Andrew Tate

I think we can leave the man in Baker St alone for this one.

Tate is quite a famous figure and almost all social media sites are American.

I have Facebook and Twitter accounts along with an Instagram account I log into about once a year for a few seconds a go. If I could be bothered, I'd delete the ones I have and I definitely won't be adding to their number.

I've never heard of them either and I'm 32 who uses Twitter and Instagram daily, don't use TikTok so that could be it.

I don't think Dylan has been on the news after being charged with rape, sexual assault of minors and trafficking in 2 different jurisdictions though.

Well the two of them regularly peddle misinformation and misogynistic views and sell them to their followers.

As far as a quick Google I've done as don't know Dylan Mulvanney, they were a YouTuber/TikToker who became quite famous and mainly do brand deals and advertising, so nothing like Tate and Petersen as far as I'm aware.

Apparantly thats what I have done.

Ridiculous that grown adults (I am assuming) can't have adult conversations based on some logical reasoning and critical thinking without beeing accused of making "hateful digs" at online personalities purely because of their gender.

interesting thread. Some pretty extreme opinions.

I’ve only seen a little bit of Tate and that was enough. He’s a horrible person in my opinion.

I’m not getting the comparison with Peterson though? Can someone clear that up for me?

Dylan Mulvaney has been on mainstream media on both sides of the Atlantic at various times over the past 18 months……..

Fair enough if you claim not to know who they are - but they have been on mainstream media…………

That may be, but I had genuinely never heard of them before. I don't see the relevance they have to Tate though.

I'm happy to leave Petersen out of the conversation as he spouts nowhere near the same level of vitriol and probable criminal activity that Tate has been involved in.

It is funny how the posters trying to defend tate are so insistent on derailing the thread into a trans argument.

There's something that is pretty clearly implied in your leaping to the defence of him. The implication is that you view it as plausible that all of the women accusing him as part of the multiple cases are potentially making up their accusations. The more likely reality is that the police in Romania and the UK have strong reasons to believe they can prosecute him. In relation to the trafficking, they've likely found a financial trail that indicates laundering of money gained via it.

None of the above relates to his politics. We do have parts of the evidence that will be used against him btw. I've linked to an article about the Panorama documentary about him. But sure, by your logic the below experience of the woman is potentially not true. Also the public accepted Savile was guilty as sin after the itv documentary cause they displayed plenty of evidence. Same applies in the Tate case. At the very minimum he is a rapist but he looks to be far more than that.

“He started kissing me... and he just looked up at the ceiling and said, ‘I’m just debating whether I should rape you or not. Out of the blue he just grabbed me by the throat, smashed me to the back of the bed, strangling me extremely hard.”

Anna says he then raped her.

She says after the attack, Mr Tate sent her disturbing text messages and voice notes about rape and sexual violence.

“Am I a bad person? Because the more you didn’t like it, the more I enjoyed it,” he said in a voice note.

In a text he wrote: “I love raping you.”

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwyje823er4o