Can we talk about Andrew Tate
- Thread starter Andi
- Start date
Okay, this is pretty funny. Although it's a parody, it really shows how messed up Tate's hustler game could be for any guy who's looking for a normal relationship. It also shows the kinda guy who most likely gets drawn in to Tate's narrative.
I don't know if it's posted here before, sorry if it's a re-post.
I don't know if it's posted here before, sorry if it's a re-post.
Oh lord, and those kids on the other interview... they're so amazed by how he describes extortion. It was like walking by a high school group of kids being mesmerized by the soon to be criminal kid's stories abut how much of a badass he is.
I actually know a guy just like Tate, and have to deal with him on a regular basis, though this one is a liberal, no wonder I can't stand hearing Tate talk.
I had posted this on another thread, the one about relationships, but I think it fits here also, just in case you're following this one and not that other one. Sorry for the double post, don't mean to add noise, it's just... such a contrast between a man and clearly a child.
I don't know how relevant this is, but I thought it would be a addition to this thread.
Tucker Carlson also interviewed Andrew's brother, Tristan, and Elon Musk reposted the interview, giving him some credit:
I didn't know anything about his brother, to be honest, so it seemed interesting to hear the interview. The guy carries himself a lot better than Tate, in my opinion, which is not to say that he is telling the truth, just that he seems to be more self-composed, which could mean that he's better at lying too, I don't know.
In any case, he does seem a bit over-confident. He does mention the webcam business (just a tiny bit) and I think that no matter how "happy" those girls were, your moral compass needs to be a bit off if you're defending that type of business while at the same time promoting good values, strong manhood in a real (rather than superficial) sense, etc.
Tucker Carlson also interviewed Andrew's brother, Tristan, and Elon Musk reposted the interview, giving him some credit:
I didn't know anything about his brother, to be honest, so it seemed interesting to hear the interview. The guy carries himself a lot better than Tate, in my opinion, which is not to say that he is telling the truth, just that he seems to be more self-composed, which could mean that he's better at lying too, I don't know.
In any case, he does seem a bit over-confident. He does mention the webcam business (just a tiny bit) and I think that no matter how "happy" those girls were, your moral compass needs to be a bit off if you're defending that type of business while at the same time promoting good values, strong manhood in a real (rather than superficial) sense, etc.
Yeah, he does sound a lot better than his brother, more articulate and sophisticated.
But, he sounds scripted... like too well prepared, and Tucker, being frank, is just being too sympathetic, he has this "awww poor you, are you ok?" attitude.
He's also making the case that he was in jail in order to attack Andrew, so he's not addressing anything really.. he keeps skirting around the topic and focuses on speaking as if it was a fact that his brother was someone worth attacking because he's dangerous to "the matrix".
But I get the sense that he sounds the way he does because.. tucker keeps asking him questions designed to validate the narrative he prepared. They're talking about, not the charges, but why are the charges false, at that level the conversation will be a fertile ground for spellbinding.
So, easier to digest yes.. but there's still something about him that I distrust. The interview is... well, I listened to 20 min, and it wasn't really that interesting to be honest.
But, he sounds scripted... like too well prepared, and Tucker, being frank, is just being too sympathetic, he has this "awww poor you, are you ok?" attitude.
He's also making the case that he was in jail in order to attack Andrew, so he's not addressing anything really.. he keeps skirting around the topic and focuses on speaking as if it was a fact that his brother was someone worth attacking because he's dangerous to "the matrix".
But I get the sense that he sounds the way he does because.. tucker keeps asking him questions designed to validate the narrative he prepared. They're talking about, not the charges, but why are the charges false, at that level the conversation will be a fertile ground for spellbinding.
So, easier to digest yes.. but there's still something about him that I distrust. The interview is... well, I listened to 20 min, and it wasn't really that interesting to be honest.
A thought that occurred to me, while watching so many on the right trying to wash Tate's image, well.. they're giving him the George Floyd treatment, somehow because the left hates him all of his past criminal behavior is erased. What a shame.
They defend him because he sounds like them, so it is an ideological position to take. As per usual, some knowledge of how pathological individuals can hijack an ideology and adopt all the terminology to sound like an insider, would come in handy. The real irony is that on the right they know it is possible, and they denounce it constantly, think about the cases of rapists pretending to identify as a woman just to be transferred to an all women prison to continue their criminal behavior, or trans athletes, it's essentially the same thing.
Despite taking the christian and traditional moral values position, it's like their ideology or the points they could win with their base, prevents them from concluding that his behavior is at the very least, at the very least, immoral. I mean, who could defend a man who publicly brags about extorting tens of thousands of dollars out of some guy using sex as the hook?
Even if you said, well that was then and not now... still, he doesn't sound full of repent.
It was wrong then, and it is wrong now, it's an awful idea although a great display of the blindspots that they do have. They position themselves correctly in a lot of issues IMO, on this one, they're way off the mark.
They defend him because he sounds like them, so it is an ideological position to take. As per usual, some knowledge of how pathological individuals can hijack an ideology and adopt all the terminology to sound like an insider, would come in handy. The real irony is that on the right they know it is possible, and they denounce it constantly, think about the cases of rapists pretending to identify as a woman just to be transferred to an all women prison to continue their criminal behavior, or trans athletes, it's essentially the same thing.
Despite taking the christian and traditional moral values position, it's like their ideology or the points they could win with their base, prevents them from concluding that his behavior is at the very least, at the very least, immoral. I mean, who could defend a man who publicly brags about extorting tens of thousands of dollars out of some guy using sex as the hook?
Even if you said, well that was then and not now... still, he doesn't sound full of repent.
It was wrong then, and it is wrong now, it's an awful idea although a great display of the blindspots that they do have. They position themselves correctly in a lot of issues IMO, on this one, they're way off the mark.
To me the brother is just a bit smarter than Andrew. He's got a more "charming" personality, better looks, and can do stuff in the background. But some of the videos posted earlier in this thread are of him, not Andrew. So, two peas in a pod, me thinks. No difference in terms of their intrinsic "psychoness".
It's too bad that Tucker still seems "enamored" with those two...
Tristan is as scummy as his brother. I thought his interview with Tucker was very convincing, charismatic, intelligent but he has an aura of smugness and self-satisfaction about him. I might have fallen for his act though, if I hadn’t already known what he is really like.
Here is just one lovely example of what a great guy he is:
There is another interview somewhere out there of how he became engaged to a gorgeous, lovely woman, although he had absolutely no intention of marrying her. He said it was worth the expense of investing in an engagement ring to be with her for a short time. Even though she was heartbroken he justified his behaviour by saying he made her extremely happy for a time. He genuinely seemed to feel that he had done nothing wrong.
Here is just one lovely example of what a great guy he is:
There is another interview somewhere out there of how he became engaged to a gorgeous, lovely woman, although he had absolutely no intention of marrying her. He said it was worth the expense of investing in an engagement ring to be with her for a short time. Even though she was heartbroken he justified his behaviour by saying he made her extremely happy for a time. He genuinely seemed to feel that he had done nothing wrong.
I listened to a big chunk of the Tucker/Tristan interview this morning. And I was struck by the communication skills (you could call it mind games) on Tristan’s side. I was put off after the Andrew Tate interview, by how enamored Tucker Carlson is with the brothers, but listening to this interview I thought, how interesting it is to see an experienced interviewer/communicator like Tucker Carlson being drawn in and made “complicit”. All those suggestive questions (have you seen addicts in the streets here? You have seen my house?…) already implying the answer, make Tucker seem very complicit when he then dutifully answers. Those are harmless questions on their own, but every confirmation from Tucker's side further validates Tristan in the eyes of the listener. This is all nothing new, but I think it is important to remember from time to time to look behind the content and at the presentation. And also, this horribly sleek persona, with a pinch of cockiness, emphasizing that he doesn’t need to show false modesty. I can see how that is attractive to some people. But the good thing is, once you see the carefully and skillfully crafted persona, it exposes the missing depth /actual content in many of his answers that, at first glance, sound not so bad. So, thanks for the discussion here, I am glad I took another look.
Yes, I agree with you.
For me it is creepy to see Tristan, because when you watch Andrew, you can kind of easily tell that he's lying, and that he's got real personality issues. but with Tristan, you have to watch more carefully and also compare what he says with real actions to see the truth. Many people would be deceived by his words and the way he carries himself in that interview, not only Tucker, unfortunately.
I think the lack of depth and real content is a good way of looking at it. I also found it interesting to see and analyse.
Nothing new in the clips that we don't have already, but this guy calls Andrew a psychopath and points at his total lack of empathy, plus he mentions the tricky thing about how psychos can tell the truth and build a rapport, while a big part of what they say and who they are is dangerous/nasty.
Is that strange? The two links suggested by Joe in two posts above appear when the page loads and disappear straight away, leaving the two posts empty. I see some people have welcomed them. What's going on?