Current Events > Blah a lot of the young men I teach/mentor keep bringing up Andrew Tate

(+) Yeah! (+)

Again.

Tons of users making accusations with ZERO evidence.

When asked for proof, they say youre a stan or a defender.

I'm not defending him. I'm calling out people like you for being obsessed with being right and bullying other people to uphold that status. I'm not falling for that by the way, I'm not going to engage with you if you're just going to engage in bullying tactics when I'm trying to have a serious discussion.

Are you going to ignore this after spending most of the topic asking for links saying that he's under investigation?

Yes, he absolutely will. Just like he did with Joe Paterno.

If its undeniable then show us the evidence.

@Umbreon

Still waiting.

Should I give you a couple hours? Days?

IfGodCouldDie posted...
IfGodCouldDie posted...
IfGodCouldDie posted...
Or, the more likely scenario is that you are obviously not worth engaging with because it is very clear what you're trying to do based on your account creation date and posts you've been making on CE since creating your account. You want actual discourse, prove it.

Umbreon posted...
I imagine most people don't feel the need to prove themselves to accounts that, in all likelihood, won't survive the month.

He has been accused of crimes, and is currently under investigation. These are facts. Whatever or not said accusations are accurate have yet to be determined.

As for hateful comments... He said women rape victims shared some responsibility for being raped. That alone is worthy of his exile from several platforms.

If you're truly interested in 'mentoring' these young men you should really take a minute and think.... why?

Beyond the surface level knee-jerk reactions of course.

Well thank you lol. I just think CE is a really toxic place for discussion about serious matters like this. In fact I hate the idea of "taking sides" because implies that there are only two possible views someone can have, which obviously isn't true.

But anyway I appreciate that you responded

People are being baited by actual God damn YWS in the year of our lord 2022

1. he legit told followers to beat women to get laid
2. he fled a country due to investigation of human trafficking

de-platforming may work if he was actually de-platformed, but the same people keep making videos about him and posting his clips to react to. we need to stop talking about him already. all of those debates were for nothing other than to cash in on his popularity at the time.

must not that good of a teacher.

must not that good of a teacher.

some of it has some legitimacy to it

Andrew Tate has a lot of ridiculous hot takes, but his opinion shouldn't worry people near as much as the fact that he got so popular so fast and has a literal army of followers.

I think past a certain stage we can acknowledge "just be yourself bro" was shitty advice and men need some ACTUAL advice to succeed in life, outside of the extremely obvious stuff that just hasn't worked for them yet.

Self help gurus and PUAs wouldn't exist if the avg guy was crushing it, but most studies show the avg guy isn't crushing it at all, either financially or in dating.

The fact that America has brainwashed everyone into thinking they're entitled to being rich and porn/Instagram brainwashed people into having absurd standards for what women look like and what men feel entitled to get off too is a massive problem as well, but this is a societally created problem, not necessarily one young. men created, mostly just men and women who make financial gains off the sex industry at our nations mental health a expense. America kinda letting Only fans and soft core porn become normalized hasn't helped any of this shit either.

So yeah, just name calling isn't really fixing the problem and is a shitload worse solution than the "advice" Tate gave. At the very least, you need a viable alternative and most guys give such shitty advice it might as well be "just be yourself" or you dive down the evopsych rabbit hole of what humans are attracted to in partners and see that there are patterns, a lot of which aren't necessarily flattering of humanity and paint us closer to animals with evolutionary needs than blindly loving each other for altruistic reasons, and that pisses a lot of people off.

That's what most of the red pill/PUA stuff is based off of, evopsych, and some of it has some legitimacy to it, even if Andrew Tate probably took it to too much of an extreme and was pretty blunt in delivering all of it.

:/

What would be the millennial version of this dbag when we were younger?

I imagine most people don't feel the need to prove themselves to accounts that, in all likelihood, won't survive the month.

Sorry did I say month? Apparently you couldn't last the week.

(Though I'm not sure what got him, I didn't report anything)

It's weird, because after looking into him with all the horrid allegations, he actually gives some very solid advice for getting ahead in life and being motivated, some that I even tried to preach to my own friends and acquaintances in the past to improve either mentally, financially, or physically :/

Again, he has some pretty wild beliefs and his bluntness doesn't register well with many, but I saw a lot of good stuff there and very, very little of the bad I'd heard so much about.

Anybody who thinks evo psych is a real thing is either a moron or misogynist.

Evopsych is literally fucking undeniable past a certain stage, but leave it to some random dip shit to comment something is fake that he likely knows nothing about.

Is it a determining factor behind everything? No. Is it a major factor in how many men and women still select partners to this day? Absofreakin-lutely, and the braindead denial of this is what allows a guy like Andrew Tate to rise to power because for every dumb take he has, he'll say something common sense that a lot of people are too scared to say out loud, it will resonate with a lot of people sick of being lied to, and they overlook the rest of the stuff they disagree with.

Mathematically factually true: Men prefer younger women for sexual partners while women tend to prefer similar age, slightly older, if not slightly younger past a certain age. We know this because dating apps are completely anonymous so are easily the best metric for sexual preferences while people would be more likely to lie if polled and they have a far greater number of users than any scientific study could dream to produce for a sample size.

Why? Because birth complications and requiring a C-section skyrockets with age and for 99.9999% of human evolution, c-sections weren't an option so if you weren't strong and healthy enough to sire a child, you were dying giving birth to that child. Past a certain age, hospitals won't even recommend trying to naturally give birth to a kid and will outright recommend an immediate C-section. Probability of mental defects scales much higher in older pregnancies.

Obesity also plays a factor with it increasing the possibility of not being able to birth a child without significant medical interference.

So low and behold, most men's sexual preferences align very neatly with women that have a higher likelihood of giving birth to healthy babies.

Women's preferences align with similar shit. Height and muscle are practically useless in today's age, but women overwhelmingly prefer that in partners. They've even showed studies that preferred jawlines in men tend to yield greater bite strength and more resilience to blunt force strikes, which is some weird shit that goes away back to us being apes and apes being biters. Having a baby is a much riskier endeavor for a woman than it is for a man and most mens fertility doesn't decline so dramatically with age, which is why women don't just simp for younger men and tend to be most attracted to men around their age instead of mostly young men (hell, tons of women think men get hotter when they get a bit older, past a certain age of course). Meanwhile women's ovulation windows shorten dramatically around the age of 30, likelihood of developing a hostile uterus (this is when a woman's body menstruates out an inseminated egg for shits and giggles) shoots up, etc.

Most studies show that women care a lot more about money in their partner than vice versa despite women being able to make their own money now. Why? Probably because there's a 9month window throughout history that a woman needed a man to care and provide for her and men were the providers for most of human evolution.

All of it is explained by evopsych. If you disregard it, you need alternative theories, and most people that scoff at evopsych have no alternative theories or just deny crystal clear preferences shown by walls of evidence (and common sense to anyone with eyeballs really).

Evopsych is literally fucking undeniable past a certain stage, but leave it to some random dip shit to comment something is fake that he likely knows nothing about.

I literally have degrees in all relevant fields here lmao. Evopsych is pseudoscience, using just-so stories to explain and justify existing hierarchies. It's not falsifiable, and it's not science.

Did you want to maybe take issue with one of his points , as opposed to saying "nuh uh"?

All of his points are combated by "not falsifiable, not science".

If you've ever had any training at all in science, it should be clear that looking at today's "is" and wildly speculating how (often lay expectations of) evolution has played a role in creating it cannot be systematically studied to produce evidence based answers.

Ok , so you don't actually want to engage with his points. Hey man , who cares if it's accepted science or not , were just chatting here . The man makes sense