Sexism and misogyny: society and ideology

Sexism underpins our society. In education, policing, healthcare, politics and more, systems and individuals discriminate against women and people of marginalised genders, although in this piece we focus specifically on young women. These systems devalue women based on a constructed patriarchal hierarchy of social roles where men are seen as inherently superior. Whether gender-based discrimination is intentionally enacted upon or not, it has dire consequences on the wellbeing, safety and life prospects of those on the receiving end of it.

Related to this is misogyny – the hatred of women as a result of attempts to maintain patriarchal societal roles. In recent years, misogyny has gained more traction as a reaction against the advancing feminist movement. What used to be relegated to a niche of men on the internet has now been mainstreamed thanks to the popularity of figures like Andrew Tate.

The perception of diminishing space for male agency is fostering scepticism and even pushback towards feminism. More men are beginning to perceive feminism as a hostile ideology aimed at punishing all men, as opposed to a commitment to equality which aims to benefit people of all genders.

This article focuses on attitudes and behaviour that have been directly influenced by the consumption of misogynistic content, as opposed to through general sexist attitudes that exist simply as a result of living in a patriarchal society. Of course, the two are not always clear cut, and intervention is needed on two levels. Firstly, there is a need to combat wider sexist culture to reduce the appetite for and normalisation of misogynistic worldviews.

Secondly, those who consume misogynistic content require targeted solutions that tackle misconceptions about feminism and the importance of dismantling the patriarchal system for the benefit of everyone. 

Misogyny and hate

Misogyny can be an entrypoint through which young men gain awareness about wider hateful views, including antisemitism, neo-Nazism, anti-migrant activism and more. This is not to undermine the harmful effects of misogyny individually: it should not be reduced to a “gateway drug” to more serious forms of hate, it is wrong and hateful in and of itself. 

That said, misogyny is so normalised in society that it often goes unchallenged and unreported. Other forms of hate can be more stigmatised and, although they might still be common in society, expressions of these types of hate might be more likely to raise concerns. 

Stereotypes about gender are joked about and upheld not by a small minority of hateful provocateurs, but rather by the vast majority of society. It can be advantageous, rather than harmful, to conform to gender stereotypes, which is not true of many other hateful stereotypes. For these reasons, young people consuming misogynistic content and developing hateful attitudes might go unnoticed for longer before the true extent of their attitudes is revealed.

“…they look around their class and think ‘I can’t align myself with anyone’. So they end up aligning themselves with someone online and that’s where it becomes quite dangerous. … what they’re viewing very much is also then kind of bubbling under the surface, but we don’t necessarily see it. … And then it might come out in an English lesson, for example, and then you kind of go hey, wait a minute. What did you just say? And then all of a sudden, [you realise] it’s actually been there for two and a half years.”

Secondary school teacher

The manosphere

The websites, forums and groups online where people express and promote toxic masculinity, misogyny and anti-feminist content is broadly known as “the manosphere”. 

There are multiple different types and expressions of misogyny within this, including:

• Calling for a return to traditional gender roles in which women exist in service to men;
• Male supremacists, who believe that men are inherently more intelligent and capable than women;
• Men’s rights activists, fighting against perceived discrimination against men;
• “Men going their own way”, trying to live without women altogether;
• Pick up artists, seeking to exploit and manipulate women for sexual intercourse;
• Incels (involuntary celibates), who believe they are entitled to sexual relationships with women, and hate women for not giving this to them. 

Andrew Tate and other misogynistic influencers have brought ideas from the manosphere which were once regarded as niche into the mainstream. Tate’s success has brought it to a much wider audience. Some of the traditional manosphere see Tate’s ideas as unrepresentative or only partially representative of theirs: he is decried by self-identified incels for his “Chad”-like behaviour, meaning he is an alpha male who is conventionally attractive, masculine, wealthy and popular, and therefore taking away their opportunities for relationships with women. However, Tate regularly expresses ideas that align with the manosphere. He is strongly advocating for the return of traditional gender roles and has even advocated for the right of men to use violence towards women. In March 2024, he posted on Twitter: “I am a men’s rights activist. The right to be made a sandwich.”

Andrew Tate

Born in Washington D.C. and raised in Luton, Tate first rose to notoriety in 2016 after being removed from the reality show Big Brother amidst a stream of issues: resurfaced homophobic and racist tweets, a video of him hitting a woman with a belt (which he claims was consensual) and a police investigation into rape accusations against him (closed in 2019 with no charges). 

Despite being by no means a lone wolf or even a pioneer in this space, he has become one of the most widely known misogynistic influencers. Tate was the third most-searched person on Google in 2023, and has 8.8 million followers on Twitter as of February 2024.

Tate’s content is based around self-help, fitness and entrepreneurship. His online business – “Hustlers University” – targets young men specifically, promising them the tools to make money online and access to a community of over 200,000 members worldwide. He initially became rich by hiring sex workers to perform on webcam sites, and has admitted that the way the business was run was a scam. Notably, he has been accused of rape and human trafficking and is currently under investigation by authorities in Romania, where he lives under judicial control.

Tate himself claims that his outlook on gender roles is not controversial, because it actually makes both men and women happy. He has referred to feminism as a “psyop” or psychological operation, an attempt by a shadowy elite to divide society along gender lines in order to prevent people from living harmoniously. His comments on gender roles are therefore closely tied to the wider conspiracy movement. 

Andrew Tate in his own words

• On women: “shut the f*** up, have kids, sit at home, be quiet and make coffee”
• On masculinity and life: “It’s a war for the female you want. It’s a war for the car you want. It’s a war for the money you want. It’s a war for status.”
• On sexual violence: “If you put yourself in a position to be raped, you must bear some responsibility” 
• On mental health: “Depression as it’s diagnosed doesn’t exist. Now come back and call me names and defend your safety crutch … Or accept facts and change your life.”
• On conspiracy theories: “the new world order, they’re deliberately trying to turn women against men, they have to divide the peasants. That’s the only way the elites can retain control”
• On Covid-19: “I called this virus [COVID-19] a hoax from the start and everyone called me crazy. The virus isn’t real. There is a virus, yes. Is it deadly? No.”

Young people’s opinions of Tate

In our January 2024 Focaldata poll of 2040 16-24 year olds, we asked young people about different public figures. 95% have heard of Andrew Tate, similar to those who have heard of the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak (96%) and more than have heard of Keir Starmer (75%). One in four of the young people who have heard of Tate have a favourable opinion of him, but there is a clear gender divide: only 12% of female respondents have a positive view, compared to 41% of young men. 

“We stereotype for women to be in offices or you know, stay at home or not working in general. And that stereotype in itself damages young people’s aspirations of what they would want to achieve or what they can achieve.”

Year 11 pupil (female)

Support for Tate is proportionally higher in some minority ethnic communities. 41% of Asian or British Asian young people and 36% of Black or Black British young people like Tate, compared to an average of 26%. Relatedly, support for Tate is higher in some religious communities: 51% of young Muslims and 44% of young Sikhs surveyed have a favourable opinion. However again, there is a clear gender divide skewing these results; 72% of young Muslim men like Tate, compared to just 25% of young Muslim women. Tate controversially converted to Islam in October 2022 – we explore the influence of this, alongside his appeal to minority ethnic young people, elsewhere in this report.

Tate also has higher appeal to young people who support right-wing parties. He is liked by 35% of Conservative supporters and 45% of Reform UK supporters, compared to only 27% of Labour supporters – in line with the average – and 23% of Green party supporters. 

Young people who like Andrew Tate 

Unsurprisingly, those who are impressed by Tate are more likely to hold misogynistic views than young people, and are twice as likely to have a negative opinion of feminists (42% vs 23%). This negative opinion extends towards gender and sexuality more generally, as they are also twice as likely to think negatively of people who identify as lesbian, gay and bisexual (43% vs 21%) and trans people (46% vs 26%). 

Responses to questions about racism were not too dissimilar to the average for young people, although it might have been expected that reactionary Tate supporters might push back against anti-racism in the same way they do feminism. As we discuss elsewhere in this report, much of this has been obscured by the high number of his minority ethnic supporters.

We asked young people what they liked about Tate. The top three reasons overall are: “He’s not afraid to push back against ‘woke’ ideology” (24%), “He wants men to be real men” (22%) and “He tells it how it is” (20%).  Although it is commonly thought that Tate’s opulent lifestyle, cars and fitness are an entrypoint through which young people become interested in his content, admiration for lifestyle (14%) and humour (11%) do not rank as highly. This suggests that the main pull of Andrew Tate for young people is his hateful activism.

That said, younger Tate supporters aged 16-17 and female respondents are more likely to admire his lifestyle, at 20% and 18% respectively. Putting Tate’s motivational and fitness content within a wider context of his divisiveness and hatefulness, as well as signposting other figures who produce similar lifestyle content without the underlying misogyny, could be an important step in combating his influence on younger, female audiences. 

“Some of his ideas are just out of pocket like his misogyny, and it’s just not it, no, but like his belief of bettering yourself and then making yourself like the best version can be – I associate with that” 

– Year 9 pupil (male)

Support for Tate and links to the wider far right

Young people who like Tate are almost twice as likely to have a positive opinion of far-right activists in general (23% compared to an average of 14%) and also of individuals like the former UKIP leader Nigel Farage (41% vs 23%), the anti-Muslim extremist and former English Defence League leader Tommy Robinson (34% vs 15%), and the disgraced former reporter Katie Hopkins (33% vs 18%). This suggests that those already engaging with hateful ideology are more sympathetic to Tate’s messaging and, more worryingly, that consumption of Tate-related content could lead young people to other forms of hate. Tate supporters are twice as likely to report hearing about the racist and antisemitic Great Replacement Theory “often” (15% vs 7%), and much more likely to agree with conspiracy theories about the Holocaust, climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Tate is part of a wider circle of inflammatory influencers or media personalities who revel in their divisiveness. He has met with far-right Islamaphobic activist Tommy Robinson multiple times, and described him as a “solid guy”. He has positive relationships with a number of English and American conspiracy theorists, including Paul Joseph Watson, Mike Cernovich and Jack Posobiec. He also referred to the American conspiracy theorist Alex Jones as “one of the greatest men on the planet” and has appeared on his conspiracy theorist channel multiple times. When Jones was reinstated on X (formerly Twitter), one of his first actions was to repost Tate. 

Tate’s conversion to Islam has had little impact on the support for him by the wider far right. His content is still regularly shared by British activist Tommy Robinson, especially content on the topic of moral decay and degradation which aligns with his own views. An explanation is likely also that Tate’s content on social media also often directly align with the far-right campaigns. Recently, his focus has been on anti-LGBT+ and especially anti-trans content. There is an obvious overlap in Tate’s view on these topics and the far right – both view widening LGBT+ rights and visibility as weakening or feminisation of society, which Tate has made his mission to revert.

Tate’s relationships with far-right figures also exposes his young supporters to a network of hateful content including the wider manosphere, the broad anti-LGBT+ movement, conspiracy theories, antisemitism and more. This is partially due to the account owners themselves interacting with and sharing each other’s content, but also due to social media algorithms trained to capture young people’s attention by showing them related content even if they do not seek it out.

Although Tate remains banned from YouTube, TikTok, Facebook and Instagram, his Twitter profile was reinstated in November 2022, shortly after Elon Musk acquired Twitter. Banning Tate from social media might reduce organic exposure to his account, but it will not remove all exposure to his content – reposted and deleted content is still rife on the platforms Tate is banned from. Additionally, removing access to hateful content and rendering it illicit risks increasing young people’s curiosity.

Solutions for escalating violence

The pyramid of violence is a model used to describe the way that biassed attitudes can escalate to, and sustain, violence against targeted groups. When it comes to sexism and misogyny, focusing on the “few bad apples” at the extreme end of violence ignores the potential for the biases and stereotypes of the lower levels to generate new violence. Interventions at all of these levels are needed.

Solutions for policymakers

Policy makers have the responsibility to mitigate systemic discrimination and bias-motivated violence because there is greater risk to psychological and physical safety and actions are directly motivated by hate.

Currently, the main policies which address hateful attitudes and behaviours are the Prevent policy, and for teachers only,  Keeping Children Safe in Education (KCSIE). Teachers can report concerns about radicalisation and terrorism under KCSIE, but it is harder to report concerns about an individual which do not, or are perceived not to fall under the definition of terrorism, extremism or radicalisation. 

The Prevent Duty is part of counter-terrorism law, and as such is primarily concerned with preventing terrorist events from happening. Whilst terrorism is defined broadly in law, in guidance and in practice Tate-influenced misogyny is not kept in mind. In many cases, teachers are either worried about the implications of referring a young person to Prevent, or when someone is referred, they are not always meeting the threshold for further action and so they are passed back to the safeguarding process. 

“[When I report something] I get back from some members of the leadership team …  saying they don’t meet the Prevent threshold. And then I’m about like, well hang on a second, if that doesn’t meet the threshold, well why is that? It seems to be that the threshold was quite arbitrary.”

Secondary school teacher

That said, teachers are also nervous to refer students to Prevent for fear that they will be making a life-changing accusation about a young person with little supporting evidence. There is a clear opening here for a completely new government initiative that widens efforts out from tackling terrorism to tackling hate more generally. This would also necessitate acknowledging the inadequacy of incarceration at creating behaviour change in young people. Widening the Prevent threshold to potentially push more young men through the criminal justice system is not a viable solution. It is likely to exacerbate existing inequalities and increase the criminalisation of young men, and unlikely to prevent psychological, physical and sexual violence in a meaningful way. 

The government should invest in the development of rehabilitation resources for those who show signs of support for violence. Eligibility to access this service should be widened out from a narrow idea of terrorism – which many argue unfairly targets Muslim men – to a broader and pluralistic model of hate. 

Given the prevalence of sexism and misogyny in society, addressing the root causes must go alongside rehabilitating those with a potential to act violently. Sadly, it is not only those who have consumed misogynistic content who perpetrate gender-based violence. A helpful starting point would be national guidance for school staff on how to identify misogyny where there is a risk of violence, report it accurately and follow it up within existing systems. 

There is also the opportunity to answer young people’s need for a relevant, inspiring influencer with someone who also promotes positive masculinity and progressive definitions of gender. Helping young men explore why they feel pressure to earn a certain amount and look a certain way, as well as providing clinically reliable mental health advice could divert young audiences away from Tate and towards sustainable and positive solutions for their struggles. 

Solutions for schools

Teachers’ experience of hate in schools is explained in more detail elsewhere in this report, but support for Tate and other misogynistic content is of particular concern in the education sector. In a weighted poll of 6420 teachers conducted by Teacher Tapp in February 2023, 83% of secondary school teachers agreed that they are worried that Andrew Tate’s views, or influencers with similar views, are directly having a negative effect on male pupils’ behaviour. 

In another Teacher Tapp poll of 4031 teachers conducted in February 2024, 41% of secondary teachers reported having seen aggressive misogyny from students in their school since the start of the school year in September and 15% report seeing advocating of sexual violence. 

In the 2023 poll, one in three teachers reported not taking any active steps to address Tate and related issues. Despite the problem being well documented and acknowledged, there are clearly blockers to enacting solutions. 

Schools have a unique opportunity to address the bottom half of the pyramid of violence – the precursors to hate-based violence – because solutions to biassed attitudes and behaviour are often centred around re-education. This could be done through the PSHE, citizenship and computing curriculum, through pastoral interventions such as assemblies, drop-down days and form time, or with external providers.

Three distinct but related approaches are needed, which educators are well positioned to address:

1. Tackling the popularity of Tate himself.
   Challenging young people’s perception of Tate as a glamorous truth-teller, and instead allowing them to understand his real attitudes and motivations. This might be more effective coming from peers or other influencers than teachers, and plenty of opportunity should be provided for carefully guided debate.
   
2. Challenging the misogyny, conspiracy theories and anti-feminism in Tate’s content.
   Giving young people the critical thinking skills to challenge information themselves is crucial to building up their resilience to hate. This includes building up digital literacy to conspiracy theories and misinformation, as well as the provision of alternative viewpoints and the opportunity to discuss these within a safe and directed environment.
   
3. Challenging everyday sexism more widely.
   This falls under part of the recent wider efforts to tackle child-on-child abuse as well as the revamp of the relationships and sex education curriculum.  Feminism could be explored more explicitly, and a clear case made for why it is still relevant to young people – of all genders – today. 

However, more government guidance is needed. The Observer reported that Department for Education officials were advising school heads not to encourage conversations about Tate in schools, including in personal, social and health education (PSHE) lessons. The DfE has done lots of positive work in moving towards a greater understanding of sexual violence and peer-on-peer abuse in schools, including through Ofsted. The new 2021 guidance for relationships and sex education states that schools “should be alive to issues such as everyday sexism, misogyny, homophobia and gender stereotypes”, however the DfE now appears to be saying the opposite. 

Schools cannot be expected to provide home-grown solutions to a nationwide problem, and ignoring the problem is not going to make it go away. Infact, shutting down conversations will only increase the curiosity and appeal of these worldviews to young people. Instead, the government must offer usable and flexible guidance on how to talk about Tate and the narratives he perpetuates in a productive and constructive way.