[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Swan

After watching quite a bit recently on Andrew Tate (since his new found fame) and having followed Jordan Peterson for a while now, i wouldn't lump them in the same category at all. Peterson does speak for struggling young men, but his approach is nothing like Tate's.

Tate plays a character, Joe Rogan put it quite well recently, he said Tate is like a wrestling bad guy/a heel. He plays up to it. I see Tate as someone who pretends he wants the best for young men (top G's, ugh) but really it's just about profit and making money. His Hustler University rubbish, is just a big con. Peterson on the other hand genuinely cares. Thing is with Peterson is his emotions always sit just below the surface. He can sometimes come across erratic. But he's passionate, and caring imo. Tate spouts hate, and it's all just a game to him. He's phoney, and a dick. Peterson is much more complex, his intentions are good though, imo anyway.

I don't really think they are the same but I think some of what JP says may encourage the Andrew tates of the world.

Just in regards to your comments about Joe Rogan calling him a wrestling baddie or whatever. I like Joe but I think it's very minimising of him to make a statement like that considering the things AT says, advising on how to traffic girls/women and now having been arrested for apparently doing that in Romania? Come on!

[Soldier Boy]

Originally Posted by Swan

After watching quite a bit recently on Andrew Tate (since his new found fame) and having followed Jordan Peterson for a while now, i wouldn't lump them in the same category at all. Peterson does speak for struggling young men, but his approach is nothing like Tate's.

Tate plays a character, Joe Rogan put it quite well recently, he said Tate is like a wrestling bad guy/a heel. He plays up to it. I see Tate as someone who pretends he wants the best for young men (top G's, ugh) but really it's just about profit and making money. His Hustler University rubbish, is just a big con. Peterson on the other hand genuinely cares. Thing is with Peterson is his emotions always sit just below the surface. He can sometimes come across erratic. But he's passionate, and caring imo. Tate spouts hate, and it's all just a game to him. He's phoney, and a dick. Peterson is much more complex, his intentions are good though, imo anyway.

Tate is "Jordan Peterson For Dummies" - some of what he says is practically verbatim to things Peterson has said previously.

[Soldier Boy]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't really think they are the same but I think some of what JP says may encourage the Andrew tates of the world.

Just in regards to your comments about Joe Rogan calling him a wrestling baddie or whatever. I like Joe but I think it's very minimising of him to make a statement like that considering the things AT says, advising on how to traffic girls/women and now having been arrested for apparently doing that in Romania? Come on!

Andrew Tate HIMSELF described word-for-word on his own website at one point ... the act of coercive sex trafficking. That he'd date girls who weren't involved in the sex industry, wait for them to fall for him, and then "go into business together" selling sex content before moving on to the next. It seems like he genuinely believed this was not trafficking, because he shared the profits with the women involved. That it essentially had to be slavery to be trafficking. I'm hopeful (although... not very hopeful...) that he's going to find out that "paying them well" doesn't make it "not trafficking".

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Andrew Tate HIMSELF described word-for-word on his own website at one point ... the act of coercive sex trafficking. That he'd date girls who weren't involved in the sex industry, wait for them to fall for him, and then "go into business together" selling sex content before moving on to the next. It seems like he genuinely believed this was not trafficking, because he shared the profits with the women involved. That it essentially had to be slavery to be trafficking. I'm hopeful (although... not very hopeful...) that he's going to find out that "paying them well" doesn't make it "not trafficking".

It's trafficking with a side of pimping.....

[Swan]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I don't really think they are the same but I think some of what JP says may encourage the Andrew tates of the world.

Just in regards to your comments about Joe Rogan calling him a wrestling baddie or whatever. I like Joe but I think it's very minimising of him to make a statement like that considering the things AT says, advising on how to traffic girls/women and now having been arrested for apparently doing that in Romania? Come on!

Well yeah, Joe was saying that if true, it's awful, and he was mocking some of the things Tate has said. Calling him out for some of the vile comments he makes towards women. And like Joe said, if this is true, then Tate is a piece of sh!t basically. But essentially Tate is/was playing a character.

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

Tate is "Jordan Peterson For Dummies" - some of what he says is practically verbatim to things Peterson has said previously.

Hmm, i dunno. Have you heard some of the revolting stuff Tate has said? Like women are property, and that he would happily cheat on "the love of his life" because "that's what men do" and that women should just "like it or lump it". He's always been sh!tting about saying if he had sons, that he wouldn't give them a thing, that they wouldn't be allowed to show emotion, how hard he'd be on them. Yet if he had a girl, he would treat her like a princess. The man is a joke.

Tate probably only echos some of what Peterson has said because he wants to seem caring towards struggling young men. And Peterson is right to argue that women do need men, just the same way men need women. And that the respect should be mutual. Tate on the other hand......

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Soldier Boy

And of course it's all absolute BS so you end up with a bunch of already-angry 20-something year old lads, pumped up at the gym and half of them chock full of steroids, expecting to now be worthy but finding themselves enraged because all of it was snake oil to begin with. And the blame never goes where it belongs - to the peddlers of said snake oil - it goes squarely on the women.

If they tidy their room and pet cats when they see them, it'll all fall into place

I've not read his book, nor heard him speak (outside of contextless clips) in years, but I think (hope!) both of those "rules" are shorthand for bigger concepts, not entirely literal? In the same way that people who say "don't smile until Christmas" don't literally mean keep a straight face for three months, and nothing else