The Andrew Tate interview is being drowned out by yet more Schofield

[Laughingravy]

The interview with Tate is not only telling in terms of what an odious human being he is but surely is way more in the public interest especially to anyone with impressionable teenage sons. Yet more Philip Schofield has relegated it to a secondary story.

On any other day it would be front and centrel and it really should be now.

Maybe the fact he’s being investigate for rape and trafficking, but sure, keep insisting he’s not such a bad guy 🙄

Tate can do no wrong for his followers. If he sexually assaulted a woman and live streamed it they would still defend him. He brainwashes his fans.

What a mature response. Are you her?

It was a pathetic point scoring affair in which unfortunately Tate scored more points

I think she should’ve waited to listen to the answers to his questions, and then made her points in response to them. You know, like a proper interview in which actual thought is required before speaking

"What do you base your opinion on though?"

I have watched his stuff and he is pathetic. Greta Thunberg got it right - "small dick vibes." I'm not going to be drawn into discussing the whys and wherefores of this vile individual with you @hamstersarse because if you can't see it yourself, there is no point. Even my 15 and 17 year-olds see right through it.

Oh dear.

So your ds also thinks older women are "fucking bikes, think how many dicks have been in them", that his future girls friends must never, ever talk to or be friends with other males, he thinks girls who go to clubs are "stupid fucking bitches", he thinks no woman could ever be "emotional stable" in a high stress situation/emergency, he thinks he can love a woman but can also be free to fuck someone else if he wants, "women are property", "depression isn't real", women are property".....I could go on, but honestly, it's depressing enough young men idiolise this prick as it is.

I'm abroad at the moment. Is there a PS interview today?

I think that there was one last night on BBC because he's on the front pages of today's papers with quotes like him saying that he's not a groomer.

Did anything new emerge in this interview? Online comments make it sound like he was the one in control and made predictable comments like the Matrix is out to get him.

I saw some of the interview and I found him intimidating to watch . His facial expression,body language,voice was scary and if I was a woman stuck in the same room as him without a camera crew I would have been sooo intimidated.
I am not easily imtimidated but he was vile .
So I actually think it was good that he was on TV so that parents can see what this poisonous man is capable of .

Omg absolutely this.

I do not understand the obsession with PS

All very Cathy Newman and Jordan Peterson.

So is Tate going to become the BBCs new ‘controversy generator’ they give lots of unnecessary airtime to in the name of ‘balance’? Just like they did with Farage who was promoted so much I wouldn’t be surprised to hear he’d also read the bedtime story on CBeebies. They are absolutely full of shit.

Only when they start giving him a seat on Question Time every week.

Here here.

If young men are idolising this women-hating prick it shows that their home life hasn’t counteracted the narrative enough.

It’s coming. He will be there to provide ‘balance’ and represent ‘left behind young men’ or some such bollocks to cover up for the fact they just want someone controversial on for ratings and Twitter engagement. They’re pathetic and their dangerous game of legitimising and amplifying fringe beliefs has caused so much trouble already.

Apparently Mizzy was on Newsnight last night.

Nothing.

The Beeb made their better interviewers resign and go to other media outlets, so they only have second raters left. Tate and others know this.

Yes this. I don’t understand how peoples’ kids become influenced by this sort of thing unless it’s somehow being modelled irl for them somewhere. It shouldn’t really be a surprise. Don’t people talk to their kids about what they watch, who they talk to etc. it’s usually the recluses that do this where their families are shocked that they would be influenced by such movement against family values and the values around them locally. I mean it’s like if someone’s kid suddenly showing terrorist sympathy , what has lead him to that around you, the people around him, the books he’s reading. It’s not suddenly he would be attracted to rextremism unless the path was already made easy to be attracted to that iykwim.

‘my community’ has shipped a lot to cultural misogyny over here and it’s alive and strong, especially as nowadays they justify it using religious texts so even women have the fear of god put into them as nothing else can make them think differently in a country that’s relatively good to women and also blaming feminism for the world’s evil. These views have ramped up in the last 20 or so years I have noticed online, and in the community, long before AT was on the scene. In homes women are being treated like crap but because it’s a cultural norm, justified by religion nobody questions it. And now all of a sudden mothers are blaming Tate for brainwashing their kids and i’m like nope, blame the fathers, uncles and older cousins, blame yourself for not standing up and questioning the status quo in your homes. AT for even the grown men in my community is just someone who has come along to validate their views. Now instead of pretending they’re all for women’s rights etc as they once did as it wasn’t okay to talk misogyny in public for fear of being called a religious extremist or whatever, because the western white man is spouting the same views they hold deep down they are obviously holding him in high esteem and are no longer worried about hiding their views because the white guy thinks the same and now it’s okay to be more open as it seems more acceptable now. So I don’t blame AT for what goes on in my community, the problems were there long before he came along, it just means they can be more open about their thinking now and feel validated.

THe audience pretty much know everything there is to know about Andrew Tate so feel some connection with him, whereas the BBC interviewer could have been any generic BBC reporter - no connection with her.

I think you make an interesting point in how different generations view media, but your above point - if people really do know all there is to know about him
and still feel a ‘connection’ - then we really are screwed.

Yep. This. And then somehow she’d also magically decide not to testify in criminal charges. Which would of course be nothing to do with him either.

Because it targets their social media, infects their friendship groups even if they don’t see it directly and is incredibly insidious. You can do all the modelling you like at home (and of course, should) but when a movement is powerfully anti-women it’s incredibly difficult to be the antidote to that. It’s naive to suggest otherwise.

If only it were as simple as that. Kid’s have rebelled against well meaning parents since time began. Influencers like this are insidiously targeting young people via social media and it’s extremely pervasive.

*kids

By the time children are old enough to be influenced by the likes of Andrew Tate what is going on at home is only going to be a small level of what in influencing them and realistically the one they are most likely to rebel against to impress friends and things.

Tate can do no wrong for his followers. If he sexually assaulted a woman and live streamed it they would still defend him. He brainwashes his fans.

Reminds me of the Trump quote where he said that he could murder someone on 5th Avenue and his supporters would still vote for him.