Believe WOmen, But Only When It Fits The Narrative

Two women in the Tate trafficking investigation are being gaslighted by authorities in Romania.
Shocking new details out of the Andrew Tate case in Romania suggest that “believe women” is a catchy, meaningful feminist slogan when it fits a particular narrative—but not so much when it doesn't. It turns out, we're only supposed to believe women when the powers in charge aren't trying to use them as pawns against a highly influential man they don't like. A judge's recent ruling in a Romanian court suggests that we should throw away all we have been taught in the past few years by the Me Too movement and only believe women when it's convenient.
In 2022, Andrew Tate spent time as the most Googled person in the world. Before that, various clips of him saying hardcore things would go viral on the internet. He is well-spoken, fit, articulate and a chess master—which helped him gain popularity among young men around the world. He exemplifies everything our mainstream media and schools are trying to prevent men from becoming. In my opinion, the guy is a pompous peacock, but I can see why his words are so effective and why his messages resonate. Not everything he says is wrong, but not all of it is right. He makes good points, but not all his wealth has been earned in particularly noble ways and his cringe chauvinism is too excessive at times (like his video response to Greta Thunberg). The guy is a caricature, but whether you like him or not, his imprisonment and trafficking case are getting more unusual by the day.
Every social media platform had de-platformed Andrew Tate prior to any allegations of trafficking. He only returned to Twitter after Elon Musk took over the company, but he is still barred from Youtube, TikTok, Instagram and Facebook. Efforts to silence him would be considered unprecedented, had it not already happened to Alex Jones. Most platforms banned Tate for his “misogynistic” views, which can often be tongue-and-cheek and sarcastic. He began calling himself a misogynist, in a satirical and sarcastic way, after the label had been applied to him by his critics. He is now often referred to as a “self-described misogynist” by corporate media.
I didn't know who Andrew Tate was until sometime in 2022. Upon researching him, I began to realize that almost everything that has happened to him, and the things that have been said about him, were entirely fabricated by journalists and bloggers in some way or another. Even after his arrest, a fake story about a pizza box giving away his location to Romanian police was propagated by prominent publications online.
He was kicked off Big Brother in 2016 after a video emerged of him whipping a woman with a belt. It later turned out that it was a consensual act, according to the woman involved—who was his ex-girlfriend. It was almost seven years later when the story changed, in 2023, following a report he was kicked off the show over a rape allegation from a year prior. According to Vice, the hyper-woke publication that originally broke the story just weeks after Tate's arrest in Romania, British police had Tate under investigation for sex crimes—which was the real reason for his expulsion from the Big Brother house. As of now, eight years after the fact, no charges have been filed against Andrew Tate in Great Britain.
No trafficking charges have been filed against Tate in Romania, but he has been imprisonment since December 29th, 2022, while police continue to investigate his alleged crimes.
Had there been substantial evidence, charges would have been filed by now. The first reports of trafficking emerged in April 2022, when the Tate house was raided by Romanian police. It was eight months later that Tate was officially arrested in Romania, after police had been tracking his movements in the country for days. It's now February and the investigation has not produced a single criminal charge.
If arresting and imprisoning someone without criminal charges for longer than two months doesn't raise any red flags, then a judge's recent ruling should. Despite two of the women making statements in defence of the Tate brothers, a Romanian judge deemed both of the women as “brainwashed” and unable to recognize they were being exploited.
An alleged psychological assessment claimed the women had suffered trauma and were groomed and brainwashed into participating. The assessment was considered extrajudicial evidence, but still factored into the judge's decision to keep the Tate brothers locked up until February 28th. This was the court's second extension of Tate's imprisonment—and probably not the last.
So, let's go over what happened and the kind of message it sends.

Gaslighting, Corruption, Believing Women

Two women made official police statements denying they were enslaved, claiming they were working voluntarily for the Tate brothers. The official police investigation is now stretching into its tenth month without any charges, meaning there is no solid evidence available to prosecute the Tates. A psychological assessment has now been performed by the court and accepted by judges to deem the two women wrong, clueless and unaware of their own victimhood—which, essentially, invalidates their own official police statements.
The court ruling states, “Although the named [woman one] and [woman two], both in the statements given before the criminal investigation bodies, as witnesses, denied any form of exploitation on the part of the four defendants, the collegial panel of rights and freedoms appreciates that these statements do not reflect reality.”
A court appointed psychologist has certified that the women's accounts of what happened “do not reflect reality”.
This is a classic example of gaslighting. There hasn't been a more obvious and straightforward example of gaslighting than this. Two women are being told they are not capable of coming to their own conclusions about what happened because they don't have a clear perception of what the authorities insist really happened. They're being told that what they think happened, totally didn't happen the way they have perceived it. The very fact that the court system of a country—that is supposedly not corrupt—would sink to a level like this is not only scary, but outright unheard of. Using a professional psychologist to invalidate witness testimony in order to fit the state's prosecution of an unsavoury influencer is something we would see in a modern dictatorship.
It's a literal kangaroo court.
As for the whole “believe women” nonsense we've been forced to consume for the past few years, it all amounted to nothing. We were told about how women are gaslighted by predators and how, therefore, we should believe them when they make accusations of abuse. The opposite now appears to be true. If women claim abuse never happened, when authorities insist that it did, we can gaslight the shit out of them and make them question their own sanity.
When women refuse to validate claims of abuse and captivity when someone needs them to, it's ok to make everyone believe they're insane, brainwashed, or mentally unfit. That's how we roll now. I say we because I have barely seen one legitimate corporate media outlet in North America question what has been happening with this case. They were all over Andrew Tate with their negative stories and smear campaigns, but they're silent about his clearly unjust imprisonment without charges. In fact, they're probably happy about it.
When someone we don't like goes to jail without charges, whether it's Andrew Tate or Tamara Lich, we don't care.
We might care if it was ourselves or someone we loved—or if it was someone we idolized and cherished. We might care when our daughters are gaslighted and made to sound insane and stupid by a professional psychologist, so a court can muster up some kind of evidence to fit its narrative. We might care when this kind of practice becomes normal in our own courtrooms and when our whole judicial system becomes politicized.
Once one of our children are thrown in jail for questioning and challenging the established order, we might take notice.
For now, though, we're ok to see women get gaslighted and manipulated when it fits an agenda we support, or if they're women we don't know or care about. It would be interesting to hear Justin Trudeau's take on it, or Joe Biden's take. Hell, it would be interesting to hear what Donald Trump has to say about it. Even though it's an “ongoing investigation”, we should hear at least one of our leaders condemn a high profile person's imprisonment in a foreign country without charges.
If it can happen to Andrew Tate, it could happen to any of us.

Guilty Or Innocent?

In the end, convincing evidence could emerge against the Tate brothers. After what will eventually be a full year of “investigation”, it's doubtful—but it's possible. The smoking gun should have been found by now, but I'm not aware of how police procedures and investigations work in Romania. In most countries with similar systems, a near year-long investigation would have turned up enough evidence to file charges against alleged traffickers.
If the police find legitimate evidence of crimes and wrongdoings, everything said here will still matter.
If no evidence ever emerges and charges are never filed, we'll know what this was really about. A controversial man who influences millions of young men in a way our current liberal order finds wrong, was unjustly imprisoned for having an unpopular opinion. His arrest and imprisonment would have been a message to others like him.
“No matter where you are, we will get you. We will destroy you.”
Had Andrew Tate been of the opposite ideology and been a loud trans activist, I'm sure we would hear endless moaning from mainstream journalists about his unjust imprisonment without charges. It would be a repetitive cycle in the news, day in and day out, until Romania was shamed into releasing him. Every virtue-signalling liberal leader would have issued a statement by now and the Tate brothers would be free.
You know it.