On: Tate

We are living in strange times when a little-known kickboxer / failed reality TV star / self-proclaimed misogynist / accused rapist and human trafficker becomes one of the most Googled men on the planet, but here we are. Welcome to the weird and wonderful world of Andrew Tate.

If, like me, you’ve been watching ‘Andrew Tate: The Man Who Groomed The World‘ on BBC iPlayer, you will know all about the British-American social influencer. He is the son of a chess player who, despite being well and truly checkmated, shows no signs of ending the game in which he is king.

Tate has become notorious for building an online empire on a toxic – but, seemingly, compelling – message of misogyny, stereotypical masculinity, and self-help. Today, he has 7.8 million followers on Twitter/X, up from 38,400 in November 2022. For context, Jordan Peterson, another controversial online figure, has 4.6 million followers; Greta Thunberg has 5.7 million; and I have 332. Another well-known misogynist, Donald Trump, has 87.3 million followers, but that’s maybe a post for another day.

As I watched the latest BBC documentary about Tate, filmed following Tate’s arrest in Romania on charges of human trafficking, I was struck by the adoration of his fans, many of whom refuse to believe the media reports about Tate. They cite the ‘Matrix’ – a reference to the 1990 sci-fi film about a simulated reality that entraps people – and claim that the news and hype around Tate and his arrest is fabricated and malicious reporting. This is a step up from the ‘fake news’ of Donald Trump , who, in one fell swoop, dismisses any negative press with the simple assertion that it is false (again, perhaps a post for another day). For me – before we get on to what I perceive to be wrong with Tate’s message – this is the biggest explanation for why Tate is so popular, and remains so, despite his arrest and charge with heinous crimes.

We live in something of a post-truth world, where truth is not merely relative as it is in the philosophical family of relativism, but something that is whatever one asserts it to be, regardless of a lack of empirical evidence in support of it. Actually, post-truth is more than that – sometimes it is, quite simply, outright lies. This aversion to truth-telling is so prevalent in our political world that, in 2016, the Oxford Dictionaries made ‘post-truth’ the word of the year. With the expansion of social media in recent decades, which does have many positives – connectivity, ease of communication, wider access to information – we have seen a rise in disinformation, manipulation, and the global fabrication of truth to achieve political ends. Everyone’s favourite twice-impeached President, Donald Trump, has been accused of telling 30,573 false or misleading statements in his four-year term in office (yes, I know, I know – a post for another day). The post-truth phenomenon has been described by Matthew D’Ancona as “the power to evoke feelings and not facts” and, although lying for political gain might not be new (weapons of mass destruction, anyone?), there is something rather insidious about the age in which we live where critical media is dismissed as ‘fake news’ or a product of the ‘Matrix’.

Onto this stage, where social media is both the gatekeeper to, and the arbiter of, truth, steps the King Cobra himself, Andrew Tate. Much like the first serpent who so effectively deceived Eve with his whispers and promises, so the snake that is Tate spreads his poisonous message throughout echo chambers across the metaverse. I think that, to understand Tate’s appeal, we first have to appreciate his creative and clever use of marketing. When we have a generation exposed to pernicious influences at the click of a button and in each constant scroll; when we imbibe the belief that any criticism of our heroes is false; when we refuse to expose ourselves to information beyond the algorithm; is it any wonder that Tate’s offensive, illogical, and deeply hurtful rhetoric is absorbed by many?

I was also struck, watching the BBC documentary, that there are many victims of Tate. There are, most obviously, the women in sexual slavery, of whom Andrew and Tristan Tate have been accused of trafficking and raping. But all women and girls are victims of Andrew Tate. Any ideology that teaches that women belong in the home; shouldn’t drive; are the property of men is oppressive. Any assertion that rape victims bear responsibility for their assault; that men should date young women because they can ‘imprint’ on them; and that physically assaulting women is an appropriate and desirable behaviour in relationships is downright dangerous. Andrew Tate gleefully claims the title of misogynist and is currently being pursued for the alleged rape of four women in the UK, a separate case from that in Romania. The women who enter Tate’s sphere of orbit are unsafe, as are all women for whom Tate’s message resonates with the men in their lives.

But it isn’t just the female sex that is the victim of Tate’s vicious ideology, it is boys and men. Tate has made millions from the exploitation of male insecurities. He claims to be empowering men to take control of their lives and live the way they are designed to – powerfully, with respect and subservience from women – yet he is doing nothing but enslaving them to a false philosophy that reduces boys and men to a set of impulses. Tate’s message revolves around what we now often term ‘toxic masculinity’, also known as ‘hegemonic masculinity’ – the reductive view of males as being inherently dominant and aggressive, particularly in relation to females. Tate’s philosophy is exclusive – there is no room for any boy or man who does not meet the limited set of criteria of what it means to be male. For those boys and men who are not driven by money, or for whom the latest supercar is not a turn-on; those for whom physical strength is unimportant or impossible; those who are not hyper-sexual or do not fit traditional gender-stereotypes; for these, there is no home in Tate’s world. These individuals are, quite simply, not men.

And let’s not forget the many victims of Tate’s racist, ableist, insert-any-other-protected-characteristic rhetoric. The world of the Cobra King is open only to a very few.

So, why the popularity? In amongst the vile misogyny are well-packaged, carefully-marketed teachings about wealth creation, confidence building, and successful living. Who doesn’t want to feel satisfied with a life that is financially stable and holds meaning? Many boys are attracted to Tate because they see him living the life that he is selling – if he has acquired 33 supercars through living this way, then maybe he’s worth listening to.

Add into the mix a sense of grievance, where many boys feel attacked for being male (we must be careful that our criticism of ‘toxic masculinity’ does not become a criticism of those boys who do present as having some of those stereotypical traits of masculinity), and Andrew Tate becomes really quite appealing as a role model.

I think we address the Tate challenge in a couple of different ways. First of all, let’s engage boys on the issue without condemnation. Let’s not be afraid of having frank conversations about self-worth, success and masculinity – Andrew Tate shouldn’t be the sole spokesperson on these issues! Those of us who are caregivers, whether at home or in a boarding context, must recognise the need for positive role models – male and female – in our boys’ lives. I have a predominantly male team of tutors in the boarding house, who I challenge to engage the boys on these issues. I can very happily talk about the diversity in maleness or the dangers of valuing success in only economic terms or the damage it does to females to be subjugated, but I think there is something very powerful in men themselves addressing these issues. Men, I ask that you not engage in sexist jokes; that you show yourself open to talking to boys about emotional issues; that you seek to converse with boys on a range of topics beyond sport; that you actively challenge misogyny whenever you encounter it; that you stop saying “boys will be boys”. Men, don’t tolerate boys calling you ‘Top G’ – if you stop viewing it as a compliment, they will stop using that rhetoric. Together, men and women, we can encourage the boys in our care away from the serpent tongue of Andrew Tate and towards more positive and inclusive role models.

I also think that we should have a sense of perspective about Andrew Tate. He is a very loud voice for misogyny, but he is really just a front man for a movement that pervades society. I think that, every time we talk about the suffragette movement in our History classrooms, or feminism in Politics; every time we champion female sport by watching the Lionesses in our TV rooms as well as the Lions (as a Scot, I watch neither with any great pleasure!); every time we encourage boys and girls having healthy cross-sex friendships; every time, dare I say it, we appoint a female Housemaster, we are dismantling endemic sexism bit by bit.

Andrew Tate is problematic. But his rhetoric will persist when he is gone, if we don’t challenge misogyny in all its forms in our boarding houses, classrooms, staff meetings and WhatsApp groups. Let’s systematically chip away at the foundations upon which Tate stands, and leave his empty ideology a heap of ashes in the ruins.