Andrew Tate. DONE.

Hell no. Sure it's legal but I don't feel comfortable or have the need to pay some random woman for sex. Criminal prostitution rings are still a thing, albeit less so than prior to legalization, so at the end of the day you still wouldn't have complete confidence that they're not doing it against their will.
Hiring a prostitute just seems sad and extremely desperate to me.



The most obvious change is that it has decreased organized crime's involvement in prostitution rings. Organized crime forcing women into prostitution still happens of course but at least less than before. So I think legalization is absolutely a positive change.

Follow up question. What they look like?:nerd:
 
Can someone spare me from researching this dude/topic…. I read this page which has a lot of posts and seems derailed

I don’t know who this dude is, but he came up in a group conversation last night… from what I heard he wants to “de-pusify” men and make men “men”. Someone said he was busted for underage trafficking but someone else said it’s bs, he’s too woke and govt wants him shut down. As a fly on the wall I didn’t know what to think

I come in peace
Basically he's a rich guy who literally argues women are property, that they shouldn't be allowed to drive, that 40% of the reason he moved to Romania is because rape is prosecuted less there, ...
When you think of the term 'toxic masculinity', imagine that but dial it up to an almost parody level. Except he's actually serious, though he does play it up a bit for social media success.
He runs a camgirl business, allegedly at least in part through coercion, hence the human trafficking charges.
I assume he makes the most from the incels he scams into buying his courses though. It's literally just a Discord server and the so-called "professors" are random no-names with no real credentials. It's largely an affiliate marketing scheme, in which the incels are encouraged to create clip accounts and spread Tate's videos on social media.

Here's him terrorizing a bruised woman, who then locks herself up while he's yelling at her that he's going to beat her.
"That's right lock the door you ******* *****, you knew I was going to beat the **** out of you"
 
Idk I’ve never been to the prostitution areas.
There are areas like “glazen straatje (glass street)” in Ghent, which is an entire street with nothing but prostitution businesses.

FVzeBSzXEAA4TLC.jpg
 
these same people swear that his messaging is dangerous & should be censored, but they are actually exposing it too plenty of people who would have never came across it otherwise.

Yuuup. Internet Rule #1, don't feed the trolls.
98% of Andrew Tate discourse, the I come accords, is people hyperventilating over obvious troll jobs.

you can count me out
 
these same people swear that his messaging is dangerous & should be censored, but they are actually exposing it too plenty of people who would have never came across it otherwise.

Similar to the Rogan, Umar, and Kevin Samuel's threads. The most active folks were the folks that didn't agree with most of their rhetoric. I don't get it.
 
Similar to the Rogan, Umar, and Kevin Samuel's threads. The most active folks were the folks that didn't agree with most of their rhetoric. I don't get it.

Anything that's flagged as controversial you're going to people who strongly oppose by default.

Even when they know little to nothing about a given person / subject.
 
:lol: @ everyone bumping a thread that fell off the front page a day later talking bout "I don't know why people contribute to this stuff".

Nah, it is head scratching.

Nobody is forcing you (not YOU) to post in the thread.

Coming into a thread JUST to voice how much you disagree with that person's views is an interesting approach.

I could see if the topics were in a general, all-encompassing type thread. (Politics, relationships, conspiracy theories, etc)

But I know those are controversial figures so it is "allowed."
 
That's silly, and kinda pretentious. What do you want them to do, wag their finger at the screen? What do you care about their engagment? Only people who agree with the controversial figure should post in their thread? Do you, or don't.

It's silly to wonder why people are coming into a thread KNOWING they will hate the content and just argue with people about said content?

You are better than that man.

But we can dead it.

The OP says good riddance, douchebag.

This wasn't a thread for Andrew Tate fans from the start.

Not even talking about THIS thread to be honest. This IS A good riddance thread. It's going as expected.

I was specific about which threads I was speaking on.
 
It's silly to wonder why people are coming into a thread KNOWING they will hate the content and just argue with people about said content?

You are better than that man.

But we can dead it.
Yes, everything you're saying is silly. Why do you sad face things you don't like? Why do you quote posts you disagree with? Why do you go into a thread "KNOWING you will hate the content"? You don't have a complete argument. "Being better" is an irrelevant cop out that doesn't serve to add any depth to your position. I don't care enough to continue this.
 
The OP says good riddance, douchebag.

This wasn't a thread for Andrew Tate fans from the start.

Exactly. The OP dictated the way the thread would go.
Who's gonna come in here and say "hey I'm a fan of his" for fear of retribution
 
Yes, everything you're saying is silly. Why do you sad face things you don't like? Why do you quote posts you disagree with? Why do you go into a thread "KNOWING you will hate the content"? You don't have a complete argument. "Being better" is an irrelevant cop out that doesn't serve to add any depth to your position. I don't care enough to continue this.

1. You know damn well the sad face thing is just a thing.

2. I don't go into DEDICATED threads of a topic I don't care about and/or not fond of. (Which is what this is even about)

3. I don't care enough to continue this either.

As I said, we can dead it.
 
Similar to the Rogan, Umar, and Kevin Samuel's threads. The most active folks were the folks that didn't agree with most of their rhetoric. I don't get it.
I find it interesting that educators here are OK with letting the poor logic and flawed arguments of public personalities stand. I always thought that pointing out ignorance and logical flaws was welcomed as part of the process of shaping minds.
 
I find it interesting that educators here are OK with letting the poor logic and flawed arguments of public personalities stand. I always thought that pointing out ignorance and logical flaws was welcomed as part of the process of shaping minds.

I also believe in letting children know that you just aren't going to GET some folks and it ain't always your job to convince the world something is wrong with them.

They will eventually fall flat on their faceS when they are left to their own devices.
 
I also believe in letting children know that you just aren't going to GET some folks and it ain't always your job to convince the world something is wrong with them.

They will eventually fall flat on their faceS when they are left to their own devices.
Sound like what you're really complaining about is that NT doesn't have a gatekeeping function.

This is an open forum, where people post whatever they want within the rules of the space. Sometimes, folks choose to engage with content they disagree with, and sometimes they don't, and they don't have to be certain that their intervention will convince folks in order to express their disagreement if they choose to do so.
 
Not even talking about THIS thread to be honest. This IS A good riddance thread. It's going as expected.

I was specific about which threads I was speaking on.

This thread about Andrew Tate getting locked up on suspicions of sex trafficking, rape, and organized crime is the perfect venue to discuss why people who aren't joe rogan fans ***** about him on the internet.
 
Sound like what you're really complaining about is that NT doesn't have a gatekeeping function.

This is an open forum, where people post whatever they want within the rules of the space. Sometimes, folks choose to engage with content they disagree with, and sometimes they don't, and they don't have to be certain that their intervention will convince folks in order to express their disagreement if they choose to do so.

There are plenty of gatekeepers and echo chambers on Niketalk.

Plenty.

But we can move on. I tap out.
 
Back
Top Bottom