We need to talk about Andrew Tate

New Netflix drama ‘Adolescence’ raises questions about the online influence of figures like Andrew Tate, who weaponise misogyny and normalise violence. Zayda Dollie reports.

* CONTENT WARNING: This article discusses rape, violence and murder

A NEW NETFLIX SHOW, Adolescence, which centres around the interrogation of a 13-year-old boy accused of killing his schoolmate, has hit a collective nerve.

The show, which explores whether online influence could incite a child to commit murder, has everyone from UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer to parenting experts in Australia talking.

Prime Minister Starmer said last week he had been watching the show with his teenage son and daughter:

“This violence carried out by young men influenced by what they see online is a real problem. It’s abhorrent and we have to tackle it. A lot of people who work with young people at school or elsewhere recognise that we may have a problem with boys and young men that we need to address.”

Adolescence offers a glimpse into the split reality of teenagers trying to live up to the conflicting expectations of their online and offline worlds.

The show confirms what parents have long suspected about their children: that they know nothing about their lives and what goes on in them. Young people are living in a world online beyond the reach of their caregivers — and it's a lot worse than they thought.

Influencing a generation

The Victorian Government announced last October it planned to roll out new resources to ‘counter the influence of Andrew Tate-types’ in schools across the state.

British-American influencer Andrew Tate has become a notorious household name for Gen Z and the younger Gen Alpha.

The 38-year-old former kickboxer made his name by getting booted off reality TV show Big Brother UK in 2016, after engaging in extreme (BDSM-style) sexual activity with another contestant, who later accused him of raping her.

Tate has since transformed himself into a brand, marketing his self-proclaimed misogyny as content, running a sex-cam business, an online course called Hustlers University and most recently a criminal-ring operated e-brothel in Romania with younger brother Tristan Tate.

The brothers were recently welcomed back into the U.S. after President Trump was rumoured to have lifted a two-year travel ban imposed on them for sex trafficking in Romania.

Tate’s rise to fame says more about our era than it does about his message. According to author and psychologist Dr Justin Coulson, Tate’s popularity is a side-effect of the social media world.

In a podcast episode about Tate, Dr Coulson said:

“The algorithms reward people, who are transgressive. The algorithms reward people, who are inciting outrage and inflaming and stoking fires of frustration.

Popularity through clicks is just a numbers game, according to Dr Coulson:

"I think that if [Tate] had appeared on the scene before algorithms do what they do, he would have been put in a box and everybody would have walked away from him. But the algorithms have actually lifted him and elevated him."

Radicalising boys

When Adolescence dropped in the UK, details had just emerged that 26-year-old triple-murderer Kyle Clifford had been watching Andrew Tate videos only hours before raping and killing his ex-girlfriend, her sister and her mother.

Clifford, who planned the attack on his 25-year-old ex-girlfriend after she ended their 18-month relationship, allegedly watched ten videos of Andrew Tate in the hours leading up to the triple murder. He also searched for misogynistic podcasts while researching and buying weapons online before the attack.

This week in Sydney, a coronial inquest was launched into the death of 21-year-old Lilie James, who was killed in cold blood by 24-year-old Paul Thijssen after she ended their brief relationship.

Thijssen had been a former pupil and “role model” at St Andrews Cathedral School in Sydney where he murdered James, who was working at the school as a water polo and netball coach.

The inquest revealed CCTV footage of Thijssen calmly rehearsing his attack, repeatedly storming the door of the bathroom stall, where he eventually ambushed James. The footage also showed Thijssen testing out and purchasing the hammer he used to kill James, striking her with it 25 times until she was beaten beyond recognition.

Forensic psychiatrist Dr Danny Sullivan told the court:

“We don't see clear signs of mental disorder…he formed a hatred of Ms James because she had rejected him.”

The simplistic rationale for figureheads like Tate is to blame women when men feel powerless, encouraging them to take their power back by force.

Tate is one of many voices in the online space being dubbed the "manosphere" — a community of sub-groups of men such as incels, pick-up artists and men’s rights activists.

The underlying belief of the manosphere is that society is biased against men because of the influence of feminism. The irony of blaming feminism is that denouncing it is radicalising boys and young men.

According to Monash University professors Roberts and Wescott:

'Tate weaponises economic anxiety, and redirects it toward feminism and advocates for gender equality. He frames women’s rights and the push for gender equity as scapegoats for broader societal problems.'

And further:

'Tate’s narrative resonates with those who feel disillusioned and disempowered…He tells boys and young men that reclaiming their “rightful place” atop the social order will restore stability and prosperity.’

Masculinity under siege

Last year, Dr Coulson said he was invited to speak at a school in Adelaide about Andrew Tate — without saying his name, so as not to contribute to his notoriety.

The problem with omitting Tate’s name is that terms like “toxic masculinity” are used in its place, misrepresenting the problem by not naming it at the source.

Terms like “toxic masculinity” and “hypermasculinity” contribute to the idea masculinity is the culprit — a false narrative and a deliberate marketing ploy utilised by men like Tate.

Tate makes bank preying on the insecurity of young boys, selling them the idea their problems stem from women trying to “dethrone” them by villainising their masculinity.

Masculinity is not the culprit.

In a Monash University article published earlier this year, Professor Steven Roberts and lecturer Stephanie Wescott wrote:

‘By manipulatively framing the phrase “toxic masculinity” as an attack on men rather than a critique of harmful practices, figures like Tate…present themselves as defenders of masculinity under siege.'

According to Roberts and Wescott:

'[Calling masculinity toxic] assigns boys and men a victimhood status, whereby they claim to be persecuted by the use of a term that offends and mischaracterises them.’

Branding Tate’s weaponising of misogyny and sexualised violence as harmful instead of outright dangerous is a miscalculation we might live to regret.

The themes in Adolescence are uncomfortable but they necessitate a conversation that is long overdue.

If this article has raised any issues for you, contact 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or online at 1800RESPECT.org.au.

Zayda Dollie is an IA assistant editor, who believes in the power of stories and having female voices heard. You can follow her on IG @zayda_dollie_hendricks, X @ZaydaD or Bluesky @zaydadollie.

Related Articles

• Alan Jones and Andrew Tate: The cancel culture mates
• EDITORIAL: Jones and Tate: The cancel culture mates