The Andrew Tate saga continues

[martin_p]

I had a conversation with my son the other day on how he shouldn't be suckered into Tates nonsense.
It must be difficult for him though as a boy who enjoys the traditional things that boys used to enjoy, like playing sports and getting changed in a male only space. Going out with girls who don't have a penis. Eating meat and not getting excessively offended by stuff he reads on the Internet.
I'll direct him to this thread to read the musings of the people with enough posts to take up more time than it takes to hold down a relationship with a member of the opposit sex to keep him in check

Todays award for spectacularly missing the point (unless you’re arguing that violence, rape and coercion are also ‘traditional’ male values you think your son should aspire to).

[Clovius Boofus]

Unless there is another reason we have some defending him which is being missed.

At least two of them are trolling, or they are so screwed up that this degenerate is the kind of people they look up to.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

At least two of them are trolling, or they are so screwed up that this degenerate is the kind of people they look up to.

It's quite hard to tell which it is tbh

[Lancasterclaret]

Is the danger of going out with girls with a penis that high?

[fatboy47]

Is the danger of going out with girls with a penis that high?

Maybe Damo is holding something back here?

[Lancasterclaret]

Maybe Damo is holding something back here?

I think he might be exaggerating somewhat the dangers that young men face!

[Robbie_painter]

Is the danger of going out with girls with a penis that high?

Your mrs has managed it.

[Lancasterclaret]

Your mrs has managed it.

OMG, I've been attacked online by an anonymous poster with a dick joke

How will I cope?

[claretonthecoast1882]

OMG, I've been attacked online by an anonymous poster with a dick joke

How will I cope?

Take it like a man

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Is the danger of going out with girls with a penis that high?

Depends on which types of clubs you frequent I suppose

[aggi]

I had a conversation with my son the other day on how he shouldn't be suckered into Tates nonsense.
It must be difficult for him though as a boy who enjoys the traditional things that boys used to enjoy, like playing sports and getting changed in a male only space. Going out with girls who don't have a penis. Eating meat and not getting excessively offended by stuff he reads on the Internet.
I'll direct him to this thread to read the musings of the people with enough posts to take up more time than it takes to hold down a relationship with a member of the opposit sex to keep him in check

Enjoying getting changed in a male only space seems a weirdly specific thing to enjoy, I do wonder how that conversation came about: "Dad, one of the things I really enjoy is getting changed in a male only space". Each to their own I guess though.

Although I have a sneaking suspicion that Damo may be projecting his values onto his son here.

[Big Vinny K]

Enjoying getting changed in a male only space seems a weirdly specific thing to enjoy, I do wonder how that conversation came about: "Dad, one of the things I really enjoy is getting changed in a male only space". Each to their own I guess though.

Although I have a sneaking suspicion that Damo may be projecting his values onto his son here.

Or more likely it’s a completely made up story to wind people up and highlight his own views

[Rileybobs]

Enjoying getting changed in a male only space seems a weirdly specific thing to enjoy, I do wonder how that conversation came about: "Dad, one of the things I really enjoy is getting changed in a male only space". Each to their own I guess though.

Although I have a sneaking suspicion that Damo may be projecting his values onto his son here.

At least he has a son. Let’s not forget this is the fella who voted to leave the EU for the benefit of his grandchildren, of which he had none.

[Benson]

OMG, I've been attacked online by an anonymous poster with a dick joke

How will I cope?

Blame Brexit?

[daveisaclaret]

OMG, I've been attacked online by an anonymous poster with a dick joke

How will I cope?

When times are hard nothing perks me up more than the enjoyment of changing in a male-only space.

[Lancasterclaret]

Blame Brexit?

Its possible that Robbie Painter is holding on to his blue passport, crying a lot and "its all your fault Brexit is a failure Lancasterclaret" while posting I suppose, but its very unlikely

More likely its just someone who used to have a different username I'd have thought

[Hapag Lloyd]

Its possible that Robbie Painter is holding on to his blue passport, crying a lot and "its all your fault Brexit is a failure Lancasterclaret" while posting I suppose, but its very unlikely

More likely its just someone who used to have a different username I'd have thought

Possible, but more probable he’s just someone who’s bored with your sanctimonious attitude that shows through on every thread you post on.

[claretonthecoast1882]

There is a weird mindset of some on here when seeing the thread title and knowing what this arsehole does to women and young girls an adults first thought is to have a go at lancasterclaret.

It is good that some work a lot harder than most to earn the dingle tag

[martin_p]

There is a weird mindset of some on here when seeing the thread title and knowing what this arsehole does to women and young girls an adults first thought is to have a go at lancasterclaret.

It is good that some work a lot harder than most to earn the dingle tag

We’re only one step away from certain poster accusing people of ‘virtue signalling’ if they say they’re against violence and rape. It’s depressing how basic core values have been eroded so much over the last decade.

[TheFamilyCat]

We’re only one step away from certain poster accusing people of ‘virtue signalling’ if they say they’re against violence and rape. It’s depressing how basic core values have been eroded so much over the last decade.

Even weirder is that it's likely to be the same posters who idolise Tommy Robinson for "taking on the grooming gangs" (before almost causing their trial to collapse).

[android]

Is the danger of going out with girls with a penis that high?

It is for lesbians.

Not literally, as that would be impossible according to long understood definitions. But there are an increasing number of males with a penis who claim to be lesbians. Apart from the danger, one of the potential consequences for actual lesbians who object, is removal from lesbian dating sites for their crime of bigotry (obvs). A bit of a downer for those affected wouldn't you agree?

[fatboy47]

It is for lesbians.

Not literally, as that would be impossible according to long understood definitions. But there are an increasing number of males with a penis who claim to be lesbians. Apart from the danger, one of the potential consequences for actual lesbians who object, is removal from lesbian dating sites for their crime of bigotry (obvs). A bit of a downer for those affected wouldn't you agree?

You been at the gurners?

[Lancasterclaret]

It is for lesbians.

Not literally, as that would be impossible according to long understood definitions. But there are an increasing number of males with a penis who claim to be lesbians. Apart from the danger, one of the potential consequences for actual lesbians who object, is removal from lesbian dating sites for their crime of bigotry (obvs). A bit of a downer for those affected wouldn't you agree?

Damo is taking the **** Android

There is no way that his lad is doing all them things, and the reason I know that is that I'm the dad of two boys

[android]

You been at the gurners?

Imagine my surprise that you were unaware of what was happening

[android]

Damo is taking the **** Android

There is no way that his lad is doing all them things, and the reason I know that is that I'm the dad of two boys

Your post arose from Damo's but I was replying to your salient point. Do you agree with me?

[Lancasterclaret]

Your post arose from Damo's but I was replying to your salient point. Do you agree with me?

When I say I haven't got a scooby doo about what you are on about, I'm not kidding

Can you go and bother someone who is interested in culture wars or this kind of thing, I'm trying to concentrate on an attempted coup in Russia

[daveisaclaret]

Having a UTC account you only use to moan about trans people is an interesting life choice imo

[android]

Ah yes CulTuRe wArS. The familiar pattern - you comment, I challenge, you claim ignorance but state these things, of which you have no knowledge, except of course the certainty that they are DEFINITELY just culture wars (sigh). I'm not interested in culture wars, but I am interested in reality, women's rights, same-sex attraction rights and child welfare (boring huh).

What I was on about was following up YOUR point about the danger of girls with penises. Groups like Stonewall (ironically and tragically) are re-defining homosexuality as same-gender attraction. They very much believe that girls can not only have penises but that girls with penises (males) who are sexually attracted to females are lesbians. Shock horror, that is seen as a bit of an issue for some lesbians - positively dangerous in fact. Before you head off to fix Russia, as a man who comments on all and sundry topics on here, can you see why that might be a problem for some women? I know you are a parent of two boys, but are you really that disinterested in women's rights?

[android]

Having a UTC account you only use to moan about trans people is an interesting life choice imo

Assume you mean me. I moan about gender identity ideology not trans people. I write about it because posters keep making it is obvious that not many people are aware of what is happening and the damage that is being done despite some progress. Most people are ahead of me on Clarets news.

Do you have an opinion or are you chill with lesbians being pressured to date males who identify as lesbians? Cool with homosexuality being redefined?
Have you read about the Tavistock and the medicalisation (to put it very politely) of gay and autistic kids?

[Spiral]

You took your concerns about women's rights and child welfare onto a thread about Andrew Tate and didn't speak one single word against Andrew Tate. Hmmm...

You need to get your $hit together and call out Tate-brand misogyny if your concern for women is sincere and not just some hobby horse, because predators like him and the idiots who are his supporters are a far bigger danger to women than transgender people.

[daveisaclaret]

Assume you mean me. I moan about gender identity ideology not trans people. I write about it because posters keep making it is obvious that not many people are aware of what is happening and the damage that is being done despite some progress. Most people are ahead of me on Clarets news.

Do you have an opinion or are you chill with lesbians being pressured to date males who identify as lesbians? Cool with homosexuality being redefined?
Have you read about the Tavistock and the medicalisation (to put it very politely) of gay and autistic kids?

I do mean you yes. My opinion is that trans women are women and that you're an awful bigot.

[aggi]

It is for lesbians.

Not literally, as that would be impossible according to long understood definitions. But there are an increasing number of males with a penis who claim to be lesbians. Apart from the danger, one of the potential consequences for actual lesbians who object, is removal from lesbian dating sites for their crime of bigotry (obvs). A bit of a downer for those affected wouldn't you agree?

Wayhey, he's back.

I was a bit concerned as there was a similar topic a few weeks ago and he didn't comment which was very worrying.

[android]

Wayhey, he's back.

I was a bit concerned as there was a similar topic a few weeks ago and he didn't comment which was very worrying.

Hi aggi, I haven't been on here much recently sorry! But last time I engaged with you I didn't get a chance (nothing to do with you or me but the thread was closed before I got back to it) to correct your mind reading attempt. Very surprised someone of your obvious capabilities went down that road but you tried to tell people what I was thinking, rather than sticking to what I wrote, and you got it horribly wrong. It seemed pretty clear, from your use of an outdated term for one thing, that we were at cross purposes and you had misunderstood what I had said. If we do debate again, I would be grateful if you didn't try to tell people what I am thinking! Thank you.

[android]

You took your concerns about women's rights and child welfare onto a thread about Andrew Tate and didn't speak one single word against Andrew Tate. Hmmm...

You need to get your $hit together and call out Tate-brand misogyny if your concern for women is sincere and not just some hobby horse, because predators like him and the idiots who are his supporters are a far bigger danger to women than transgender people.

No, I really don't need to get anything together thanks. Seems unlike you to do the "if you don't explicitly condemn this it must mean this" routine. Anyway, as per my response to dave, I try to stick to what I know. Others know much more about this odious Tate person than I do. I am hardly likely to be a fan am I, given my campaign for women's rights!

[android]

I do mean you yes. My opinion is that trans women are women and that you're an awful bigot.

Your views on lesbians duly noted. Evidence-free insults is all you have - but the no debate strategy is running out of road.

[daveisaclaret]

Your views on lesbians duly noted. Evidence-free insults is all you have - but the no debate strategy is running out of road.

Why would you think you're entitled to a debate?

[Swizzlestick]

The great white knight of women’s rights coming onto a thread about one of the biggest misogynists in the world right now and saying absolutely nothing about him is classic.

[aggi]

Hi aggi, I haven't been on here much recently sorry! But last time I engaged with you I didn't get a chance (nothing to do with you or me but the thread was closed before I got back to it) to correct your mind reading attempt. Very surprised someone of your obvious capabilities went down that road but you tried to tell people what I was thinking, rather than sticking to what I wrote, and you got it horribly wrong. It seemed pretty clear, from your use of an outdated term for one thing, that we were at cross purposes and you had misunderstood what I had said. If we do debate again, I would be grateful if you didn't try to tell people what I am thinking! Thank you.

I must admit that I had no idea what our last posts were on this topic, I just remembered that it is pretty much the only thing you posted on.

However your response piqued my interest so I had a look back and it seems that what I did was quote you and the article that you had quoted (with your personal twist) so I've no idea what you are talking about here.

[aggi]

The great white knight of women’s rights coming onto a thread about one of the biggest misogynists in the world right now and saying absolutely nothing about him is classic.

As I previously said to Android

I just find the whole thing pretty weird. Not so much the JK Rowling stance but all of the blokes who are so keen to jump on this as an erosion of women's rights who have been notably conspicuous on other debates on women's rights.

[Damo]

I'm not sure it's me who spectacularly missed the point to be honest.
The people making a hero out of cretins like Tate are the ones who demonise young males and masculinity at every opportunity.
There's a few on here and all of them seem to have replied to my post.

[Spiral]

I'm not sure it's me who spectacularly missed the point to be honest.
The people making a hero out of cretins like Tate are the ones who demonise young males and masculinity at every opportunity.
There's a few on here and all of them seem to have replied to my post.

All you see is caricatures. You think you're above this proverbial "it all", but you're seen by everyone, naked, as too craven to speak your honest feelings without draping them in irony. This is how you state your position: ironically. Have you ever looked at the world and comprehended it in a way that wasn't first given a passport stamp by the twittersphere discourse prism through which you filter each and every one of your topical opinions? You speak as do the terminally online because you're terminally online, but this caricature you've constructed in your mind of what you believe to be some sort of 'opponent in belief' leads you to the view that the only ones terminally online are liberal woke snowflakes; blue-haired feminists and such. You believe that this label, 'terminally online', you believe it can't possibly apply to you. Conceit. Delusion. You fail to grasp the righteousness in attacking the righteousness of others. These behaviours are not as one sided as you believe. You prime to respond to this post by criticising its psychoanalytical tones, and now you halt, because you feel seen for what you were about to do. You respond around it, or not at all, and never directly to it, except perhaps with a put down, because you never state your positions earnestly, always belligerently, ironically. Yes, this is a single paragraph, no breaks in breath except full stops. Is this challenging to you? Show me one instance, one single solitary instance of masculinity being demonised that can't more accurately be described as a criticism of destructive behaviour. You can't. You need caricatures, you need the fictions you've created in your mind to stabilise your beliefs and give order to the feelings in your gut. (You are a far more emotionally led creature than you believe you are.) You embrace these caricatures and the caricatured ideas they represent because embittered-middle-aged-man-twitter has done a number on you and you are at this point more detached from decency and civility and equanimity than before you installed the godforsaken app, and the existence of an enemy gives reason to your middle-aged pain and frustration, but you're too terrified to look inward and ask why it is that you are a bitter man. If the world is a force acting on you provoking your irony, and masculinity is to be associated with a bastardised idea of stoicism, it is a masculine feat to overcome all bitterness and resentment, is it not? You do not seem to be succeeding on this masculine front. Perhaps the world is not a force acting on you: perhaps you, and you alone are ultimately the source and cause of your own bitterness, that bitterness that every post of yours reeks of — perhaps you need to find the courage not to overcome and endure the world, but to go inward, to take control of your own patterns of thought, not as an act of stoicism, but as a kindness to yourself. You fall back on the suggestion that you're provoking a reaction for your own amusement because you so desperately want the safety of a crash mat when you're falling and grasping at thin air the very minute someone pushes back at your bitterness. Smileys, insults, a disparaging remark about the length of this post (the horror...), it's all so robotic. Where's the originality? It's never to be seen: you lack the imagination to be original. Go back to twitter with the screeching brain donors and the bots and the paid trolls, that's your wheelhouse.

[android]

I must admit that I had no idea what our last posts were on this topic, I just remembered that it is pretty much the only thing you posted on.

However your response piqued my interest so I had a look back and it seems that what I did was quote you and the article that you had quoted (with your personal twist) so I've no idea what you are talking about here.

You did more than that aggi. You claimed that I was debating in bad faith. This was due to a slight mix up over whether one point I made was in reference to a survey linked by another poster or other surveys that I had also mentioned (and which I had not linked and therefore, you could not possibly know whether I was adding a "personal twist"). In any case, I had already clarified this mix up before you posted so your claim about me was unjustified. ClaretPete understood it easily enough - thanks ClaretPete.

But you also went on to falsely claim that I was talking about large numbers of trans women being predators. I made no such suggestion. I had pointed out the obvious fact that women cannot tell the intent of ANY male. I made no suggestion whatsoever that any classification of males is more or less dangerous than any other. To be fair to you, Greenmile did his usual fake take on what I said and that may have misled you but that was on Greenmile not me.

It was clear to me that our discussion, which was cut short, was at cross purposes. My main point was not about surveys at all. Given the lack of knowledge in this are, surveys are of some interest but of limited value.

You brought up the term "transsexual". That alone was indication to me that you were on unfamiliar ground. That word is rarely used now and is offensive to some. The tiny number of transsexuals were very much in mind in the Equality Act of 2010. The landscape is very different now and transsexuals are only a tiny part of the trans umbrella. You were talking about people who are pre-op or post-op. I was trying to point out that most trans women now, have not only not had an operation, they have no intention of ever doing so. And yes, within that group is an increasing number of intact males who are sexually attracted to females. Each to their own, but if the latter group are deemed lesbians by the prevailing ideology you have to be a bit blind not to see that this causes some issues, to put it mildly, for lesbians. Not a lot of this is widely known and when it is, it changes views and yes, survey responses.

I am happy to write this off as a misunderstanding and I hope you are too.

[android]

As I previously said to Android

I just find the whole thing pretty weird. Not so much the JK Rowling stance but all of the blokes who are so keen to jump on this as an erosion of women's rights who have been notably conspicuous on other debates on women's rights.

And as I have previously said Aggi, I have limited time and try to use it where I can add knowledge, rather than repeat what others have already said.

Telling people that I agree that this Tate bloke is a scumbag achieves nothing. Frankly, I have no desire to give him the attention. Whereas informing people about the damage being done by gender identity ideology (not trans people for the hard of thinking) strikes me as worthwhile, particularly given the levels of relative ignorance of the subject, which many have been happy or bemused to admit.

There is a great irony to me being attacked by the usual suspects about Tate of all subjects. It seems that Tate shares the same kind of regressive attitude to gender roles that is so fundamental to the ideology that I am opposing. It is not me who wants to tell very young boys who want to wear a dress or very young girls who want short hair that there is something wrong with them. 5 minutes ago we were nearly all supportive of gender non-conformity and now the ideologues want to reinforce gender stereotypes. The self-styled progressives have gone a bit Andrew Tate, but of course they will not see it.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm not sure it's me who spectacularly missed the point to be honest.
The people making a hero out of cretins like Tate are the ones who demonise young males and masculinity at every opportunity.
There's a few on here and all of them seem to have replied to my post.

Get away Damo, no one demonises young males and masculinity

Toxic masculinity like Tate 100%

What on earth is masculinity by your definition btw, because it can't be that different from us woke lefties surely?