Dear all,

I am involved in a research project that is looking at the influence of Andrew Tate on masculinity and I would appreciate a few minutes of your time to share your thoughts on this subject via this anonymous survey:

https://app.onlinesurveys.jisc.ac.uk/s/ ... ate-effect

Thanks in advance for your time.

Done.

Many thanks fidelcastro and anyone else who has completed the survey.

Done, only took 5 mins. Good luck with your project

Many thanks Vegas Claret.

Not sure if I was much help, not being a uer of social media ( other than here )
Didn't take long though.

Done.

Interesting questions!

Quite enjoyed that.

Completed.

You should get a range of views as this has come up on the Board previously. Would like to see the study when published.

Who's Andrew Tate?

dougcollins wrote: ↑

Tue May 20, 2025 9:33 pm

Who's Andrew Tate?

Careful mentioning his name, I had my post deleted for saying he should be in jail.

You do wonder about some actions on here, no doubt this will follow soon enough as well.

He’s a complete bell. Not sure any further answers are needed.

Never heard of him.

ClaretinJapan wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 2:17 am

Never heard of him.

I find it very concerning that some posters on here claim to be unaware of him given the amount of coverage there has been about him over the past couple of years
Like myself, it maybe that many posting on here have never seen or followed any of the vile stuff that he posts online to influence - mainly - young males, but you can guarantee that younger members of your family who use social media all the time will be exposed to his views, and we should all be following / monitoring what our younger generation are being influenced by. They don’t get their info from newspapers and magazines any more.

Like myself, it maybe that many posting on here have never seen or followed any of the vile stuff that he posts online

Not in any way a defense of the tosspot that is Tate, but I think it’s interesting to consider something you’ve never seen or followed as ‘vile’. Would it not be better to see his content to understand what you don’t like, rather than convey a narrative that you don’t like him because you’ve been told as such?

we should all be following / monitoring what our younger generation are being influenced by

100%

I’ve taken in his content with my son, so we could extrapolate Tate’s few good points (men should take care of their health, strive to be better at work, consider the dangers of addiction to online adult material,etc). This whilst also mocking Tate’s standpoints over women, him further fuelling society’s current adversarial nature between the sexes, his controlling nature over women or expecting a return to society for a ‘traditional wife’, etc.

I can’t speak for everyone but the approach works for me. My son feels open to discuss if he’s seen a Tate video, rather than having to watch it in secret or feel ashamed for doing so.

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 6:29 am

Not in any way a defense of the tosspot that is Tate, but I think it’s interesting to consider something you’ve never seen or followed as ‘vile’. Would it not be better to see his content to understand what you don’t like, rather than convey a narrative that you don’t like him because you’ve been told as such?

I really don’t need to follow Andrew Tate on social media to get a balanced view of what he is about
I’m not saying that all news outlets are totally unbiased, but by watching the various news channels on tv and radio, reading online newspaper articles and generally doing some research on the internet you can discover plenty about him and form an opinion.
Like many people, I hadn’t even heard of the guy until about 18 months ago, but since then his name pops up on my news feeds very regularly and I think there’s enough out there from both those who find his views abhorrent and those who support him to form an objective and educated view of him

Done

nil_desperandum wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 6:50 am

I really don’t need to follow Andrew Tate on social media to get a balanced view of what he is about
I’m not saying that all news outlets are totally unbiased, but by watching the various news channels on tv and radio, reading online newspaper articles and generally doing some research on the internet you can discover plenty about him and form an opinion.
Like many people, I hadn’t even heard of the guy until about 18 months ago, but since then his name pops up on my news feeds very regularly and I think there’s enough out there from both those who find his views abhorrent and those who support him to form an objective and educated view of him

Until you actually sit down with somebody face to face & engage it can said you don't actually know somebody. I think it's dangerous forming opinions about people who you haven't even clapped eyes on let alone met.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:31 am

Until you actually sit down with somebody face to face & engage it can said you don't actually know somebody. I think it's dangerous forming opinions about people who you haven't even clapped eyes on let alone met.

Very tolerant of you jakub.

I am fairly confident in labelling Tate a wrong un and an arsehole without meeting him. Some are just more forgiving I guess.

claretonthecoast1882 wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:35 am

Very tolerant of you jakub.

I am fairly confident in labelling Tate a wrong un and an arsehole without meeting him. Some are just more forgiving I guess.

Not forgiving just don't know him like I said how can you possibly & truthfully know people you have never met it's impossible.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:38 am

Not forgiving just don't know him like I said how can you possibly & truthfully know people you have never met it's impossible.

Wouldn't it be fair to say it's the same way you have opinions about all the topics and people you have opinions on without living those experiences or meeting those people?

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:38 am

Not forgiving just don't know him like I said how can you possibly & truthfully know people you have never met it's impossible.

Using that logic Hitler might have been ok then ?

Was Fred West really a complete *******? Having not sat down for a brew and chinwag, I guess I’ll never know.

Having not met Mr Peter Sutcliffe, the content of his character and as a man remains a mystery to me.

ClaretAndJew wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:41 am

Wouldn't it be fair to say it's the same way you have opinions about all the topics and people you have opinions on without living those experiences or meeting those people?

You don't testify opinions to be true. Opinions are opinions. I could take part in the research but all I could honestly offer is an opinion about somebody I've never met & unlikely to ever meet.

Done

Spoke at length to Jimmy Savile at a refreshment table at the Manchester Marathon, then ran with him for around 3 miles. Seemed a top bloke to me.

I think Andrew Tate is a symptom, not the prime problem he is treated as. He gets far too much airtime and attention for what he is.

Is a strange phenomenon with Tate as most blokes I speak to about it when it comes up in convo usually say "I agree with some of it but not everything he says" which could apply for a lot of things/people.

My nephew is in the generation that's been hit by Tate and Co and he's changed his life around a bit watching these things. He's hitting the gym to get into really good shape and eating well, dresses well, tries to make money and live a good life and travels lots. I know it won't be the same for everyone who will follow him but with the impact these role models have had on my nephew you can't really say it's a bad influence. Did a lads trip to Paris over the weekend to watch PSG and he was the only one who didn't touch a drop of alcohol. Downside could be that he's become a bit of a womaniser (though still respectful) but in late teens/early 20s I think most lads fell into that category.

Done

Done, I hope all goes well with your project and that Tate rots in hell.

ClaretAndJew wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 8:47 am

Having not met Mr Peter Sutcliffe, the content of his character and as a man remains a mystery to me.

I knew Peter Sutcliffe. Queit bloke, kept to himself, always polite to the neighbours.

fatboy47 wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 1:58 pm

Spoke at length to Jimmy Savile at a refreshment table at the Manchester Marathon, then ran with him for around 3 miles. Seemed a top bloke to me.

Take people at face value sometimes you will get caught out as things don't appear as there seem. More often than not you can properly assess somebody's character on a personal level by actually interfacing with people. I find things absolutely absurd how opinions can be concluded as facts with people not remotely knowing each other. My psychic powers fall woefully short to some of the learned members of this forum.

Filled it in and loved the offer of the Samaritans help at the end of it. I did consider it because the concept of thinking about Andrew Tate triggered me to the point of reaching out for help.

But then I thought naaaaah **** it, I'm not a Palestinian or a peasant in Somalia things could be worse.

I think Andrew Tate is a bit thick but I think he plunders a market rather than creating or influencing one.

I don't watch his stuff because he's too stupid to listen to but he's become the Woke zombies object of hatred so he can't be all that bad.

All done and some interesting open questions that allow individual responses rather than a simple yes/no survey

bfccrazy wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 5:54 pm

Downside could be that he's become a bit of a womaniser (though still respectful) but in late teens/early 20s I think most lads fell into that category.

Sadly the statistics suggest otherwise, which is where the real deep 'red pill' and incel stuff takes hold. Fair play to your nephew though for using the positive aspects of Tate to better himself.

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 6:29 am

Not in any way a defense of the tosspot that is Tate, but I think it’s interesting to consider something you’ve never seen or followed as ‘vile’. Would it not be better to see his content to understand what you don’t like, rather than convey a narrative that you don’t like him because you’ve been told as such?


100%

I’ve taken in his content with my son, so we could extrapolate Tate’s few good points (men should take care of their health, strive to be better at work, consider the dangers of addiction to online adult material,etc). This whilst also mocking Tate’s standpoints over women, him further fuelling society’s current adversarial nature between the sexes, his controlling nature over women or expecting a return to society for a ‘traditional wife’, etc.

I can’t speak for everyone but the approach works for me. My son feels open to discuss if he’s seen a Tate video, rather than having to watch it in secret or feel ashamed for doing so.

Probably a good way of dealing with it.
People like him are dangerous con men

Speaks a lot of sense does Andrew Tate, I think the women talk lets him down. I remember posters on here calling him a rapist whilst I was the bad guy for taking the “let’s wait and see how the trial pans out” approach. I think it’s fair to say now, that was a clear attempt at silencing him, they’ve tried to throw every charge at him and nothing seems to stick. A dangerous world if people are happy to see others go to jail on bs charges because they disagree with the words that come out of someone’s mouth. The media will push narratives and sheep will fall for it.

Been out all day but seen that my posts have been removed. Can anyone shed some light?

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 4:22 pm

Been out all day but seen that my posts have been removed. Can anyone shed some light?

Yes. Your comments were outrageous!

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 5:15 pm

Yes. Your comments were outrageous!

Not sure if you’re joking but I definitely didn’t say anything outrageous and have no idea why my posts have been deleted.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 5:19 pm

Not sure if you’re joking but I definitely didn’t say anything outrageous and have no idea why my posts have been deleted.

I thought the emoji gave it away, but tbf it doesn't take a lot to have posts removed on here these days.

fidelcastro wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 5:23 pm

I thought the emoji gave it away, but tbf it doesn't take a lot to have posts removed on here these days.

Sorry, saw the winky but I’m genuinely confused as to why they’ve been deleted so didn’t know if you were making reference to something in particular.

Rileybobs wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 5:27 pm

Sorry, saw the winky but I’m genuinely confused as to why they’ve been deleted so didn’t know if you were making reference to something in particular.

I don't even recall what it was you posted, but like I said, it doesn't need to be especially controversial to have it removed these days.

fatboy47 wrote: ↑

Fri May 23, 2025 1:58 pm

Spoke at length to Jimmy Savile at a refreshment table at the Manchester Marathon, then ran with him for around 3 miles. Seemed a top bloke to me.

But when you were at the refreshment table, were yue sitting down?

Survey still open if anyone has a spare few minutes - https://app.onlinesurveys.jisc.ac.uk/s/ ... ate-effect

Thanks to all those who have completed it so far. Really appreciate it.

What I've sussed out from reading this thread; some on here are comfortable in their own skin, while others are a bit oddbod and deeply insecure, to say the least.

Done!

I'm sure the research will be very interesting to read once completed.

Darthlaw wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 12:13 pm

Sadly the statistics suggest otherwise, which is where the real deep 'red pill' and incel stuff takes hold. Fair play to your nephew though for using the positive aspects of Tate to better himself.

Don't really want to contribute to this further but this is not really true. The incidents related to Incel are quite small and relatively few individuals are involved. The real issue with Incel is that when individuals are referred to PREVENT they are escalated meaning there is some justification in the referral and the small number of crimes have been terror like in that they have involved a number of victims.

The main factor is mental health issues. People with mental health issues are drawn to ideologies that feed their grievances. So, it's not easy to say that Incel causes the violence it's quite possible the people who are violent would find other grievances to justify their actions.

It's quite a complicated arena and often the media and people with very strong ideological traits want to find scapegoats and easy solutions but I think the real issue here mental health and other cultural factors rather than one person.

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Sat May 24, 2025 4:00 pm

I think it’s fair to say now, that was a clear attempt at silencing him, they’ve tried to throw every charge at him and nothing seems to stick.

VERY funny timing to post that.