Andrew Tate - sex trafficker

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 minutes ago, kiko said:

Context?

I was making a refrence to when Peterson got suspended on Twitter  for misgendering elliot page and accusing the surgeon who did Elliot’s surgery of doing something illegal.

Peterson had a mental breakdown over it.
Elliot never commented on the debacle 

[mormont]

3 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Eh, I do think it’s imperative to decipher what a person actually means by positive male role model based on a person’s own political/social biases the answer can be very different.

Perhaps. But the men above (and again, just six random names I picked in 60 seconds) are notably successful. They're courageous, decisive and bold. They show leadership and self-belief and they care about others, including other men. Even physically, they're all attractive and in great shape, fine specimens of masculinity.

Any definition of 'positive male role model' that excludes those six wouldn't be worth bothering with.

1 hour ago, kiko said:

Aren't role models usually fathers, brothers or other people from your social circles?

Of course. Tricky to pick examples of those in a discussion with strangers, though!

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 minutes ago, mormont said:

They're courageous, decisive and bold. They show leadership and self-belief and they care about others, including other men. Even physically, they're all attractive and in great shape, fine specimens of masculinity.

 

But they’re explicitly woke—I think perhaps that may the heart of the objection here in your nominating of them.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, kiko said:

Aren't role models usually fathers, brothers or other people from your social circles?

 

 

[Deadlines? What Deadlines?]

 

[Which Tyler]

 

[baxus]

19 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Isn't one of the problems that boys only have aspirations to become footballers or get into music, rather than engage in education or work in other fields. 

Where exactly do boys have problems engaging in education or working in other fields?

19 hours ago, Heartofice said:

Either way, I'm not saying that there are no male models, but there are far fewer than before, and the trend is going in one direction. Add in issues with fatherlessness and males in education and it's a growing problem.

What do you base this conclusion on? How are there fewer male models than before?

And what issues with males in education are you talking about?

19 hours ago, Heartofice said:

On the other side of the coin there is a sort of collective effort to push women to achieve more and support them and give them goals and aims. Almost all my female colleagues are part of some collective women's group or go to 'women in business' events to push each other, thats just an example of the general movement to support and help women, which doesn't really have an equivalent for men.

You need to keep in mind that as recently as a few decades ago women weren't working at all or their chances of career advancement were severely limited. Yes, women do need all the help they can get and it's a great thing that they have events and organisations where they can find help.

Even if we agree (which I don't btw), just for the sake of argument, that there is no such group or events for men there's a question - why don't you create one? Wouldn't creating such a group make you a positive male role model in eyes of the people? Or do you expect women to do it for you?

19 hours ago, Heartofice said:

The response to all this is usually 'meh, men don't need help' or 'yeah well this is just you losing your rights and you can't handle it' which is all nonsense. Tell that to the boys dropping out of school, or committing suicide or joining gangs or getting into crime, stabbing and shooting each other. 

Just out of curiosity, where do you live? All these examples you provide are nowhere near as rampant in my part of the world as you are making them out to be.

[Heartofice]

23 minutes ago, baxus said:

Where exactly do boys have problems engaging in education or working in other fields?

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/young-men-college-decline-gender-gap-higher-education/620066/
 

Quote

Colleges Have a Guy Problem
A recent viral news story reported that a generation of young men is abandoning college. The pattern has deep roots.

American colleges and universities now enroll roughly six women for every four men. This is the largest female-male gender gap in the history of higher education, and it’s getting wider. Last year, U.S. colleges enrolled 1.5 million fewer students than five years ago, The Wall Street Journal recently reported. Men accounted for more than 70 percent of the decline.

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/10/08/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/
 

Quote

Enrollment rates over the past decade are declining, a change almost entirely driven by men. Women are now much more likely to enroll in college than men, and the gender gap widened significantly in 2020. 

 

Quote

Over 1.1 million women received a bachelor’s degree in the 2018-19 academic year compared to fewer than 860,000 men; put differently, about 74 men received a bachelor’s degree for every 100 women. Even fewer men graduate with an associate or master’s degree, relative to women. Doctoral degree conferral is the most gender-balanced, though even here 54% of degrees are conferred to women.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-boys-fall-behind/
 

Quote

In every country in the OECD, there are now more young women than young men with a bachelor’s degree. Figure 1.3 shows the gap in some selected nations. As far as I can tell, nobody predicted that women would overtake men so rapidly, so comprehensively, or so consistently around the world.

Almost every college in the US now has mostly female students. The last bastions of male dominance to fall were the Ivy League colleges, but every one has now swung majority female.

 

[Darzin]

On 1/4/2023 at 4:54 PM, Heartofice said:

The only thing I find interesting about this Andrew Tate thing is why he is seen as popular at all? 

I don't think certain men and boys admiring someone who displays crass wealth and is surrounded by fast cars and beautiful women is anything new. There are always going to be those who see that as the epitome of success, some will grow out of it some won't.

I find the moral panic over him way overblown. He's a scumbag and I hope he rots in a Romanian prison, but like we've always had Andre Tate's and his influence is way overblown. 

23 hours ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

Jorden Peterson as being positive male role model someone who could promote the same ideas of Tate but in a more intellectual veneer.

 

No way does Jordan Peterson who wants young men to settle down and live a straight laced lifestyle promote the same ideas as Tate who advocates a life of hedonism and forming a harem. Just cause they are both "right wing figures" doesn't mean they overlap much. 

[Heartofice]

11 minutes ago, Darzin said:

I don't think certain men and boys admiring someone who displays crass wealth and is surrounded by fast cars and beautiful women is anything new. There are always going to be those who see that as the epitome of success, some will grow out of it some won't.

I find the moral panic over him way overblown. He's a scumbag and I hope he rots in a Romanian prison, but like we've always had Andre Tate's and his influence is way overblown. 

Yes there are plenty of guys who get idolised for this kind of behaviour. Dan Blizerian got insta famous for basically posing with guns cigars and hot chicks, claiming he makes it all from poker (in reality that is all bullshit). Very similar to what Tate seems to be doing, as he seems to make his money from being an actual pimp, slave trader and scammer. 

Think the difference with Tate is he has set himself up as some sort of guru, someone whose opinions some people think are worth listening to. 

15 minutes ago, Darzin said:

No way does Jordan Peterson who wants young men to settle down and live a straight laced lifestyle promote the same ideas as Tate who advocates a life of hedonism and forming a harem. Just cause they are both "right wing figures" doesn't mean they overlap much. 

Agree, Peterson would probably be disgusted by pretty much every aspect of Tate's life.

[Varysblackfyre321]

1 hour ago, Darzin said:

No way does Jordan Peterson who wants young men to settle down and live a straight laced lifestyle promote the same ideas as Tate who advocates a life of hedonism and forming a harem. Just cause they are both "right wing figures" doesn't mean they overlap much. 

You know what I’d concede there are some differences in the ideas they promote. But they do promote  a lot of the same misogynistic ideas like the idea of being bad for women to take of a more active place in the workforce, that society had  emasculated men, and the essential nature of the sexes, and a dose of rape apologia.

They’re equally misogynistic. Peterson practices a more benevolent form of misogyny, while Tate’s is more hostile.

 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Varysblackfyre321

[baxus]

17 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/young-men-college-decline-gender-gap-higher-education/620066/

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2021/10/08/the-male-college-crisis-is-not-just-in-enrollment-but-completion/

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-boys-fall-behind/

That's not what I was asking though, was it? I asked where do men have problems engaging in education. Boys have the same access to education as girls, whether they do as well is a whole other story. There's no sexism against men keeping them from getting an education, which is proven by fact that you still have plenty of men graduating from college, getting masters degrees and phds. In some fields (engineering for example) men are still dominating in numbers. Thankfully, that's changing since women stopped taking "it's not for girls" crap.

Even if we were to switch our discussion to girls doing better at school, are you trying to say that's due to systemic bias? Or is some dark coven of women trying to promote women's rights by ruining the academic careers of boys?

The major issue I find in these articles you linked is that 1,5 million fewer college students enrolled this year compared to 5 years before. If that trend continues it would be indicative of US higher education system facing serious problems.

21 minutes ago, Varysblackfyre321 said:

You know what I’d concede there are some differences in the ideas they promote. But they do promote  a lot of the same misogynistic ideas like the idea of being bad for women to take of a more active place in the workforce, that society had  emasculated men, and the essential nature of the sexes, and a dose of rape apologia.

I might have missed something since don't follow Jordan Peterson that much, but I don't remember him ever displaying "a dose of rape apologia".

[Varysblackfyre321]

4 minutes ago, baxus said:

might have missed something since don't follow Jordan Peterson that much, but I don't remember him ever displaying "a dose of rape apologia".

I don’t know if this qualifies exactly but the first thing that springs to mind is him him arguing  it’s hypocritical for women who wear makeup in the workplace to complain about sexual harassment which can to be fair include a lot of things short of rape.

[mormont]

It's not disputed that in almost every developed Western country, boys (and in particular, economically disadvantaged boys) get poorer educational outcomes than girls, almost from the start of their educational career.

What's interesting is to consider why that is. Most disadvantaged groups (including girls) use education as a way to improve their lot in life. But that doesn't seem to happen with economically disadvantaged boys. 

One thing we can say with some certainty, though, is that idea of 'masculinity' promoted by the likes of Tate is a cause, not an effect, of this disadvantage. Not the only cause, but certainly a cause. Education is seen as 'weak' in that mindset: men should get what they want by right, or by force, not by earning it through study. Research shows this is a common contributor to the educational disadvantage of boys. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

21 minutes ago, baxus said:

If that trend continues it would be indicative of US higher education system facing serious problems.

It is facing serious problems, but gender isn't one of them. The gender gap in college graduation rates probably just comes down to new access, birth control and young women generally being more responsible than young men while also recognizing that traditionally over the last fifty years that women have had to work harder to get the same jobs. 

Or to put it more simply, as someone who went to a respected university that's always in the top 10 for total enrollment, the women were more likely to show up to class and less likely to be hungover than their male classmates. 

Edited January 5, 2023 by Tywin et al.

[Varysblackfyre321]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

It is facing serious problems, but gender isn't one of them. The gender gap in college graduation rates probably just comes down to new access, birth control and young women generally being more responsible than young men while also recognizing that traditionally over the last fifty years that women have had to work harder to get the same jobs. 

Or to put it more simply, as someone who went to a respected university that's always in the top 10 for total enrollment, the women were more likely to show up to class and less likely to be hungover than their male classmates. 

Interesting fact—there’s a gender gap in college attendance in Saudi Arabia in favor of women in similar or greater margins to countries in the west.

It’s not purely a bias against men causing the difference.

8 minutes ago, mormont said:

One thing we can say with some certainty, though, is that idea of 'masculinity' promoted by the likes of Tate is a cause, not an effect, of this disadvantage. Not the only cause, but certainly a cause. Education is seen as 'weak' in that mindset: men should get what they want by right, or by force, not by earning it through study. Research shows this is a common contributor to the educational disadvantage of boys. 

Yeah men and boys are socially encouraged or at least allowed to go their own way more than women and girls —a lot of school is just doing what you’re instructed to do on time.

 

[Heartofice]

11 minutes ago, baxus said:

That's not what I was asking though, was it? I asked where do men have problems engaging in education. Boys have the same access to education as girls, whether they do as well is a whole other story.

Maybe its a language misunderstanding here, but when I talk about engagement in education, I think falling numbers in enrollement and completion of degrees is a pretty good indicator that males are becoming less and less engaged in education, don't see the benefit to them or are unable to make it work for them. That is a worrying trend and I'm not sure why anyone would try and dismiss it.
 

13 minutes ago, baxus said:

There's no sexism against men keeping them from getting an education,

Never said there was, but clearly there is something going on where females are much more likely to want to get an education, and it might be a variety of factors, some of which is a general incentive and level of support for women get an education. We've had decades of society telling women that they need to go get an education in order to make up for decades of repression and lack of opportunity, and women have jumped at it. On the other side of the coin there has no very little of the same push for men, in fact their ideals have been much more along the lines of the Andrew Tate lifestyle, live fast die young kind of thing. What is the point of spending years in education hoping to get a half decent job in your 30s whilst all the cool jocks are off getting laid and having fun partying. Which is the more attractive lifestyle? Then if you can't get that or think you cant then you can just be a dropout and live in a basement playing video games.

There is other research out there suggesting that education favours girls in it's methods, which I think is disputed but I suspect there might be something in it, in that it disadvantages certain boys. 

12 minutes ago, mormont said:

One thing we can say with some certainty, though, is that idea of 'masculinity' promoted by the likes of Tate is a cause, not an effect, of this disadvantage. Not the only cause, but certainly a cause. Education is seen as 'weak' in that mindset: men should get what they want by right, or by force, not by earning it through study. Research shows this is a common contributor to the educational disadvantage of boys. 

I think your framing here is pretty biased. It's probably true that Education is seen as, well if not weak, but a bit pointless and not that useful. As I mentioned above, why put yourself into the system for very little benefit. 

 

[Varysblackfyre321]

2 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

There is other research out there suggesting that education favours girls in it's methods, which I think is disputed but I suspect there might be something in it, in that it disadvantages certain boys. 

16 minutes ago, mormont said:

It’d nice if you explicitly take a solid stance and bring up some solid studies to back up it up then some vague allusion of social bigotry against men.

8 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

We've had decades of society telling women that they need to go get an education in order to make up for decades of repression and lack of opportunity, and women have jumped at it. On the other side of the coin there has no very little of the same push for men, in fact their ideals have been much more along the lines of the Andrew Tate lifestyle, live fast die young kind of thing. What is the point of spending years in education hoping to get a half decent job in your 30s whilst all the cool jocks are off getting laid and having fun partying. Which is the more attractive lifestyle? Then if you can't get that or think you cant then you can just be a dropout and live in a basement playing video games.

You know this unironicly sexism against men right? That they can’t enjoy certain games or there need be shame in a man living with his parents.

Also you initially cried about men dropping out of education but now for this particular instance you argue that education wouldn’t likely benefit them, that there’s no hard point to it. 

[Derfel Cadarn]

29 minutes ago, mormont said:

It's not disputed that in almost every developed Western country, boys (and in particular, economically disadvantaged boys) get poorer educational outcomes than girls, almost from the start of their educational career.

What's interesting is to consider why that is. Most disadvantaged groups (including girls) use education as a way to improve their lot in life. But that doesn't seem to happen with economically disadvantaged boys. 

One thing we can say with some certainty, though, is that idea of 'masculinity' promoted by the likes of Tate is a cause, not an effect, of this disadvantage. Not the only cause, but certainly a cause. Education is seen as 'weak' in that mindset: men should get what they want by right, or by force, not by earning it through study. Research shows this is a common contributor to the educational disadvantage of boys. 

Boys are perhaps more likely to go into trade apprenticeships. A couple of parents i know of teeneged boys certainly encouraged their sons to go the apprenticeship route rather than go to uni. 
Twenty/thirty yesrs ago, I believe apprenticeships were less of a thing, and certainly the mindset at school was to go to uni if you could. That’s changed.

[baxus]

2 hours ago, Heartofice said:

We've had decades of society telling women that they need to go get an education in order to make up for decades of repression and lack of opportunity, and women have jumped at it. On the other side of the coin there has no very little of the same push for men, in fact their ideals have been much more along the lines of the Andrew Tate lifestyle, live fast die young kind of thing. What is the point of spending years in education hoping to get a half decent job in your 30s whilst all the cool jocks are off getting laid and having fun partying. Which is the more attractive lifestyle? 

Honestly, this sounds like bullshit to me.

Sure, we'd all like to earn millions playing a sport or an instrument, being popular worldwide instead of studying and working hard, but the vast majority of us can't have that, we accept that and move on. Those who can't do that, don't really seem like they'd have much of academic career, do they?

Looking around me and my circle of friends, our close friends and family have been the biggest influence, not some vague "society pushing this or that". We have all studied different things - banking, law, music, sociology, engineering etc. and the only one of us who hasn't graduated from university has started working when he had a couple of exams left and dropped out of uni.