#richmenrule

If Andrew Tate is the most evil man alive, why are so many women lining up to work for him, live in his houses, and profit under his name? Where’s the outrage for women willingly participating?

For years, feminists, the mainstream media, and professional male feminists (read: weak, simpering men desperate for female approval) have screeched that Andrew and Tristan Tate are the worst thing to happen to women since the invention of corsets.

They call them “human traffickers,” “predators,” and “abusers”—yet oddly, there’s no shortage of women begging to be part of their empire.

No one is forcing these women to send DMs asking to be hired. No one is holding a gun to their heads making them fly across the world to live in Tate’s mansions. No one is tricking them into taking their clothes off for money.

So if this is really about “women being exploited,” why are the loudest feminists completely silent on the fact that women are willingly selling themselves to the very man they claim is a monster?

💰 Sex Work Hypocrisy: “It’s Empowering When Women Do It... Until Tate Profits”

Let’s be honest: the entire cam and OnlyFans industry is built off women voluntarily selling their bodies online.

Women love to talk about sexual liberation and economic independence—right up until a man figures out how to make the same game more profitable than they ever could.

Tate didn’t create webcam work. He didn’t invent the supply and demand of male sexual attention. What he did was perfect the business model—and women flooded his inbox asking to be part of it.

Yet somehow, when women CHOOSE to work for Tate, it’s suddenly “exploitation” instead of entrepreneurship?

If a woman films herself naked and makes money solo, it’s “feminist empowerment.” But if she does it under a business run by Tate, it’s “human trafficking”?

Make it make sense.

📊 The Hard Stats: Women Actively Choose “Toxic” Men Over Feminist Ones

Feminists love to claim that "women don't actually want men like Tate." Cool. Let’s see what the cold, hard data has to say about that.

🔴 Women Overwhelmingly Prefer “Toxic” Men:

Studies show that women are more attracted to men who display Dark Triad traits (narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy) than they are to "nice guys."

78% of women admitted to having "bad boy" attraction tendencies.

🔴 The Same Women Who Call Him a Predator Are in His DMs:

Andrew Tate himself has stated that women constantly reach out to him, asking to work under him, live with him, and be a part of his business empire.

If he’s such a predator, why aren’t these same women running in the opposite direction?

🔴 Women’s Words vs. Women’s Actions Don’t Match Up:

A 2023 study on female dating preferences found that women claim to want “kind, progressive men” but overwhelmingly choose high-status, dominant men with traditional masculine traits.

This explains why women publicly denounce men like Tate, but privately pursue them.

So let’s call it what it is: The feminist outrage against Tate isn’t about morality. It’s about control.

👀 The Harsh Truth: Women Want the Men They Pretend to Hate

It’s a tale as old as time: A woman will cry about “toxic masculinity” all day long—until a man with power, status, and money offers her a seat at his table.

If Tate is truly the villain that feminists claim he is, then why are women still climbing over each other to be around him?

Maybe, just maybe, the problem isn’t Tate. Maybe the problem is that women will always follow men with status and resources—no matter how much they pretend to be "independent."

The outrage against Tate has never been about “protecting women.”

Because if it were, these same feminists would be calling out the women who voluntarily sign up to work for him.

But they won’t. Because that would mean acknowledging that female agency exists.

And that’s the real conversation they don’t want to have.