politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Tate is the main inspiration for my theory that "incel" behavior and attitudes aren't necessarily tied to involuntary celibacy.
I think it's more fundamental than that, and it's just that that personality type often ends up involuntarily celibate, which amplifies their bitterness and spite and misogyny.
But there's another distinctive type of "incel" who, through some happenstance or another, manages to get laid. They share the same bitterness and spite and misogyny as the celibate incels, but the fact that they actually can manage to get laid adds a layer of entirely unwarranted arrogance on top of that.
And Tate is the exemplar of that. He just radiates "incel" - only with an extra layer of arrogance on top of it.
Involuntarily celibate people are that way specifically because their personality is shit. Most of them are narcissistic for sure, so they turn off any self respecting woman.
Now, there will always be women with absolutely garbage self esteem who will enter into a relationship with such a person because they feel like they have no other option.
But yeah, you're right. Being an incel is more about their personality disorder than not having sex. They basically want a house/sex slave and don't see women as people.
He's a sex trafficker, not just an incel getting laid. I should say, like the old school, pretend to be a good boyfriend, and then sell them as prostitutes kind.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/andrew-tate-tristan-romania-rape-trafficking-travel-ban-us-rcna193959
Which is an incel dream job. He's just managed to make it a reality instead of fap material.
fully agreed, it's cause/effect taken backwards. They think they are becoming toxic because they can't get laid... but really they are having trouble getting laid because they have a toxic view of the world.
and yeah agreed with the right money, connections, looks or maybe even just luck of who's around, people with those toxic viewpoints can still get laid.
Of course Tate himself... it's hard to really even judge him... From what I've seen of him I'd say while he hates women... I think he's just a con artist in general. He see's everyone in terms of what can he exploit from them, how can he get money, power etc.... including/especially the fanboys that worship him. He doesn't view them as people he respects, or that he wants to help get their lives together like he thinks he is. He thinks they are suckers that he can get to give him money on every one of his scams, and he knows what to say to keep them viewing him as some big alpha dog. of course like all exploiters, his goal is to let them feel powerful while bowing down to him, by convincing them there is someone below them on the food chain (IE women).
I think you're missing a big factor: money.
When you have enough money, you can pay to not be celibate. The difference between Andrew Tate and the chuds who worship him is Tate has enough money to pay (or forcibly coerce...) women for sex. His crowd doesn't.
Tate radiates that he's struggling deeply with that closet door.
Sex between a man and a woman is 100% more feminine than sex between two men. Am I logicking this right?