Lately, I’ve noticed a shift in the podcast clips that pop up on my TikTok and Instagram feeds. What used to be lighthearted content, like stories about bad first dates or comedy podcasts, has given way to something much darker. Now, I’m flooded with clips from right-wing, misogynistic podcasters like Andrew Tate. These videos are designed to grab attention and clicks, often accompanied by flashy visuals or distracting games, but underneath the bright colors lies a troubling message. These podcasts function as part of a larger trend in which young, impressionable viewers are pulled into harmful ideologies disguised as “self-improvement.”
Tate is primarily recognized for advocating a lifestyle focused on wealth, masculinity and personal growth, yet his opinions have generated considerable debate, as he is known for misogynistic rhetoric and toxic masculinity. In an interview discussing women in the sex industry while in relationships, Tate said, “She belongs to him, and the intimate parts of her body belong to him because they’re in a relationship, and if she wants to sell those, he has a stake in those parts of her body.” However, when asked if the same would apply if the roles were reversed, he said, “I don’t know, because I think the woman belongs to the man.”
This type of discourse he encourages has garnered a significant following among young men while also resulting in considerable backlash, including being prohibited from various social media sites. His remarks and behaviors have also caused legal troubles, including a widely covered arrest in Romania in 2022 on allegations of human trafficking and organized crime, which he refutes.
Before he began podcasting, Andrew and his brother Tristan operated a webcam pornography business. Tate brags, in multiple interviews, how he started with 75 women who had no experience in the porn industry and seduced them into joining. He says that he wanted to share his knowledge of how he “managed females in those scenarios, how I controlled their emotions, how I convinced them to work and give me most of their money, how I convinced them to share me with other women, why they obeyed me.”
So, he crafted Hustlers University, his online school now rebranded as “The Real World,” which claimed to provide financial success to those who bought his courses. Tate specifically attracted young men through ostentatious displays of wealth, misleadingly suggesting they could attain similar success by adhering to his teachings. The program preyed on insecurities, idolizing hustle culture and male supremacy while taking advantage of a young, impressionable fan base with minimal financial literacy.
However, most of its lessons were basic, recycled content readily available for free on the internet. Numerous users suspected that the true profit came from bringing in new members rather than from the business models being taught.
Although freedom of speech is a fundamental right, there exists a distinction between exercising that freedom and disseminating damaging, persuasive beliefs, especially for profit. Podcasts such as Tate’s do more than express viewpoints — they influence the perspectives of young audiences who might lack the skills to evaluate them critically. Social media algorithms only enhance this impact, promoting these videos to the feeds of users who frequently remain oblivious to the harm they consume.
This has been especially true for middle and high school boys whose algorithms bring them straight to Tate’s content. Teachers across the country have reported an increase in male students repeating sexist ideals in the classroom, even using exact comebacks that Tate uses on his show, like “What color is your Bugatti?” which Tate uses to brag about possessions. Sarah Milianta-Laffin, a seventh-grade teacher in Ewa Beach, Hawaii, says, “There’s been a huge increase in rape jokes that the boys are making.” Because of the pandemic, delay in social skills and increasing screen time, many of these boys can’t recognize how problematic Tate’s content is on their own.
Middle schoolers are at a vital point of self-exploration, which makes them susceptible to figures like Tate, who provides a perspective that prioritizes and centers them and their significance. However, Tate is a literal sex trafficker (allegedly), so why do young boys readily ignore this? From my understanding, a mix of psychological bias, misinformation and social influences keep them from accepting the reality of the accusations against him. Tate and his supporters actively spread misinformation, claiming the charges are false or part of a conspiracy. Due to the unwavering trust he’s garnered, most followers repeat these narratives without critically analyzing the evidence. We must account for online echo chambers, where social media algorithms push content that reinforces existing beliefs for the sake of young fans, who mostly see content that portrays Tate as a victim rather than a criminal.
Experts in extremism and sociology, such as Mairead Moloney and Pasha Dashtgard, argue that Tate’s allure stems from appealing to boys who feel disconnected from feminist discussions. According to Dashtgard, Tate is feeding on a common struggle: “I’m a young boy … I don’t know how to talk to women; I’m insecure.”
Another aspect of the allure could come from “edge lord” culture, which has been on the rise over the last decade and allows personas to deliberately discuss offensive or nihilistic topics to shock other users and gain traction. For young boys, edge lord culture has fed into their belief that being “edgy” and even offensive makes you cooler, so they pick up this habit to combat feelings of exclusion or social rejection.
This feeds into one of Tate’s popular references, red pill culture. “Swallowing the red pill” refers to a man “waking up” and learning the “truth” about female nature and that feminism is the oppression of men. These red-pilled podcasts take advantage of and heighten feelings of inadequacy and frustration, particularly when numerous young men may grapple with their identity and role in society. They are overwhelmed with stories that set them against women, depicting feminism as something that devalues their significance. This ongoing narrative of “us versus them” fosters bitterness, often trapping these young audiences in patterns of toxic masculinity that they lack the maturity to scrutinize critically.
Tate and his associates flourish in this setting, exploiting social media algorithms to enhance visibility and guarantee their messages reach young, impressionable audiences. The spread of such material is risky as it provides oversimplified answers to intricate problems. A young man facing difficulties may easily accept that his life challenges stem from a societal change that benefits women rather than exploring deeper, systemic problems or pursuing healthier avenues for personal development. The irony lies in the fact that these podcasts, which assert they provide self-improvement, are actually guiding many towards a detrimental path that hinders their potential.
The answer to this increasing influence is found in media literacy, parental support and educational initiatives to combat these harmful ideologies before they become deeply established. Tate was not the first to bring harmful views to the internet, and he won’t be the last. Teachers, guardians and even friends must participate in candid, sincere discussions with youth regarding these influencers and the harmful stories they advocate. It’s essential to instruct the upcoming generation that genuine empowerment arises not from belittling others or adhering to negative stereotypes but from respect, empathy and fairness. If we neglect to tackle this issue now, the repercussions could resonate for generations ahead.
Mia Kirisits is a freshman majoring in psychology.
Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the staff editorial.