Violent misogyny of kind promoted by Andrew Tate 'fuelled rape and triple murder' by Kyle Clifford

[IwantToRetire]

Kyle Clifford, 26, had been searching YouTube for the 38-year-old controversial influencer's podcast the day before he carried out the four-hour attack, it was said in legal argument ahead of his trial.

It can only now be reported because Judge Mr Justice Bennathan excluded the evidence from the trial, saying that it was of "limited relevance" and too prejudicial.

But he added that anyone who takes a close interest in Tate, a "poster boy for misogynists", could also be seen as a misogynist. ...

... his brother Bradley Clifford, is serving a life sentence for murdering a teenager in 2017. Bradley Clifford drunkenly mowed down 19-year-old Jahshua Francis, who was riding a moped, and his pillion passenger Sobhan Khan, 18, after his "prized" red Mustang was damaged. ...

Please note the full article has horrible details https://news.sky.com/story/kyle-clifford-violent-misogyny-of-kind-promoted-by-andrew-tate-fuelled-rape-and-triple-murder-prosecutors-allege-13321891

Has it got to the point with young men that is now considered "normal" for them to be violent misogynists?

They tried this with Michael Ryan saying that his watching of the film Rambo triggered him -

www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-08-22-mn-1039-story.html

Yet millions watched Rambo and were not inspired to go on a killing rampage.

It's the same with Kyle Clifford and his brother who is also a murderer behind bars, they and only they are responsible for their actions.

Blaming Andrew Tate is wrong.

The common thread being misogyny and entitlement of men to take what they want from women.

Two murderers in one family is also something to consider. I’d be wanting to know what (lack of) values were being reinforced and who else might have been influenced in the same way, and therefore may be a risk to the public.

I think it was more that looking up the Tate podcast shortly beforehand solidified his plan and justified it in his mind, rather than being entirely to blame. I can well believe that the Tate rhetoric gave him the final push to a pre-made plan.

Tate can be a contributing factor to a mind and actions that are already violent and misogynistic. In simple terms, in a Utopia where misogyny didn't exist and Tate didn't exist, he would have still gone ahead but known he was a lone voice in society. The fact that misogyny is rife meant that he could use cognitive dissonance and cognitive bias to spur his plan into action and feel justified, without the added (minor) deterrent of feeling like he's a lone wolf.

I think people aren't joining the dots here.

this monster Clifford has openly stated he is a heavy user of porn and used dating apps.

Porn, in the wrong hands, fuels this extreme behaviour. Combine that with dating apps and you have a lethal combination. Combine that with misogyny and you have an entitled man who doesn't see a woman as a person, an autonomous human to respect. That lethal combination would never have been possible before.

they use dating apps to gain access to a steady stream of women who are nothing more than warm bodies to these men. They lose a sense of reality and I'm sure there is research out there that shows the effect of porn on the brain. OK they have to be absolutely twisted and sick in the head to inject an unsuspecting woman with a date rape drug using a hypodermic needle, but their ease of "supply" is feeding their demand, no shadow of a doubt in my mind. It just makes the problem an order of magnitude worse.

My experience is most men of all ages are misogynists.

Let me guess - Tate fan.

It’s not “blaming Tate”. It’s showing evidence of Clifford’s misogyny.

Exactly, @PsychoHotSauce

Tate is absolutely abhorrent and damaging. It's unbelievable that he is allowed to spout his hate-filled bullshit in public.

I wonder if his hatred was directed at any other part of society other than women, he would have been allowed a platform. As it is he's done very well out of it.

Has it got to the point with young men that is now considered "normal" for them to be violent misogynists?

No, I don't think so.

I can't imagine he would, @BulbousSpring . Replace 'woman' with any other word in his rants and he'd be banned.

It's a disservice to the victim to make excuses for the killer.

He alone killed them. Thousands of men have watched horrible things such as films like 'I spit on your grave' where women are raped etc and they have committed no crimes against women.

The only person responsible for the deaths of Carol, Louise and Hannah is Kyle Clifford.

What excuses are you going to give 'Jack the Ripper' who was slaying women long before mainstream porn/tv/computers/influencers?

There's a difference between a film telling a fictional story and a hateful man openly spreading a hateful philosophy. If someone was reading Mein Kampf the day before going out and attacking Jews you wouldn't be saying "but but Hitler isn't the problem!"

Yes my heart sank but it wasn’t AT ALL surprised to see Tate’s name mentioned. Tate may not be responsible for the actions but he is responsible for influencing and firing these men up to feel paranoid and that their beliefs are reasonable because Andrew Tate has them and he’s famous.

News media editors love a connection to a hate figure, whomever it might be.

Something went wrong in the Cliffords' family life to turn out two sons capable of extreme violence. To try and pin it on Tate, who may be an influence but not the person perpetrating these crimes, is wrong. Kyle Clifford took the lives of Carol, Louise and Hannah Hunt, not Tate. (Not defending Tate's MO, he's the worst, but, perspective)

He would be allowed his platform.

It would also be the same size. Plenty of people with big platforms who are hatefilled against many groups and nothing is done. It’s our obsession with free speech.

And X is a cesspit so they were never going to remove him for misogyny.

They do nothing about Kanye West’s bigotry!

Banned from where and by whom?

Not from his private platforms and not from X. He knows what platforms to use.

I have to agree with this and although I’m not a fan of Andrew Tate making him a scapegoat isn’t going to help. This was a tragic case but there’s only one person responsible.

From the brother's history, it's clear something happened in this family which means that they have not been able to deal with feelings of anger and rage like "normal" people. His brother committed a horrendous act of violence which by "luck" only killed one person, on a hair trigger of provocation. Now he has done the same. Whether it's nurture, genetics, something went very wrong with both these brothers.

There's a compelling argument that some violent, angry young men are using Tate's work as self medication for anger-giving themselves an outlet for releasing those feelings, similar to how many young men use cannabis (a known trigger for mental illhealth) to manage symptoms of depression. The problem is, as cannabis can soothe the symptoms while making them more likely to occur, rage broadcasting does the same thing - reinforcing the anger emotion while giving those feelings a place to be channelled.

Misogyny is nothing new, blaming women for the ills of the world is as old as the hills. Over the last 40/50 years attitudes to women and their place in society has been changing (thank you to the stalwart women who came before), calling women bitches etc in public/work place etc is frowned upon by society BUT under the surface it is all still there, the seething resentment and fury is all still there. Tate is an outlet for the kinds of men who feel this, they feel justified in their fury and they wind each other up and revel in it. Clifford is a violent hate filled monster and would very likely have committed some form of violent crime without lapping up tge Tate Hate Philosophy.
Clifford is responsible for his crimes. Nobody else. On a societal level men like Tate should be shown up for what they are though. Small terrified impotent little men, not men to imitate and follow. Young men should be shown how to respect themselves and women from an early age but how can you reach the outliers like Clifford?

Oh dear, seems many comments are based on posters existing beliefs then tagged onto what I posted.

If you read the OP you will see the Judge did NOT allow the evidence about Tate to be included.

And no the papers aren't blaming Tate, they are using Tate as an illustration of the type of male this disgusting human being was, is.

So that's why I asked about is it now being seen as increasing normal for young men to find themselves fixated on men like this.

It has for a while been generalised that incels (assumed to be lone young men with no social contacts) were fixated. Now it is seems more common to find "everyday" men are consumers of this male abusive behaviour as something to aspire to.

And I know it is so often the case, but how did a man who has this views ever become part of this family?

Or is this part of the pattern.

That although an important part of their "value" system these men know that they do not make it public (except of course to other men in private).

I don't think you can compare Rambo with Andrew Tate at ALL.

First I love Rambo, second, Rambo might be violent but he was the underdog fighting for his survival (etc) against abusive sheriff's who abused him and tortured him and triggered his PTSD over his time in Vietnam, and all the while was looking to avenge his friend who suffered the effects of Agent Orange while fighting for his country. It might be violent but ultimately he's fighting for his survival and sticking to his values and fighting against abuses of power.

Andrew Tate on the other hand is a weak, pathetic little shit bag from Luton (nothing against Luton) who shit talks women and IS the abuser. What a loser. And his constant pursuit of getting young men to follow him and get twisted like he is is disgusting and even more pathetic.

Andrew Tate on the other hand is a weak, pathetic little shit bag from Luton (nothing against Luton) who shit talks women and IS the abuser. What a loser. And his constant pursuit of getting young men to follow him and get twisted like he is is disgusting and even more pathetic.

Exactly. If this was a white person promoting demeaning and violent post or videos about PoC there would be outrage.

Yet somehow he is just seen as maybe being a bit extreme but basically part of the male sphere.

Welcomed of course by the Trump.

And every man of whatever age who looks at, or listens to Tate will have a mother, or a sister, or a wife or a girlfriend, or a daughter, and yet this is the violent filth in their heads.

I don’t buy the line that only one person is responsible here. Misogyny is a cultural issue. It takes different forms and can be more or less extreme at the societal level depending on culture.

I doubt Andrew Tate was the single element that tipped this horror into doing what he did, but Tate is certainly playing a prominent part in increasing levels of hate towards women in our society. Don’t tell me he doesn’t influence and persuade. That he doesn’t legitimise and build on other misogynistic messages that are out there.

None of this is to say that this bloke isn’t responsible for what he did. But the culture plays a part too. A pp mentioned Mein Kampf - we recognise that ideology creates hate when it comes to racism and similar, but there seems to be a reluctance to view misogyny in the same way. Because in some sense it’s viewed as natural? Whatever the reason, it means we miss chances to reduce it.

Except, duh, in his paid for private channels Tate literally tells boys to hurt and manhandle victims, even a guide on how to traffic women - do your research! I saw screengrabs on the report by The Intercept.