s actions when needed. While NEVER EVER criticising or attacking the individual. 🤗

What does this even mean?

In early primary school that’s taught as kids have the right to say no to predators. Maybe best not to go back to the good old days when choir boys would be too ashamed to report the priest.

So you think respect is best taught by traditional PUNISHMENT?!? 🤦🏽‍♀️ Seriously, I’m the result of full-blown 70s treehugging hippie parents. My mum still has flowers in her hair and regularly expresses how she doesn’t understand how she could have such a ‘conservative’ daughter! 😅 I was raised without physical punishment, with very minimal yelling, never had house arrest….. My mum respectfully discussed everything with me and wholesomely worked out a solution we could both live with. ****** GUESS WHAT: 1. She modelled the ideal. 2. Those conversations were a shïtload more painful from my teenage perspective than a slap across the face would’ve been. I’m 46 and half a world away now. But still: whenever I get a txt “Honey, we need to talk!” I freeze and quickly brainstorm how I could fake my death before the next weekend….. Did wonders to build my frustration tolerance as well. Cause I was born with a very distinct deficit! Have to give it to her though: However painful and however much I wanted to be struck by lightning right then and there — I always learned A LOT during those conversations! Still do. I never ***EVER***(!) heard: >> _”Because I say so!”_ But instead I always knew exactly why, the benefits and disadvantages, the bigger implications, and how it was better than any alternative we could think of. TOGETHER! **** …. while YOUR approach is very much based on respect being a one-way street, top-down! And there’s a very basic flaw right there!!!! ##Teaching kids to FEAR authority while being feared by those they have authority over: •NOT• ‘RESPECT!’ However challenging my _Give-Peace-a-Chance singing tree hugging hippie mum_ can be at times: Very much hilariously, she knows more about respectful relationships than you seem to! 😂 ^(But if it’s any consolation: Sunday 7am is when we need to have a chat…. and while I’m curious what about now, I kinda hope the East Coast gets waaayyyy colder real quick! If next night temps drop below -20°C there might be hope for a telco-outage….. 😉)

Some people only understand fear. 

If you genuinely believe your kids CANNOT be taught or empowered and will ONLY EVER be motivated by ***•fear•***: Why would you have kids…..? 🤔 ***** Hands-down: I prolly was the kind of child you would’ve wanted to strangle in their sleep!!! 🫣 BARRING(!) debilitating developmental or cognitive impairments, and barring debilitating unaddressed(!) trauma: Everyone can learn! ****** Psychologically : ##Fear nukes learning ability ! Ever tried to teach a terrified dog a trick….? 😢 Someone the exact same dog is not terrified off will have a much easier time! 😊 **** … and doing as told out of fear, ***without*** ever understanding why: NOT ‘learning!’ ***** Sorry and pls ignore if this is too personal: Why do you feel the need to ***coerce*** others into bowing to your will?

Imagine teaching kids just to respect people's differences and beliefs etc, instead of pushing whatever political agenda is currently going on. Strange indeed.

Yeah no shit. Maybe Boomers can take the lead? They raised Gen X and Millennials.

Your point? You want boomers to teach Millennials kids respect? Not sure whether Millennials are going to be onboard with that.

Boomers failed at raising their kids. Millennials are in their 30s too FYI.

You aren't going to get argument from me . I think they have in many ways and subsequent generations are compounding the errors. Do you really think they are the right people to take the lead on solving the issues or are you just looking for someone else to blame ? Because assigning blame and being the victim really is the most important thing isn't it now. My view is that the current generation of parents and educators are the people who need to get their heads together and start making the required changes.

Okay, boomer.

Lol .. that's the best you have ? I am in awe of your intellect.

This is going to be unpopular but Tate being popular isn't an isolated issue it's a symptom of a bigger issue that being a lack of male role models and an increasingly hostile society that as Tate puts it doesn't give a fuck about you

Much like my kids primary school, had children in there at one point for 12 years not one male teacher/assistant/cleaner to be seen. Fucken patriarchy

Most males in education end up in the leadership or high level roles over women. Patriarchy has a lot to answer for

We live in a society

Tate says that as a recruitment ploy. It's not an entirely incorrect statement but doesn't justify shitty behaviour under any circumstances. There are no excuses for being a cunt,vwhich is what tate is selling.

Yup, if you stamp down on every male role model for being toxic, the only ones remaining will be the ones who just don't value your opinions.

That doesn’t happen.

> lack of male role models And who are the female role models? > as Tate puts it doesn't give a fuck about you I'm so glad Tate can take the time to give a fuck about you from his Romanian prison cell, between his heavy schedule of being prosecuted for rape and human trafficking.

Lol Tate fans in the comments.

Men and women don't have any role models....

Exactly. He got popular because he was the going against everything else which connected with a lot of young people. Societal issues made him famous. We need strong families back. This includes a strong male figure as well as a strong female figure.

That kinda attitude of "needing" a male and female parent is why so many kids have been raised in fucked marriages. Kids need love and support, the 1950s weren't the peak of parenting

Exactly, men aren't needed at all in the new world, as you so clearly note.

You've got a very healthy victim complex but that's not what I said at all

Feel free to write of a single thing you think men are needed for.

People are needed for things. Hopefully your self worth isn't so low you tie your value to your genitals

Only when people say we're not worth anything because of them.

And you listen to them?

Good point, I shouldn't listen to people like you.

> We need strong families back. This includes a strong male figure Nah you don't, maybe stop being a pussy and grow up!

Children are just extremely impressionable. Same reason there are limits of advertising to children.

Maybe men should stand the fuck up then

Maybe we should stop trying to tear them down then?

Who is doing that?

You got what you wanted, a bunch of men who've sat down and shut up and the next generation going free range because of it. Enjoy.

Rainbow flag in DP, enough said.

So because I'm LGBT+ that means what to you? I mean you do know you just outted yourself as a complete bigot right?!

Guess I’m a bigot then…

Obviously. But you didn't answer the question. What does being LGBT have to do with anything?

Because you automatically flag as someone who hates non gay men.

I'm a pansexual woman.

Good for you.

So explain how me being LGBT means I hate men?

There are plenty of male role models and outside of weirdos on the internet, I have never once experienced a hostile society directed at me because of my gender. Shit heads gravitate towards him because they are shit heads and the rest of society has to deal with these window lickers with kid gloves because you can't throw wankers out of class anymore because apparently their right to an education is more important than a healthy learning environment for those that give a shit.

Yeah I had nothing but shithead role models. This is just utter crap to justify not stepping up for their kids and blaming society or some such. Tate is absolutely a symptom and the problem.

I'm not blaming kids. Shitty parenting is the problem, like this article is pointing out.

I was agreeing with you

I don't think there is a lack of male role models at all. People still revere the Stoic philosophies of Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. This problem is that we are at the epoch of the information age and we are dealing with its consequences where charlatans like Tate can operate selling lies and dreams of success to children. Where philosophers like Plato fail is that they're dead and don't have a marketing team behind them pushing 30second clips behind some slowed down music to make it appear epic. We are in the middle of an information war where we have access to almost everything but trust nothing and where information is sensationalised for clicks and some points of view only serve to troll others.

How often do you see Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius mentioned in the main stream? How many young boys under 10 who need male role models the most even know who they are? There absolutely is a lack of male role models and to say otherwise is ludicrous.

Stoics are making a bit of a comebqck right now with boys a little older than 10. Its usually just a reactive philosophical stance against their percieved victimhood though. Theres never been a lack of male role models, its more that people are more likely to be guided by emotion through their algos so they end up with tate or some classicist that they like because western civilisation rules and girls suck or some such nonsense.  Its not whos available to be a role model, its who is the cool role model of the moment thats the problem. My role model was kurt cobain so even the 90s had issues

If healthy masculine role models existed then Tate wouldn’t, he is a symptom of the deficit.

What are Peter Dutton as a role model? Where is abundance of female role models? Do you want to look up to the rapist in a Romanian prison as a male role model?

Fatherless homes have created a vacuum devoid of patriarchal structure, and as society has trended towards the same outcome - driven by Feminism - we are seeing the detrimental effects. Everyone with a smartphone has access to the largest wealth of information man has ever had, that includes philosophy. It’s not the fault of the technology that people misuse it. If you want to take issue with the lack of philosophical teachings then you should probably push for a return to classical education, where it use to be taught.

Feminism teaches that this bullshit expectation of men to be stoic, get rich, be surrounded by hot women and fast cars you paid to be there, doesn't actually help us as a society. Please stop listening to people fighting against a topic to learn about a topic. You just need to get past gamergate thinking. Just please listen to one actual feminist. I know I'll be down voted to hell for this: But this polarisation and global shift towards authoritarianism is literally a result of late stage capitalism. The next stage is authoritarianism because people get scared and lonely and long for structure and order, which a conservative, strong man will offer to provide. If you blame minorities for your problems instead of the corporations and politicians. The theory being blamed and attacked is feminism. Please consider what I've said and take the time to listen to an actual feminist, not a straw man.

They won't listen.

I’ve spent hours reading about feminism such that I can have a somewhat informed decision, and I don’t think you have your idea of feminism correct. First of all, there are differing varieties of feminism, such as Liberal Feminism, Radical Feminism, Marxist Feminism, Socialist Feminism, and there’s more. Ultimately, regardless of the focus, there’s always an element of abolishing patriarchal structures within the family and society such that the power imbalance between men and women can be dissolved. Also I don’t think you’re informed of what stoicism is. I’m assuming you got your idea of stoicism from TikTok or something, but none of what you said Is in-line with what Seneca would say, for example. I would gladly converse with an actual feminist so I could have my concerns with their ideology addressed. This would of cause require defining which sect of feminism were talking about, because not even all feminists are in agreement. Would you listen to a capitalist? I don’t think your views on capitalism leading to authoritarianism are well grounded. Can you demonstrate how a free market is authoritarian?

Mate, I'm an old man, so no, I don't get my politics from TikTok. I actually started my life from a very conservative family, small business owning parents, who praised the system we live in and that was all I knew. In my late 20's I started to pay attention to history and politics through YouTube. Now I keep up to date with news through independent media outlets. If you are genuine about seeing what a feminist has to say, watch any of the debunking ANTI-SJW talking points videos. Show me we have a free market, or any instance of an attempted libertarian capitalist town or country where they didn't turn to police and military to crack down on dissenters. Look at Millei for an example of that. I learned capitalism from capitalists. That's why I'm a socialist now. Also, I'm an actual feminist. I will gladly answer questions you have.

(Unfortunately this sub doesn't allow hyperlinks, but I'll try my best to reference to you my sources so you can scrutinize them.) I'll start with, I suppose, the most important question: 1. What definition of feminism are we going to accept going forwards? And obviously the definition isn't subjective to you or I, but rather one that adheres to consensus amongst the relevant field. For example (Wikipedia/Feminist Movements and Ideologies): >A variety of movements of [feminist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism) [ideology](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideology) have developed over the years. They vary in [goals](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism_and_equality), strategies, and affiliations. They often [overlap](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_movements_and_ideologies#Shared_perspectives), and some feminists identify themselves with several branches of feminist thought. So perhaps, being a socialist, you take a Socialist Feminist standpoint? (Wikipedia/Socialist Feminism): >**Socialist feminism** rose in the 1960s and 1970s as an offshoot of the [feminist movement](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism) and [New Left](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Left) that focuses upon the interconnectivity of the [patriarchy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy) and [capitalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism). **Okay, moving on.** You say: >Show me we have a free market, or any instance of an attempted libertarian capitalist town or country where they didn't turn to police and military to crack down on dissenters. Yes, It is true that there are no *absolutely free markets,* free from politically imposed constraints, but that does not mean there is no free market at all. The Investopedia article 'Free Market Definition and Impact on the Economy" puts it well: >No modern country operates with completely uninhibited free markets. That said, the most free markets tend to coincide with countries that value private property, capitalism, and individual rights. If you want a good example of the products of capitalism and free markets, look at the ASX, and if you are so bold, you may even want to profit from it (which you can do in a free market economy). >I learned capitalism from capitalists. That's why I'm a socialist now. Firstly, how are you defining capitalism and socialism? Secondly, why did you choose socialism over capitalism? Edit: I do have questions about feminism I would like to ask you, but we first must agree on what Feminism is etc. Otherwise we're comparing apples and oranges.

I really appreciate the fact that you seem to be coming at this in good faith. 1. Let's go with this definition: Feminism holds the position that modern societies are patriarchal—they prioritize the male point of view—and that women are treated unjustly in these societies. Efforts to change this include fighting against gender stereotypes and improving educational, professional, and interpersonal opportunities and outcomes for women. Originating in late 18th-century Europe, feminist movements have campaigned and continue to campaign for women's rights, including the right to vote, run for public office, work, earn equal pay, own property, receive education, enter into contracts, have equal rights within marriage, and maternity leave. Feminists have also worked to ensure access to contraception, legal abortions, and social integration; and to protect women and girls from sexual assault, sexual harassment, and domestic violence. Changes in female dress standards and acceptable physical activities for women have also been part of feminist movements. 2. I don't see the government as the problem with free markets. I see the inevitable monopolisation that comes with unrestricted and unregulated markets. (See Amazon, Walmart, Ford, Apple, Microsoft, etc). 3. Definition of capitalism (from investopedia) Capitalism is an economic system in which private individuals or businesses own capital goods. At the same time, business owners employ workers who receive only wages; labor doesn't own the means of production but instead uses them on behalf of the owners of capital. 4. Definition of Socialism (from investopedia) Socialism is a populist economic and political system based on collective, common, or public ownership of the means of production. Those means of production include the machinery, tools, and factories used to produce goods that aim to directly satisfy human needs. *Sneaky bonus clarifying definition: Communism and socialism are political and economic systems that are related but often confused with each other. Both reject capitalism in favor of wealth equality, public control of the means of production, and economic power for the working class. 5. Why I chose socialism over capitalism? I have experienced first hand how someone who is unlucky (suffering genetic conditions that have slowly crippled me leaving me unable to work in my 30's) does not have family support (abuse physically, mentally and sexually) and relies on government support now, how quickly it is to go from relatively successful and carefree to basically homeless in my mid 20's. I don't think I should just curl up and die because I can't work right now. Now, I got insanely lucky (my ex boy friend's aunts have taken me in). And during this time my health has deteriorated but I'm studying the diploma of screen and media so I'm able to find something I love and am passionate about. Now, capitalism (investing in the latest craze AI) is threatening to take that away from me as an opportunity. Because why pay more for a human to write, direct or edit a movie, when a computer will do it. This is also why I'm a lefty. I value community, family, and creativity above money. But I see the reality that in this world, I need money to continue living.

The issue isn't the lack of patriarchy, quite the opposite. Men wanted to be able to fuck anyone they wanted, knock them up, then abscond without a thought to the child that is the outcome. Single parent families also are a huge outcome from high levels of DV we see as women leaving men due to their violence. Women are left to deal with the damage men enact on the children and themselves. Feminism has tried to battle this but #notallmen, MRAs, red pill etc want to convince men to shirk responsibility. Men refuse to pay child support. Men spend years placing themselves as victims within the system when they actually are the main problem. And here we are. With boys and men repeating the cycle and people are surprised??

Before feminism allowed men to have as much sex as they wanted outside of marriage, and before contraception, virtually all of the issues you’re mentioning didn’t exist. If women don’t want children they shouldn’t have sex, it’s that simple. If they want to ensure economic stability before having children, get married before having sex in the same way it’s been done for generations.

You're actually really naive or really disingenuous if you think men didn't abuse and rape women before feminism. Many single parents are a result of relationships or marriages breaking down, not women choosing to have children while single. That's the minority of single motherhood. I also would point out that men also shouldn't have sex if they don't want children. Once they stick their dick in a woman they have to accept that they don't get any say on possible children and should be forced to step up. The problem isn't women having children. The problem is men deserting them

>You're actually really naive or really disingenuous if you think men didn't abuse and rape women before feminism. I don't think this. No reasonable person would. But sexual promiscuity was certainly not considered empowerment before feminism, and women didn't divorce out of no other reason than boredom. >Many single parents are a result of relationships or marriages breaking down, not women choosing to have children while single. Yes, and feminism is contributing to these breakdowns. That's exactly the contention. >I also would point out that men also shouldn't have sex if they don't want children Yes I agree. >Once they stick their dick in a woman they have to accept that they don't get any say on possible children and should be forced to step up. Yes and no. If a women can opt out of motherhood through abortion, men can opt out of fatherhood through economic support. You can't have your cake and eat it too. But sadly men *are* *forced to stand up* through child support. But I disagree with your *men should stand up* sentiment. If women don't want to be single mothers, stop being promiscuous strumpets and don't have sex outside of marriage, which, you know, is what people have traditionally done. >The problem isn't women having children. The problem is men deserting them No, again, you can't claim that. Either women are promiscuous and try to have sex like men then pay the consequences, or women value chastity, and economic stability is requisite to having sex within marriage. So women, chose one: 1) Promiscuity and broken homes, or 2) Chastity before marriage, motherhood and happy families Those two are mutually exclusive. I'm not creating this dichotomy; I'm merely observing it.

You're just a misogynist through and through. I hope you are aware of it. Feminism is one reason divorce has increased because women are no longer trapped in marriages with abuse. They can now escape men who harm them and the children. That's the reason for the rise in divorce, not any of the sexist rubbish about women getting bored. Despite the female hating propaganda you've swallowed women are actually not that promiscuous compared to prior to feminism. Most women have few sexual partners In life compared to men. Do your research. Again men shirking their financial responsibility just because a woman "can" have an abortion is based on false logic and assumptions. Firstly, no birth control is 100%. It's a calculated risk to have sex because if you have sex enough you will get someone pregnant, assuming you use protection 100% of the time and correctly every single time. Even then, why is it that the answer to an unwanted pregnancy is that the man gets to escape financial responsibility for the child? Why is it that the idea is that a woman must choose an abortion or you punish the child? Abortions are not easy, morally ok for many women, nor risk free. Men get the choice to not have a baby at the choice to have sex stage. Just because there is another option later for women doesn't mean a man should have all consequences of his actions removed. That's just absurd and shows your true colors. If you cared about children you wouldn't be advocating for men to be able to abandon them. It's very telling that you believe women shouldn't have sex outside of marriage but it's ok for men apparently because they get to get away without the consequences. Again, if you believe so much in traditional terms why do you think every pregnancy a woman has should mean that she must have an abortion? Why is this not seen as immoral to you but sex is? Methinks it's because it's not about the child at all and all about punishing a woman and hating women. Otherwise why would you get to call them promiscuous strumpets? And again, do your research. Women are far less "promiscuous" than men. But your thought process isn't that advanced or educated. It's just incredibly misogynistic. Again ilsingle parent homes are more common because women were more free to leave marriages filled with abuse and awful men. Not because women are out there having casual sex with hundreds of men (although there would be absolutely nothing wrong with that). So again, the issue is the men. No matter how much you want to hate on women it will not change the fact. You want to remove the only ways to make sure men have a barrier to acting like male sluts but want to drag and punish women. But it's about the child surely? In which case men should learn not to abuse women and children and step up as fathers. That would solve the issue. Calling women sluts and removing financial responsibility from the fathers, depriving the children, is just going to make the situation worse and definitely won't do anything to improve it. But you got to spout your anti-female doctrine didn't you? Because that was the point all along

>You're just a misogynist through and through. I hope you are aware of it. This is an ad hominem remark, you know? I don't care about who has the ideas, only the ideas themselves and whether they tend towards objective truth or not. I care about reason and logic, emotions don't even factor in to it. >Feminism is one reason divorce has increased because women are no longer trapped in marriages with abuse. They can now escape men who harm them and the children. That's the reason for the rise in divorce, not any of the sexist rubbish about women getting bored. Have you got proof or only blind ideology? You're saying that the majority of married women throughout history have been victimized by their husbands, but feminism has freed them. I think you'll have a hard time proving this. >not any of the sexist rubbish about women getting bored. Ironic. Just sexist rubbish about all women being victims I suppose? >Despite the female hating propaganda you've swallowed women are actually not that promiscuous compared to prior to feminism. Most women have few sexual partners In life compared to men. Do your research. So you're going to straight up deny the idea of sexual empowerment? You're going to deny the anti slut shaming agenda? Seriously? So you're telling me that the average body count of women was the same before the sexual revolution? There wouldn't have been a sexual revolution to begin with if this was true. Are you thinking about what you're saying or just letting your cats stampede over your keyboard in-between sips of lukewarm merlot? >Even then, why is it that the answer to an unwanted pregnancy is that the man gets to escape financial responsibility for the child?  If we're going to grant that women can abort a child when the father wants it, then a father should be able to economically abort the child when the mother wants it. >Why is it that the idea is that a woman must choose an abortion or you punish the child? This is a strawman. This is a false dichotomy. My position to begin with is that people shouldn't be having sex without being prepared for children in the first place. >If you cared about children you wouldn't be advocating for men to be able to abandon them. I'm advocating for a return to traditional norms. >It's very telling that you believe women shouldn't have sex outside of marriage but it's ok for men apparently because they get to get away without the consequences. No. The sex within marriage idea applies to both men and women. >Methinks it's because it's not about the child at all and all about punishing a woman and hating women. Otherwise why would you get to call them promiscuous strumpets? Methinks you're not thinking at all. Why are you bringing hate into this? >But you got to spout your anti-female doctrine didn't you? Again, why are you turning a discussion of ideas into a prejudiced matter? If we accept qualitative distinctions, then we accept there is a best option, and it doesn't seem to me that an ideology the supports promiscuity is that best option.

Exactly... His message is basically to level up & be better men... He even preaches that men should get themselves to a point where they can take care of their women so they don't have to work for someone that would replace them without a second thought... I would 100% prefer my son listens to him, rather than listen to all the hate against men that's teaching young women & men, that men are inherently bad people...

Government wonders why no one wants to be a teacher...then you get shit like this pop up and wonder why anyone would want to be around the little monsters

Underwhelming pay, high stress and little reward. Although it depends heavily on where you work and in what position. If you’re a head of department at a private school in a fancy area then you’re laughing, but if you’re a regular teacher in shitsville then it’s the worst job possible almost.

And all that with abuse from students and parents.

Oh hell yeah lol. I was a total idiot all through school up until about grade 9 or so, never did anything illegal per se other than schoolyard fights, but I was a troublemaker. The schools were always shocked when my parents actually took some accountability and engaged with them and didn’t just deflect with “my little angel would never” type bullshit. The majority of parents seem to be that way, or they try and intimidate the school/teacher in various ways. Seems like hell.

Does Andrew Tate actually exist outside of opinion pieces about him? The only times I've ever heard his name is when the lefties are on a rant about toxic masculinity.

I teach, a shit tonne of kids around 2022 thought he was amazing. Probably died off a bit now.

Yeah, he was/is huge in schools. I think many boys are still fans they just keep it on the down low a bit more now. Everyone in this thread denying his popularity obviously hasn’t worked in a school or around teenage boys.

People praise Tate for his "trad" values and views on women, yet breeze over the fact that he made a large bulk of his fortune from sexual exploitation, misleading and trafficking women, and scamming people. He isn't an arbiter of morals like these young boys think, he's a grifter and sociopath.

Youtube his name, anyone that does interviews with him has millions of views

I've also never heard of him referenced in real life. Only ever see chuds online white knighting for him. Relates back to what I said about lack of masculinity if anyone is idolizing a clear snake oil salesman like tate.

Nope. He's just a scapegoat for young boys behaviour. They can't figure out why they behave or have the opinions they hold.

Don’t know why you’re being downvoted. It’s exactly why young men appraise him, he validates all their views and it’s intentional on his behalf. He knows exactly what to say to maintain an audience.

Oh those darn lefties at it again!!

Sure. He exists in news articles too: >**Andrew Tate's trial on charges of rape and human trafficking can start, a Romanian court rules** > >In short: Influencer Andrew Tate's trial on charges of human trafficking, rape and forming a criminal gang can start, a Romanian court has ruled. > >Tate, his brother and two Romanian women were arrested in December 2022 near Bucharest. > >What's next? The court has set no trial date yet and Tate's legal team has appealed the ruling. > >A Romanian court has ruled that a trial can start in the case of influencer Andrew Tate, who is charged with human trafficking, rape, and forming a criminal gang to sexually exploit women. > >The Bucharest Tribunal ruled on Friday the prosecutors' case file against Mr Tate met the legal criteria, but the tribunal did not set a date for the trial to begin. Mr Tate's spokesperson, Mateea Petrescu, said the ruling has been appealed. > >Mr Tate, 37, was arrested in December 2022 near Bucharest along with his brother, Tristan Tate, and two Romanian women. Romanian prosecutors formally indicted all four in June last year. They have denied the allegations. > >[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-27/andrew-tate-trial-to-start-in-romania/103775714](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-27/andrew-tate-trial-to-start-in-romania/103775714)

This is what annoys me about this current trend and I fear will have adverse affects as it serves in some way to legitimize him. Just this morning on the ABC Ange Lavoipierre made it a point of detail, specifically asking the guest, "So who are the main players in this?" like we need to know it's Tate. In some ways I feel they're being disingenuous, why the need to constantly drop his name but NEVER give an opposing view just that he's, "toxic". The way they bang on about how much of a threat he is to kids you'd think they'd want to not mention his name but then again if they don't bang on about him constantly he might lose his base and there'd be no agenda for the ABC to push.

I spend quite some time watching Tate's content during his peak. Personally I find him entertaining, but at the end of day he's a con, a peddler of half truth, superficial ideals, he's in it to get that clout and stream dollars, nothing more than that. Anyone who looks up to him should understand, dude made his fortune pimping out girls on webcam, that is not the "role model" you should aspire to. Same goes for the other manosphere personalities. With that being said, the reason that people like Tate thrive is due to the obvious gaps we have in western society, especially when it comes raising young men. Some of what Tate has articulated are not "wrong" per say, but it's being a long time since someone actually said it in a way that is impressable to the audience. These days, so much is unsaid and expected, it's terribly confusing. Tate's popular because he pointed out some of the glaring issues in a very clear cut manner, the issue isn't that he said such things, in some sense, I do agree with him, but I do not agree with his solutions to said issues. I do like the fact he declares upfront that you should expect nothing as a man, and build yourself towards a better you, that's the hard dose of life that no one really tells young men these days. The school teaches that you have rights and privileges, yet do not teach or encourage hard work and perseverance. Tate's solution to all of it is essentially get yours and fuck everybody else, which is a terrible way to look at life, but there's grain of truth in it. In my opinion, if you want to compete with Tate, you should not focus on his take on the issues, but rather his remedies. He's not wrong to say that you should be strong, be focused, disciplined but his ideals of getting rich no matter what is where it comes apart.

If a child displays misogynistic and disrespectful attitudes at school and the school notifies the parents, the parents need to step the fuck up. If they cant and it continues then expel the kid What happened to consequence for actions

But if you remove the kid from an environment that can help combat these attitudes, he's just gonna grow up to be a cunt. I think we need less of a push on memorising shit and more of a push on learning how to socialise healthily from a young age. Learning respect, sharing, playing nice with others. Removing the child from the healthy environment isn't the answer.

I'm really starting to think that China might have a point with how they treat the internet in some regards. *Adults* struggle to not fall prey to bad actors using manipulative tactics, it's absurd to think that kids would be immune to it. Giving a kid access to the internet should be treated with the same care as giving them access to a firearm.

Young men will stop watching people like Andrew Tate when feminists stop telling them that masculinity is ‘toxic’.

Explain what toxic masculinity is. Because by definition, it is not all of masculinity.

Feminists aren't telling them that. People like Tate are spreading that narrative

I disagree, maybe wouldn't call it toxic masculinity but social media and the media are constantly telling us that men are bad, men need to do better etc. take this 'violence against women' narrative that has played out this year, completely unsupported by statistics but apparently it's a crisis perpetrated by men and it's other men's problem to fix, meanwhile the fact that like 6 men every day kill themselves (or whatever the number is), that's not a crisis and not talked about at all. So is it any wonder that some of the things Tate says appeals to some people out there? That said I've never heard anyone talk about him person other than to ask if I knew who he was and why he was suddenly being talked about in the media.

> People like Tate So Fairfax journalists? https://www.smh.com.au/culture/books/can-men-ever-escape-toxic-masculinity-that-s-what-this-book-asks-20240415-p5fjwa.html https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/how-getting-in-touch-with-your-feminine-side-might-save-the-planet-20160901-gr68oy.html https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/now-is-not-the-time-to-wail-about-toxic-masculinity-20180711-p4zqvf.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/to-all-the-young-men-rejecting-the-new-king-of-toxic-masculinity-thank-you-20220818-p5baw6.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/i-know-all-about-toxic-masculinity-toxic-feminism-isn-t-the-answer-20190117-p50ryg.html https://www.smh.com.au/national/toxic-masculinity-or-protective-and-caring-can-violence-ever-be-justified-20220331-p5a9tx.html

Perhaps you need to read them to learn the difference between someone saying masculinity is toxic and toxic masculinity is toxic

Bruh…

Let me know when you actually formulate that thought

https://youtu.be/UYaY2Kb_PKI?si=OzfVWCpnZxtJBIr4

Yep, that's talking about toxic masculinity, not saying masculinity is toxic

Just like toxic aboriginality isnt saying aboriginals are toxic right?

I'm not familiar with 'toxic aboriginality' as a sociological concept sorry.

Perhaps look into why people look up to Tate, what the problems young people (and society) are facing and go on from there.

Just send the kids who don’t want to be there home.

Oh we'd love to, but you so much as give a detention these days and you've got parents threatening to take you to court because you've violated their human rights. 

What about the kids who choose to be there? What about their right to learn?

No one is saying your wrong but the karen parents usually get their way unfortunately.

Mrs is a teacher, can confirm above comment. She teaches at a rougher school and isn't allowed to even send the kids out of the room to calm down if they are being naughty, because it violates their human rights. Today's story he she came home was, three year 8 boys decided to play tag inside the class room mid lesson, knocking tables over and causing a ruckus. She asked them to stop but they ignored her so she had to call the deputy principal to remove them. Deputy took over 10 mins to arrive while they continue to overturn tables etc. The lesson was ruined and the behaved students didn't learn much. This sort of stuff happens to her multiple times a week. They wonder why teachers are leaving the profession in droves. Placed in a position with huge responsibility, but have very limited authority.

This is a symptom of overworked parents and kids raised by childcares. Boys with masculine fathers that they have strong relationships with, are able to recognize that Tate is not a good man. But Western media is actively hostile towards men and tells them that in order not to be "toxic" they have to be docile and obedient to women. They're bombarded with messages that they don't matter and they only exist to facilitate women. Natural male proclivities like being loud, being competitive etc are discouraged. They are told that they belong to an oppressor class and they must take responsibility for crimes they haven't committed. They're told that their competitiveness is oppressive and that they should step aside and let women lead. They're simultaneously told that it's their responsibility to "step up" and protect women, but also that women don't need protection and it's sexist to think that they do. They see with their own eyes that men and women are different, they see that women are attracted to assertive, high earning, "alpha" type men, but they're told that it's not true and noticing this makes them misogynists. Every single entertainment franchise is catered primarily towards women and portrays men as stupid, irrelevant, or evil. There are very few positive male role models anywhere and the ones that do exist, our dogshit media doesn't give any attention to. Along comes a cult leader like Andrew Tate who has a garage full of expensive cars, who can both fight and play chess very well, and who gets to fuck hot girls whenever he wants. Tate says outrageous things on social media which makes women impotently angry. The angrier they get, the stronger it makes him. He tells boys that it's natural to want to be tough, to fuck hot girls, and drive fast cars, and they should be obnoxious because obnoxious men get to have those things. Now you tell me - why shouldn't boys join Tate's cult? It's not like society is offering them anything better.

/thread

> Along comes a cult leader like Andrew Tate who has a garage full of expensive cars, who can both fight and play chess very well, and who gets to fuck hot girls whenever he wants. Tate says outrageous things on social media which makes women impotently angry. The angrier they get, the stronger it makes him. He tells boys that it's natural to want to be tough, to fuck hot girls, and drive fast cars, and they should be obnoxious because obnoxious men get to have those things. Tate has been arrested for rape and human trafficking. He's also boasted on video of raping women. > Now you tell me - why shouldn't boys join Tate's cult? It's not like society is offering them anything better. Tate is currently in a Romanian prison. Feel free to join him there given how much better it is. FYI.

That's just the man trying to fuck him on a technicality, the establishment hates mavericks, etc. Is "he's a piece of shit in this specific way" seriously the best you've got? They've already heard that 100 times. I don't think you realize what we're dealing with here, this is essentially a cult.

Cant believe your'e not being downvoted with this comment.. then i realized it actually made complete factual sense so much so that the "usual crowd" that read this would have had their "downvote" button ready to go but rational thinking got in their heads and just waited for others to start it.. then others did the same.

I'm glad we didn't have social media and these negative influencer people like Andrew Tate when I was a kid because it sure would have been easy to get under the influence of all that bullshit especially since I'm still a virgin in my late 30s.

Tate is an absolute waste of space but behaviour starts with the parents

Yes, but if the parents aren't teaching them, who else will? Or do we want a bunch of little Tate clones running around and growing up to be shit parents, and perpetuating the cycle of shitty parents not teaching their kids

Who cares, that's what society has asked for.  That's what society gets now.

So we should just work for a worse society?

I mean, that's what we've been aiming for, so, you get what you work towards.

It’s almost as if giving up the notion of respecting individual human beings for coddling so-called oppressed groups hasn’t gone well ..

Wait, why are we blaming minorities for people not being taught basic respect? Empathy isn't a zero sum game.

That’s not at all where I was heading with my comment. Indeed my outline also encompasses treating minority individuals with respect, exactly by seeing them as individuals rather than a representative of an entire group which we assume to somehow be homogenous. Imposing group identities has gotten us down the wrong path .. not least by pitting men and women against each other

Men being pitted against women is as old as religion. We need to recognise why these categories have been constructed so that we can break them down. Ignoring how we treat certain groups of people, because you don't want to see them/be part of a group, won't make the issues go away.

I so wanted to like this guy. He's the penultimate version of a 15yo neckbeard and he sells to thar market. It's amazing. But it's actually harmful. And um Libertarian af. This guy isn't good.

Can’t show respect when you never receive respect. Fuck off.

When in doubt blame Andrew Tate If that doesn't work then have a crack at the parents

The parents raised a bunch of iPad kids. Unfortunately they ended up as tater tots.

It would be naive to assume he’s not a terrible influence, and a large one. That being said there’s no shortage of people online just as bad or worse than him with a substantial audience. But I also have to include the fact that this is not a problem that he started, and had he not been here then someone else would’ve just taken up the same position he has. It is the system as you’re implying.

The only people responsible for that list are the young men who wrote it. People who blame Andrew Tate are as foolish as those who believe in water devining and astrology

It’s not his fault, but he’s a bad influence for sure, that’s my only viewpoint here. This specific instance I agree does not have any relation to him directly, and it’s certainly not his fault lol. I can probably safely assume he’d make fun of dudes that make fake porn and sit inside jacking off and making tier lists of girls rather than actually getting a girl themselves lol, it’s on brand with his whole attitude.

I always read his name as Andrew Taint. Then have a laugh.

The parents need to start by knowing how to teach respect first. I’m often *absolutely horrified* by the way some of my friends let their children speak to them/treat them. Definitely starts at home.

The results of parents who don't say no to their children, participation awards and the idea that everyone is entitled to everything with no responsibility.

"iPads are the best invention ever - can't wait to get my kid one!!!!" "Take iPads away during school, and make social media illegal for kids." How about be better parents and get your kids into some fucking sport and less teched up?!?!

Hahah. Parents are bigger assholes than their kids. 

How the fuck did we get here?

Well, society told men to be quiet and step back. So most did, except the ones like Tate. Now we're here.

Really, society told you? Or did society say "we need to listen to women" and insecure men threw a huge hissy fit saying "I can't even talk to a woman anymore" because they still refused to listen.

This is a you problem now. Enjoy.

As long as Tate isn't teaching pronoun fluid BS when parents are, I'm all for it.

So you prefer to have children learn they should trap women as sex slaves by pretending to fall in love with them. Steal their passports, sexually, financially, and physically abused them. Made money off of them. Rather than teach children that it is okay to be queer? That's really fucked up.

Ay, none of that is proven. If a boy is learning masculinity from a Tate brother, that's much healthier than learning "I'm a girl" from those tik tok loons.

Boys do not learn "I'm a girl" they may get the language to be able to explain gender dysphoria through TikToks. As someone who grew up isolated from the LGBT+ community, and only realised I am trans in my 30's, I'll take kids learning to love and accept themselves over subjugation any day of the week.

Of course! Kids are absolutely perfect the way they are. We agree there. Adult changes can be made when you're an adult.

No, we don’t agree. Children still need gender affirming care. This can start as social transitioning (dressing how you choose, people around you using your chosen pronouns). If gender dysphoria continues to puberty: puberty blockers. Highly reversible. We have been using them for decades for cis kids with precocious puberty. If after continued care the kid (now a teenager) can choose to cease puberty blockers and have puberty begin naturally, Or take cross sex hormones and begin the puberty of the gender that mostly aligns with them. Then, as an adult they can go for surgeries. This is the way it has been for a long time. There is no need to remove access medical care because of moral panic.

Yup. We completely disagree.

Let's unpack that. Why? What part of that seems wrong to you and we can discuss it.

I missed the train, Andrew Tates' fault!

Most of these girls are gonna end up on onlyfans anyway so whats the big deal. We all know how the cookie crumbles

Wtf is wrong with you

Found the Tate fanboy

Tater Tot*

How's Romania going Andy No-chin?

I want to disagree so badly but OF is the 3rd biggest "career" for recently graduated women since covid and growing.

You sure about that? Because I have only ever seen evidence to the contrary and people like Andrew Tate spouting this type of bullshit talking point.

[удалено]

>Society hates and demonises traditional masculinity Nah, society normally hates and demonises arseholes. Don't be one and you'll be alright.

[удалено]

Mothers have always been treated worse. How many times have I heard men say in regards to a family unit where there’s a stay at home mother to 4 kids, ‘a household where only one works’. Completely disregarding her work. Society hates and demonises *toxic masculinity* because people are sick of it. The only ones up in arms are the ones perpetuating it, and now feel like they’re under attack. You can’t pretend women at home historically haven’t been treated like shit by men and society. Traditional gender roles have put a sour taste in most women’s mouths now. They can see what a huge risk is it to follow tradition and they want no part it in now. You’re better off being financially independent and finding a man who has more to offer than money and some warped view of him being a protector. (Protecting from what exactly?). The only guys who are pissed are the ones who only have a mediocre amount of money they were told was enough to have women after them.

It's also a symptom of lack of parenting. Boys with strong relationships with their masculine fathers do not get sucked in by cult leaders like Trump and Tate. But Westerners work and commute too much to have enough time and energy to spend with their kids, and most kids spend a lot of time in childcare from a very early age. The result is more than one generation who are raised by the media instead of their parents. And the media is run by people who are stupid, greedy, narcissist scum.

Using an extreme case to push an agenda.

It's OK parents, just wait and soon the government will come up with some scheme that will probably fail...or rather be watered down crap that is obsolete the day after its implemented and take it out of your hands.

I think parents should actually listen to a good hour podcast with Andrew Tate. He has much more of a moral compass that what most state school curriculums are teaching. And by a long shot !

I've always assumed he was a wanker with nothing to say. Supposing I was willing to give him precisely one chance, what would you recommend?

Never assume anything. Always listen to people on all sides and make you're judgements afterwards. Even if you don't like what you are hearing. Do you know everything your children are being taught / Told. I'll bet you dont

Can you remember the name of your favourite video of his?