Jordan Peterson Exposes Andrew Tate: Inside the Allure and Darkness of Toxic Masculinity Run Amok
When University of Toronto psychology professor Jordan Peterson sat down with his daughter Mikhaila for a conversation about the notorious internet personality Andrew Tate, their over 90-minute discussion offered rare insight into the appeal yet ethical dubiousness of Tate‘s hyper-masculine persona.
As an expert who has spent decades studying authoritarian demagogues and radicals who monetize resentment, Peterson brings nuanced analysis to the inner workings of “guru” figures like Tate who have become icons to hordes of disenfranchised young men.
By highlighting both the admirable and dangerous dimensions of Tate’s messaging and business dealings, Peterson elucidates why the brash former kickboxer has become a lightning rod in today’s gender wars minefield. The conversation serves as a case study in the complexities of villainous characters and why outrage content so often eclipses substantive discourse online.
Who is Andrew Tate and Why Has He Become So Popular?
For those unfamiliar, Andrew Tate is a British-American former professional kickboxer turned internet entrepreneur and self-help guru. After retiring from fighting, Tate built a mini empire by founding the “adult camgirl” site Webcam Modeling and its subsidiary Hustler University, where he sells online business and lifestyle coaching to men.
While running these eyebrow-raising companies, Tate has gained notoriety for espousing inflammatory opinions – primarily via TikTok – that promote a lavish, hypermasculine image and disparage women. His “Tate Speech” brand offers guidance to men on amassing wealth, dating beautiful women, driving fancy cars and flaunting symbols of “sigma male” success.
Despite (or perhaps thanks to) recurrent bans from social platforms for policy violations around hate speech and misogyny, the 35-year-old influencer has cultivated a cult-like digital congregation. His acolytes treat Tate’s bravado-fueled rhetoric as gospel, referring to him as the “Top G” (slang for “top gangster”) and proudly proclaiming things like “Tate’s right and everyone else is wrong.”
This diehard following is overwhelmingly male, consisting of many young and impressionable but disenchanted men. As clinical psychologist John Mitterer told NBC News, many are “seeking answers in life and not getting them from traditional sources like their career or religion.” They gravitate to voices like Tate’s offering seemingly simple prescriptions around reclaiming masculine power.
Alternative to Depression and Anxiety…But at What Cost?
As Jordan Peterson notes early in the discussion, part of Tate’s appeal lies in him offering disciples an alternative route to chronic negative emotions like depression and anxiety. For men feeling dejected by dating woes or aimlessness in life, Tate dishes out a heavy dose of tough love.
He berates his fans for being timid, risk-averse, and allowing themselves to be trampled on. “You need to become a muthaf***ing savage!” Tate bellows in one oft-shared clip. He motivates them to stop being so resentful and instead take responsibility for theirvictimhood. His abrasive style brands him as the quintessential “no excuses” life coach.
On the surface level then, one can understand why Tate’s “snap out of it” style emboldens his followers to feel more powerful and regain their personal agency. But upon closer examination, as Peterson notes, the substance behind Tate’s rhetoric grows questionable. Not to mention the means he advocates for actualizing one’s ambitions.
Monetizing Sexuality Online: Exploitation Masquerading as Empowerment
One realm where Jordan Peterson takes notable issue with Tate is in his unapologetic involvement running webcam modeling (camgirl) networks. After Tate sold his porn website for millions in 2016, he founded Webcam Modeling – a network specializing in connecting models with fans willing to pay for sexual content subscriptions. Offshoot sites like WizzCam and Hustler Academy purport to help clients become webcam entrepreneurs themselves.
As these sites imply, Tate is adamant that adult webcam modeling is a legit and lucrative career path for women. And superficially, given the potential to earn over $100k annually as a successful model, one could argue it beats minimum wage drudgery. But Peterson sees a more nefarious dynamic at play in terms of commercializing female sexuality under the guise of empowerment.
“I don‘t think it‘s okay for young women to monetize their sexual attractiveness online…even if they‘re successful, because becoming successful doesn‘t mean exploiting yourself,” he argues. Peterson points to the inherent vulnerabilities of audiences objectifying one’s exposed body for profit, often out of financial strain rather than free choice. He sees webcam modeling as yet another predatory industry like strip clubs that promise shortcut success but lead women down an ugly path.
Comparing it to drug dealing, Peterson argues that just because an illegal enterprise helps someone escape poverty doesn’t make it ethical. This contrasts with Tate’s continued stance that webcam modeling offers women, especially those in dire financial situations, a convenient way to capitalize on their assets. The ends justify the means in Tate’s view, indicative of his moral compass being “warped in a serious way” as Peterson suggests.
Peterson also condemns the adjacent business of being a webcam modeling agency owner/pimp in stark terms: “Pimps are amongst the most contemptible of people… ultimate empathetic parasitic predators who grow rich by exploiting women.” So while Tate’s hustler mentality inspires a ruthless entrepreneurial spirit in his followers, his methods for building wealth should not be seen as admirable alternatives to living an ethical life, Peterson argues.
The Seductive Danger in Villainous Characters
And yet, despite levying substantial criticism against Tate’s ethical breaches, Peterson acknowledges the seductive dimension that well-crafted villainous personalities can have. He notes how Tate possesses more courage and convictions than the stereotypical troll who makes vile statements but is too cowardly to attach their face or name.
“The person who would like to do something terrible but is too cowardly to do it…that‘s a pretty damn low form of demon,” Peterson remarks, suggesting Tate’s willingness to own his views – however abhorrent – denotes confidence. This analysis echoes why chaos agents like Joe Rogan have described Tate as “smart, cocky, and dangerous” but entertaining to engage.
Peterson also expresses fascination at Tate’s admissions around taking calculated revenge against those who try to damage his business interests. According to Tate, when faced with obstruction from petty bureaucratic gatekeepers, he would retaliate by dedicating months if not years toward sabotaging their careers and personal lives.
“It‘s so twisted, it‘s interesting,” Peterson says, hinting at the comically wicked dimension. This further spotlights the depth and contradiction in human nature – how even toxic figures still display sympathetic qualities that captivate imaginations. Peterson channels Dostoevsky in observing how most lost souls still have a redemptive humanity behind their external villainy.
So the danger with charismatic ideologues like Tate, Peterson cautions, lies less in their big talk but more in them representing the tip of the spear of a much larger cultural resentment. For young men especially, flocking to extreme voices reflects inner despair with society and legitimate hunger for meaning being unmet through healthy channels.
Tapping into a Crisis of Masculinity
On this note, Peterson discusses how the current fixation on hyper-masculine influencers like Tate speaks to a crisis of purpose among men. Despite Tate clearly demonstrating pathological tendencies, his theatrical assertion of dominance coding still mesmerizes millions of lost boys and men. Why?
As Peterson theorizes, it links to manhood itself feeling under siege, almost as though maleness has become “pathologized.” From divisive gender theory permeating academia to drug epidemics ravaging communities, forces larger than oneself can leave young men feeling emasculated and adrift.
Peterson argues that into this void steps muscular voices like Tate’s that seem to counterbalance energies threatening traditional masculine identity. It matters less whether Tate’s specific beliefs hold up logically; more important is him telegraphing rage and power during a time of psychic crisis. He represents the extreme vitriolic pushback from an ego bruised masculine psyche.
"The terrible juice that emerges from that crushed grape…it‘s no bloody wonder," Peterson remarks, employing a metaphor about the pooling of toxic bitterness when manhood feels smashed by society. Tate has become an avatar for this reactive impulse, embodying Shakespearean levels of masculine contradiction.
So the irony Peterson highlights lies in the most problematic figures going viral precisely when social cohesion frays apart. And predicting this tendency within crisis cults to lionize false prophets, Peterson warned years ago against the scourge of nihilism and urging young people to seek higher meaning beyond base pleasures.
Otherwise in the coming chaos, he cautioned, adherents would form around totalitarian symbols promising order but bringing greater darkness.
Enter the age of Tate, fresh from his fight club days selling get-rich-quick schemes to cells of wayward men called War Room. His promises may be empty, but to a hungry audience desperate for someone to walk into the fire with, Tate strikes the mythic outlaw figure.
Even mainstream voices like Joe Rogan and Logan Paul request audiences with this self-crowned king of toxic masculinity. Why? As art critic Thomas Crow once said, charisma “is a relationship not a property; it inheres not in individuals but resides in the meeting of unlike substances.”
The Seductive Danger of Listening Too Deeply
Ultimately Jordan Peterson concludes that despite figures like Andrew Tate appearing almost beyond redemption, one must resist hastily writing souls off as good or evil archetypes. In Peterson’s view as a clinical psychologist, behind even the most chaotic personalities exist multidimensional human stories.
Peterson reveals that when he actually spoke to Andrew Tate one-on-one, he encountered a paranoid yet intelligent man shaped by childhood trauma and fighting experience into adopting extreme posturing as a coping mechanism. In calmer setting, Tate drops his performative swagger and discusses concepts like trust issues rather vulnerably.
This higher resolution encounter highlights why Peterson believes “almost everybody is interesting enough to be a Dostoevsky character if you start listening to them.” In other words, if one listens closely and long enough even to objectionable voices, their richness and contradictions emerge, hinting at their damaged inner child.
Yet herein lies the deeper danger – especially for undiscerning minds lacking a moral compass about what constitutes acceptable viewpoints. Consuming too much of someone’s unfiltered darkness can seduce away from the light, particularly if underlying issues already percolate.
As Peterson cautions, “Listening to people, man, it‘s just so complex. And it‘s complex in a manner that I would say, especially if you‘re interested in them, is almost impossible to resist the temptation to believe what they‘re saying.” He sees figures like Tate as pied pipers leading less integrated folks down paths of increasing fascination yet ethical dubiousness.
The Antidote to Demagoguery: Self-Awareness and Meaning
Ultimately Jordan Peterson traces much of today’s cultural addiction with outrage personalities back to declining meaning and lack of purpose in society – especially for young men trained to seek their self-worth through narrow definitions of success. Into this existential void rush figures promising magical elixirs and escape from pain.
But one inoculates against false prophets less by attacking their hypocrisy, Peterson argues, but more by each individual engaging in the hard work of moral development. Listening to demagogues functions as empty calories compared to sitting with yourself and asking difficult questions around who you aspire to be.
Developing a code of ethics aligned with higher ideals matters more than fixating on society’s ills. Seeking purpose through venues like responsibility, career passion, and family bondsBuilds resilience against radicalization pipelines promoted by hucksters like Tate.
In the tension between order and chaos, meaning emerges by walking the narrow path – heeding the wisdom traditions urging truth and virtue rather than reactively choosing sides. Redemption lies less in fighting perceived enemies but more in tending one’s own garden with humility.
From this place of integrity, one can understand the psychological wounds and cultural despair breeding personalities like Andrew Tate without feeling compelled to join their circus. As Peterson concludes, “You have to have your act together enough so that you can actually have a conversation with someone, and it not just suck you in.”
The conversation illustrates why Peterson has been rightly called the “antidote to chaos” in an increasingly frenzied cultural landscape. His ability to critique dangerous elements yet still extend nuanced empathy offers a refreshing contrast to the binary bloodsport of glorifying or condemning avatars.
In a tense historical moment, Peterson reminds that the center still holds – should enough everyday citizens choose to stand on it by living from their highest values rather than strongest emotions. The demagogues represent mere shadows on the cave wall, granted power only when good people look away from the light.