Two journalists argue their beliefs regarding internet personality Andrew Tate

For: by Alejandro Hernandez

Andrew Tate is an internet personality and former professional kickboxer. On Aug. 19, Facebook and Instagram banned his accounts. On Aug. 20, TikTok banned Tate´s account, followed by YouTube and Twitch on Aug. 22. According to The Washington Post, “In a statement to The Washington Post, a TikTok representative said Tate’s account was removed for violating the company’s policies that bar ´content that attacks, threatens, incites violence against, or otherwise dehumanizes an individual or a group based on attributes including sex. Meta said it had removed Tate’s official accounts on Facebook and Instagram, pointing to policies against dangerous organizations and individuals.”

The vague policies of TikTok and Meta allow them to carefully select which creators get banned. Social media companies ultimately decide what content is guilty of violating their policies, which can often mean irregular and arbitrary rulings. This is not to be interpreted as whataboutism in defense of Tate. Instead, it is an identification of the disingenuous nature of social media policy enforcement. The true rationale behind Tate´s multitude of bans is that social media companies perceive him as a threat to their permitted order. Tate is a disruption to the current order as his beliefs are not congruent with what they desire society to believe. Tate is the masculine antithesis to their preferred emasculate order. In response, they began a coordinated effort to eradicate his online presence. This effort is founded on a false narrative that has spread among the public and created negative connotations for Tate and his supporters. 

There is no evidence of Tate explicitly inciting violent acts. He was ostracized based on pure conjecture, presumably founded on out-of-context sound bites. However, no specific sound bite was cited by any social media company to justify their bannings of Tate´s accounts. It remains a mystery as to what specifically led to his bans from major social media platforms. 

In the context of Tate´s social media bans, social media companies have behaved as publishers. This is defined by the regulation of content similar to a newspaper or other organization with an editorial board. However, social media companies are often considered platforms. Platforms are protected from legal liability under Section 230 of Title 47 of the U.S. Code, meaning that they are not held responsible for their users´ speech, unlike publishers. Meta and TikTok have opportunistically decided to regulate their “platforms” in spite of free speech. In simplest terms, social media companies could have turned a blind eye to Tate but chose not to for political purposes. They chose to control what content is available on their services relative to their interests.

The aforementioned social media companies do not have the best interests of ordinary people in mind. They desire control over society, which manifests itself in Tate´s bans. They have a disdain for those who speak in favor of masculation and not emasculation. The situation is beyond any accusations against Tate or Tate himself. Rather, it is a direct attack on free speech and public discourse, which nullifies any notion of a free marketplace of ideas.

In a Rumble video published on Aug. 25 (15:15), Tate said, “[Social media companies] think ´well [Tate] has a lot of influence. He’s helping men with men´s issues but we don’t care about men’s issues. We don’t care about free speech. We´re just going to cancel him and instead, we´re going to feed them a YouTube timeline where they can watch men try on different makeup, and hopefully, they´ll decide to watch one of them instead. They hope you´re just going to forget about [me] and all [my] lessons. You´re going to forget about the lifestyle I purport and all the things I can teach you. Instead, you´re going to just run away and do something else. Let´s just delete Andrew and maybe they´ll watch makeup and go do that.´ They think you´re dumb. You need to show them that you´re not stupid because you have a memory. Just because they’ve deleted me doesn’t mean you don’t remember who I am and what I teach.”

Cody Ortiz ‘24 said, “Tate has made a pretty big impact on society, good and bad. His memes are everywhere, he’s being talked about everywhere. I don’t think it was right to ban him. There’s a lot worse out. There are way meaner people saying worse. Yet again he wasn’t the best.”

Sierra Golden ‘24 said, “It was absolutely right for [Tate] to be banned from social media because he was setting a horrible example to future generations or younger kids just starting to join social media.”

The salient fact about Tate is that he positively influenced public consciousness among his supporters. It is impossible to prove his effects on society outside anecdotes and sound bites, which have been used as evidence for anti-Tate chicanery. However, Tate has claimed to receive thousands of emails per week from people thanking him for his help in their self-improvement. In a video published on Aug. 23 (40:40), Tate said, “People often say ´don’t have Tate as a male role model, there are better ones.´ Where are they? There are no other male role models. Because to inspire the youth, you need to be aspirational. They need to look at you and want to be like you. There are no other male role models who have the tenacity or the aggressiveness to have such a fantastic life as I have that they’re going to listen to me. I’ve done things that men respect and they look up to me. That’s why I can lead them.”

It is disingenuous to attempt to prematurely define a person through a false dichotomy (ex. Tate is either benevolent or malevolent) that is informed through conjectural evidence (sound bites and other out-of-context content). Tate’s supporters and opponents are guilty of this, though the latter to a greater extent. He is nuanced enough not to be defined by a 30-second sound bite of a two-hour video. Nonetheless, Tate has a defining accomplishment that is enough to vindicate him of negative judgment; his support of masculinity. Tate championed masculinity, while others sought to label it “toxic.” He has ignited a fire of masculine revitalization among men that cannot be extinguished. 

The most accurate version of Tate can be seen through his content, which is now near exclusively available on the online video platform Rumble. He has amassed over 505,000 followers on his channel, “TateSpeech.” The demand for Tate´s content has continued despite social media bans, a testament to his true character and public influence. 

Tate´s exile to Rumble should be evaluated by all believers of free speech, regardless of their position on Tate himself. An anonymous contingent of the “big tech” elite was able to restrict the speech of an individual and the like-minded. They are an undemocratic corporate board that makes decisions for society behind closed doors. They prefer censorship to freedom of choice, and that should be feared.

Against: by Sophia Nacu

“I’m not a f****** rapist, but I like the idea of just being able to do what I want. I like being free,” said Andrew Tate in a Youtube video that has now been deleted. Tate is known for his outlandish views on women as well as his hypermasculine media presence. His rapid surge to fame was not by chance, seeing as many of his fans have started reposting his most controversial takes for maximum publicity. Tate has been banned on multiple platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Twitch and Youtube due to his apparent violation of their guidelines. According to a spokesperson from Meta, Tate’s ban will be permanent due to his account violating their policy regarding dangerous individuals and organizations. A TikTok spokesperson also confirmed that Tate’s account had been permanently banned as a result of an ongoing investigation on said account. Twitter, Twitch and YouTube have also banned or suspended his accounts for similar reasons. Most platforms likely banned him to avoid negative press on their part rather than because they thought his viewpoints were potentially dangerous to his young, persuadable audience. 

Chantelle Troutman ‘23 said, “I don’t think it was right that Andrew Tate was banned from some social media platforms because everyone has the right to speak their mind on the internet. Even if his statements are ignorant, he should still have the right to share them.”

As a teenager with a younger brother, I believe these social media platforms had the right to ban Tate’s accounts due to his harmful views overall. Children are incapable of knowing when Tate is joking and when he is being serious, causing a serious lack of awareness regarding reality and the struggles of both men and women in the world. There are impressionable, young children on the Internet now, which is not something anyone can control or fully edit, so the regulation and removal of specific accounts that advertise right-wing extremism and anti-women propaganda are warranted. 

“I have everything every man has ever dreamed of. I got a big mansion. I got supercars. I can live anywhere I want. I got unlimited women. I go where I want. I do anything I want all the time. So, I’m an amazing role model,” said Tate. Malehky Balam ‘23 said, “Tate is a total sigma male and really embodies the type of man I want to be. A top G.” Obviously, Tate wouldn’t be where he is today without his following, which largely consists of teenage boys who are at a vulnerable stage in their life where they are more likely to be open to following such radical viewpoints in the hopes that they can be nearly as successful as they perceive Tate to be. 

It would be remiss of me to ignore the simple fact that from a business perspective, Tate knows what he’s doing. He had a goal and he accomplished it through any means of publicity. He made money. But money isn’t everything. The mindset and mentality that he encompasses are detrimental not only to those who follow him but also to those who just pass by him on their feed. Impressionable minds take in what he says and interpret it in their own ways. 

“It’s bang out the machete, boom in her face, and grip her by the neck. ‘Shut up b****,’” said Tate. That’s how Tate would react if a woman accused him of cheating. Although there is no physical evidence of Tate committing violent acts, there have been multiple videos that have surfaced of Tate being openly misogynistic online. 

“I think the most important thing anyone can do in their life is have children. When I speak to some of these feminists who’re like ‘I don’t want kids,’ I think you are the most miserable stupid b**** in the world,” said Tate. Tate has no shame in speaking on the traditional roles of men and women in our society, women’s autonomy, and just plain violence towards women. “Females are the ultimate status symbol… People think I’m running around with these h*** because I like sex. That’s nothing to do with the reason why I’m running around with these b******. I got these b****** just so everyone knows who the don is,” said Tate. It’s sad really, to see a successful man so full of spite and hate that he’d rather spew nonsense instead of educating himself on the complexities of today’s society. 

“Even though everyone’s opinions should be listened to for us to be more aware of different people’s beliefs, I think his [Tate’s] impact has been largely negative due to him stating that he hates women and is a misogynist, and giving your followers a platform where they can echo this sentient is only leading to the spread of harmful viewpoints for impressionable people on the internet,” said Bruce Sheldon ‘23. Tate’s ideologies are based completely on his own assumptions which just goes to show that he speaks on things with no real knowledge of them. Take for example his rants on women’s roles, in many clips of him speaking on women, he goes on tangents about how women are overly emotional and often irrational and that we (women) need a man to help us make decisions because we are unable to do so ourselves. For him, women are seen as something to protect and own, rather than being their own separate entity. 

When someone mentions Tate to me, I don’t automatically think “Oh that’s the pioneer of modern masculinity, that’s the man who is giving real men a voice. That’s the guy who speaks on the destructive patterns of today’s society and brings up how things have worked in the past because of the roles that men and women led.” Instead of this, I think of “This is the guy who openly hates women because they’re not doing what they were born to do. This is the guy who has been investigated numerous times over rape and human trafficking allegations. This is the guy who told a podcast that he moved to Romania because every system is corrupt and anyone with money, some basic social skills and some nice friends could get away with practically anything there. This is the man who fled to Romania to escape those allegations. This is the guy who has some teenage boys convinced that they are invincible.”

Luke Lisheski ‘23 said, “Tate hasn’t influenced my life in the slightest, but it’s funny to see how dumb he is.” As a teenage girl living in 2022, Tate does not seem real to me. I don’t understand how a man as successful as himself would go about his day with this alpha male mentality. I understand that the world is not fair and that you must work hard in order to achieve what you want, but this whole “life is war every day if you’re a man” nonsense confuses me. What can a man do that I cannot? What can a man achieve in 2022 that I cannot? What knowledge does he have that I do not? 

If we’re arguing about impact here, it is my humble opinion that Andrew Tate has had an insanely negative impact on society as is. “If you’re a 55-kilo [about 121 pounds] female, I will pick you up with one hand, by your t****,” said Tate.  Even just reading this makes my brain hurt. This is another example of that harmful negative rhetoric I was referring to. Saying things like this on the internet is so blatantly ignorant. What message does this send to younger people? 

He is no modern-day masculine hero. He is self-obsessed and conceited. He is too arrogant and proud to admit he is wrong so he goes on podcasts to rant about everything wrong with the world and doing absolutely nothing to fix anything. He is simply an incel who, from what I’ve seen, is chronically online and urging his followers to be just like him.  

To end, his banishment from social media was much needed. There are better male role models out in the world that one can look up to. There are better people to spend your or your parent’s money on. Hopefully, his followers will soon see it through that they will not make it in the real world by viewing others as inferior, and that no one is too strong to be put down.