Class and Gender Violence: Understanding a Case of Wealthy (Online) Influencers and Misogyny

Abstract

Our research examines a unique case of the complex interplay between two wealthy brothers and their actions of gender-based violence. In presenting the case of the Tate brothers, British influencers who settled in Romania, we explore how they gained notoriety through their wealth, their online presence, and controversial ideas that promote misogyny. In a survey involving 56 young and young–mature participants, we highlighted perceptions of the Tate brothers alongside attitudes toward wealth, gender roles and norms, and misogyny. Our findings indicate a predominantly negative sentiment towards the Tate brothers, particularly regarding their wealthy class position and how their class power is unfolded through misogyny in their online presence. This study underscores the urgent need for national and international authorities and NGOs to improve the surveillance of misogynistic men’s discourses and practices to combat violence against women. Additionally, it highlights the importance of increasing awareness about the detrimental consequences of gender inequality created through the triadic nexus of class privilege, masculinity, and misogyny.

1. Introduction

Recent literature indicates a significant link between masculinity, objectification of women, and gender violence [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]. However, the relationship between class privilege and gender violence fueled through the nexus of misogyny, masculinity, and women objectification is little researched. Furthermore, as current human activities are more and more dependent on social media and digital platforms, there is a need for more literature on the societal implications of online influencers and the normalization of misogyny. This is important because online influencers could shape societal norms and behaviors, including misogynistic attitudes [11,12,13].

Previous studies highlight that a misogynistic person is someone who harbors prejudice against women, often manifesting in attitudes, behaviors, or beliefs that demean, devalue, or discriminate against women. Manne [14] describes misogyny as the social enforcement of patriarchal norms and the punishment of women who violate these norms. Misogyny can be expressed through overt actions, such as verbal abuse or physical violence, as well as through more subtle forms, such as perpetuating harmful stereotypes or supporting policies that disadvantage women [15]. Moreover, the literature presents that some men often perpetuate hegemonic and toxic masculinity, resulting in higher instances of gender-based violence and objectification of women [1,2,3]. Hegemonic masculinity is characterized by traits such as aggression and control and could reinforce gender hierarchies and contribute to the exploitation of women [16]. If toxic masculinity encompasses cultural pressures that enforce harmful ideas of masculinity, impacting both individual mental health and societal gender norms [4,5,6], hegemonic masculinity is a dominant cultural construct [5] that further legitimizes male dominance and marginalizes non-conforming individuals. On the other hand, objectification of women involves treating women as commodities rather than individuals, leading to dehumanization and reinforcing harmful stereotypes [7,8], while gender violence refers to violent acts against individuals based on their gender, embedded in gender inequality and aimed at maintaining power dynamics [17,18]. Gender-based violence includes various forms of abuse, such as intimate partner violence and sexual assault [9,10,19].

Post-communist Romania has emerged as a fertile environment for misogynism and exploitation of women by affluent and influential men who showcase an extravagant lifestyle and exploit the societal vulnerabilities of women and the permissiveness of local regulations. Numerous instances within contemporary Romanian society demonstrate that activities such as gender inequality remain inadequately monitored by the authorities [20,21,22]. A more recent example is the case of Andrew and Tristan Tate, former British kickboxers who relocated to Romania and gained substantial wealth through contested methods, being currently prosecuted for sexual exploitation of women.

This study aims to examine the perceptions of educated young and younger adults regarding the influence of masculinity and misogyny as propagated by Tristan and Andrew Tate. After briefly presenting the content employed in their online presence, including their websites and social media platforms, an online survey is conducted among young and young adult men and women to explore their perceptions and the consequences of the Tate brothers’ digital media impact on their followers. The research question for this study is: how can wealthy (online) influencers, masculinity, and misogyny be actually related, and how is the potential relationship portrayed by the Tate brothers perceived by the younger generation?

We expand upon the existing literature on class, misogyny, masculinity [23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40], and the objectification of women [8,41,42,43,44,45,46,47], investigating the interrelations between these constructs and broader societal issues such as sexism and violence against women [19,48,49,50,51] by providing a comprehensive analysis of the impact and perception of the Tate brothers as online influencers and misogynists among young people. Specifically, we add value to this literature by highlighting their contentious media presence and assessing how educated young adults perceive their discourse and conduct. Therefore, our article delves into the intersection of class and gender by examining the Tate brothers’ influence on social norms and the perpetuation of misogyny. Through a critical analysis of their online presence, we highlight how their discourse reinforces harmful gendered norms that marginalize and stereotype women and girls. This study, therefore, contributes to the broader discourse on how class privilege and gender intersect to create hierarchies of power that cause harm to others, more specifically it contributes to the specific gender literature addressing the societal implications of online influencers and the normalization of misogyny [11,12,13]. The online traits and ideas associated with misogyny and hegemonic and toxic masculinity are often specific to wealthy men in power positions, who leverage their wealth and influence to perpetuate harmful gender norms. The Tate brothers exploit men’s desires to achieve financial success and opulence by promoting a luxurious lifestyle. This lavish portrayal serves as fertile ground for endorsing gender violence and misogyny. Their online presence and entrepreneurial ventures, which emphasize rapid wealth accumulation and extravagant living, mask the underlying exploitation and objectification of women. By normalizing these regressive ideologies, the Tate brothers contribute to a broader culture of gender-based violence and inequality, highlighting the urgent need for critical examination and proactive measures to counteract such damaging narratives.

The article is structured as follows: First, we provide a conceptual background. Second, we describe the study’s context, and we outline the methods employed in the study. Then, we present the detailed results of our research. Finally, we offer a discussion and draw conclusions based on our findings.

Literature Review: The Nexus of Wealthy (Online) Influencers, Masculinity, and Misogyny

Wealthy individuals often hold significant positions in state institutions or lead influential companies. Some of these individuals can serve as positive role models for younger generations by promoting good practices. However, there are also wealthy (online) influencers who are criticized for promoting misogyny and misleading ideas of hegemonic and toxic masculinity, especially when they are considered online influencers.

A misogynous person often manifests behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs that discriminate against women. Such attitudes and practices could lead to prejudice against women. Misogyny comes as a result of the social enforcement of patriarchal norms and the punishment of women who are considered to violate these norms [14]. Misogyny could be reflected in verbal abuse or physical violence, different harmful stereotypes, or even in subtle policies that disadvantage women [14].

Hegemonic masculinity is often associated with wealth and power and can reinforce gender hierarchies, leading to the exploitation of women. A notable example is the case of American president Donald Trump, whose political style and rhetoric embody hegemonic masculinity characterized by domination and control [16,52]. Therefore, hegemonic masculinity is a dominant cultural construct that further legitimizes male dominance and marginalizes non-conforming individuals [5].

A similar term to hegemonic masculinity, more used but also more controversial, is toxic masculinity. The concept of toxic masculinity has garnered considerable attention in recent years, particularly within feminist discourse. This term encapsulates harmful behaviors and attitudes traditionally associated with masculinity, which are detrimental to women, men, and society as a whole. Feminists often employ the term to depict specific forms of masculinity that perpetuate gender inequality and violence [23]. This concept tends to individualize and obscure the structural and institutional dimensions of these issues, implying that privileged men employ it to distance themselves from issues like misogyny, homophobia, and violence. Consequently, it reinforces gender hierarchies by attributing sexual violence and harassment to marginalized men. The term may also divert from the underlying causes of gender-based violence, such as neoliberalism, militarism, and capitalism.

Hegemonic and toxic masculinity are not inherent to men; rather, they stem from social pressures and the reinforcement of damaging cultural norms and behavioral expectations imposed on boys and men from an early age. These norms often include ideals such as physical strength, sexual aggressiveness, and social dominance [24,25], particularly in patriarchal societies [26,27,28]. This concept also involves the rejection of emotions and empathy, as well as a dismissal of mental health issues. Research conducted over several decades [30] has revealed that toxic masculinity has damaging effects on the mental health and social relations of men [31]. It contributes to violence, misogyny, sexual crimes, and homophobia [32,33], enhancing other social problems such as bullying [34] and the sexual objectification of women. Women are frequently perceived and treated as objects for the gratification of men’s desires [17,35], often grounded on superficial judgments related to appearance, perceived sexual intent, age, and attractiveness [36,37]. Sometimes, from early childhood, men are conditioned to consider women as sexual objects, leading to problematic forms of sexism, misogyny, and abuse [38,39]. This perpetuates and reinforces sexual harassment, particularly against marginalized groups such as LGBTQ individuals and people of color [40].

One significant consequence of misogyny and masculinity could be the sexual objectification of women. This implies treating women as objects of sexual desire while disregarding their feelings, personalities, and dignity. Objectified women are often considered less competent and lacking in intelligence and emotional depth. Additionally, women who are perceived as more open to casual sex are frequently attributed with less moral status and lower cognitive capacity [36]. The interaction of such factors as the sexual behavior, age, attractiveness, and gender of the perceiver generates the objectification of women. These factors shape societal stereotypes about women in society, compelling them to choose between being seen as attractive or sexualized and being respected or valued [1,2,3,36]. The literature on those who objectify others is less comprehensive. Studies reveal that the more men and women consider themselves as objects, the more likely they are to discriminate against women and tolerate and approve the objectification of other women [18]. Furthermore, research on the objectification of women and self-control indicates that objectifying women is often an automatic response while refraining from objectifying requires conscious self-control [42,43].

Numerous studies reveal that societal influences play a significant role in the objectification and self-objectification of women. Girls are often socialized to perceive their bodies through the lens of an external observer, which can result in mental health issues, such as depression, body-shaming, and even sexual dysfunction [8,44,45,46]. Laura Ramsey and Tiffany Hoyt examine the impact of partner objectification on women’s sexual well-being, revealing that women who feel objectified by their partners engage in self-surveillance, leading to increased attitudes of body shame and reduced sexual agency [47]. The reasons why women accept being objectified by men are various. The most important findings show that societal norms and media representations can lead women to feel attractive when they are the subject of male objectification. However, not all women accept or tolerate such objectification, and many actively challenge and resist male objectification and the societal norms that support it. In traditional communities, such as those of the Roma, gender violence is often shaped by cultural norms and traditional role models [19,48,49]. The misogynistic messages and promotion of violence by figures like the Tate brothers can have a particularly harmful impact in these environments [50,51,53]. Their rhetoric can reinforce existing prejudices and validate abusive behaviors, making it increasingly challenging to address and combat gender violence [52,54]. This situation underscores the urgent need for targeted education and community engagement to challenge harmful traditions and promote gender equality [55].

An important stream of literature is dedicated to the role of online influencers in shaping sociability. Online media influencers have a significant impact on shaping societal norms and behaviors, including the perpetuation of hegemonic and toxic masculinity. Recent research [11,12,13] search by highlights how influencers or “manfluencers” can shape young men’s misogynistic attitudes by portraying women as major threats to men’s status. This perceived threat can lead to increased misogyny and dehumanization of women. Influencers, particularly those with large followings, can reinforce discriminatory behaviors and attitudes, including racism, antisemitism, homophobia, transphobia, and misogyny, and may also contribute to sexual harassment and abuse, unhealthy relationship dynamics, and victim-blaming narratives [56,57]. These harmful norms through their content and interactions. For example, the Instagram account @thegentlemanrising has been analyzed for its complex narratives around masculinity, promoting positive traits while avoiding toxic behaviors [58]. Younger audiences are most vulnerable as media content can shape perceptions and behaviors. There are many influencers online who promote hypermasculine ideals, emphasizing physical strength, dominance, and control. Their content often includes derogatory language towards women and the glorification of aggressive behavior. Some of the most famous online influencers who promote misogyny and masculinity are Kevin Samuels [59], an American influencer known for his controversial views on relationships and gender dynamics, often promotes traditional and rigid gender roles; Jordan Peterson, renowned psychologist and best-selling author who promotes traditional masculinity, Dan Bilzerian, also known as “King of Instagram”, known for his lavish lifestyle, his content frequently objectifies women and promotes a lifestyle centered around wealth, physical strength, and dominance; and Joe Rogan, who promotes masculinity and controversial views on gender roles [59].

Other recent studies have highlighted the negative societal impact of online influencers such as Kevin Samuels, Joe Rogan, and Dan Bilzerian and personalities in positions of power, such as Donald Trump [16,54,60] and Sean “Diddy” Combs [61,62], particularly those who exhibit misogynistic behaviors. Research indicates that these individuals often normalize misogyny using derogatory language and perpetuating harmful stereotypes and attitudes towards women [14,60,63]. This normalization can lead to a range of negative consequences, including the reinforcement of gender inequality, the devaluation of women, and the perpetuation of gender-based violence [64]. These influencers use their platforms to spread messages that reinforce harmful stereotypes about masculinity, often leading to the normalization of misogynistic attitudes and behaviors. Their influence extends beyond individual behavior, affecting broader social interactions and norms. Influencers perpetuate harmful stereotypes and contribute to a culture that devalues women and promotes gender inequality. High-profile cases, such as the Tate brothers, illustrate how wealthy and influential men use their platforms to promote toxic masculinity and gender violence. This issue has increased with the rise of video chat platforms, particularly those that offer sexual content or feature misogynistic themes, objectification of women, sexual harassment, and sexual violence—such material results in devastating consequences on young people’s behavior both online and offline. A study [65] reports that exposure to harmful content, framed as entertainment, leads to the normalization of hateful and misogynistic attitudes among young individuals.

Masculinity is believed to increase the demand for sex trafficking and video chat activities that feature sexualized content [66]. In these activities, women are encouraged to present themselves in a sexualized manner, increasing the likelihood of self-objectification and objectification of women, depending on the expectations of users and social and cultural norms that shape the perception of women and their bodies. It underlines how the anti-trafficking movement primarily focuses on the experiences of women, often excluding men from different narratives. Hegemonic and toxic masculinity leads some influencers to engage in sexual harassment as a way to assert their dominance and cope with feelings of insecurity or threat posed by women [67].

2. Materials and Methods

Our study’s methodology primarily involves administering a qualitative online survey to young individuals. According to Pinsonneault and Kraemer [68], a survey is defined as a “means for gathering information about the characteristics, actions, or opinions of a large group of people.” (p. 77). A qualitative survey is a research method that employs questions to gather detailed opinions, experiences, narratives, or accounts from respondents. Unlike quantitative surveys, which focus on numerical data [69], qualitative surveys aim to explore the “why” and “how” behind human behaviors and social phenomena, providing rich, in-depth insights. Harrie Jansen [70] describes qualitative surveys as a distinct research method focused on analyzing the diversity of member characteristics within a population rather than their frequencies. This approach involves specific questions to capture detailed opinions and behaviors, aiming for a comprehensive understanding of social phenomena. Qualitative surveys are valuable for their ability to provide rich, in-depth insights into the complexity of social behaviors and attitudes.

To understand how young urban adults perceive the (online) influence of the Tate brothers on younger people, we conducted an online survey in May 2024. Over the course of one week, 60 participants completed the survey, leading to 56 valid responses. Our respondents were aged 19 to 40 (see

Table 1. Features of the survey respondents.

Feature	Category	Percentage
Age	18–25	75.00%
	26–35	12.00%
	36–40	9.00%
Sex	Male	52.00%
	Female	48.00%

) and were either university students or graduates. The survey included 29 questions of various types, emphasizing open-ended items to encourage detailed and diverse answers (see Appendix A). The survey questions focused on seven dimensions: (1) perception of the Tate brothers; (2) representation of women in relation to the Tates’ masculinities; (3) image of the Tates as men and their reflection in today’s society; (4) views on Tate’s video chat activity; (5) opinions on the sexual exploitation of women and human trafficking; (6) the Tate brothers’ legal situation; (7) reasons for acceptance of the Tates’ activities. The survey was conducted anonymously, and each respondent provided written full consent to participate.

The survey design took into consideration the following four steps.

In step 1, we defined our research objectives, target audience, and data type considerations. Our methodological research objective was to understand the opinions of younger people on the Tate brothers’ behavior as online influencers and their misogyny. We defined our target audience as educated younger people, including students and former alumni of West University of Timișoara. Therefore, we employed a cross-sectional sampling of younger and educated individuals. Cross-sectional surveys collect data from diverse participants representing the population of interest, capturing a snapshot of different opinions at a specific time. We chose qualitative insights, which is why we opted for the qualitative cross-sectional survey model.

In step 2, we developed the research questions. We ensured that the questions were clear, concise, open-ended, logically sequenced, and free from bias.

Step 3 involved selecting the survey method. For the audience’s comfort, we chose self-administered online surveys instead of interviewer-administered surveys. This method was chosen because it is cost-effective, allows respondents easy access via their email addresses, and ensures better engagement due to the absence of interviewer bias.

In step 4, we conducted a pilot test of the survey. The pilot survey included 12 initial questions and was tested on 30 students. This smaller-scale pilot testing helped us refine some questions and add several new ones to the final survey.

The principles we followed in the survey design included simplicity and clarity of the questions, neutrality and objectivity, reliability and validity, ethics, and respect for the respondents. We obtained informed written consent from participants, avoided any offensive or discriminatory questions, and protected the confidentiality and privacy of respondent data.

Following Braun and Clarke’s methodology [71], data interpretation of our study was based on the following steps. First, the survey data were transcribed. Second, after individually reading the transcribed data, both authors independently selected codes and themes. The thematization process was inductive, utilizing the principles of groundedness and code density. Third, both authors negotiated the themes and codes identified by each of them. Initially, four main themes and six sub-themes were identified in the entire data set. Each sub-theme included at least four-five quotes from the survey respondents. After attentively reading the themes, sub-themes, and all major quotes, we eliminated two themes and organized the codes into two remaining major themes. The two remaining themes include: a) Societal implications of the Tates as wealthy online influencers; and b) The Tate brothers’ rhetoric of normalizing misogyny. These themes are presented in Section 4.

For this study’s context (see Section 3), we also followed preliminary research on the Tate brothers’ online presence by examining their websites, Hustlers Academy and The Real World, as well as content on platforms like Instagram, X, and YouTube, where we identified Tate brothers. This was aimed at understanding the general nature of the Tate’s messages. Additionally, we explored how the Tate brothers were portrayed by news agencies and other online media, both in Romania and internationally. Our intention was not to do an in-depth digital media analysis, but we made only a purposive selection of the most relevant headlines for the aims of our study, which helped us determine whether their lives and behavior were depicted around misogyny. We simply selected the digital news headlines using several keywords on the Internet: “Tate brothers”, “wealth”, “misogyny”, “gender violence”, “Romania” and “United Kingdom”. The digital content of the online platforms and journals was briefly and critically presented in Section 3.

The methods and data of our research have been analyzed and approved by the ethics Department of the West University of Timișoara, Romania (50506/23 July 2024).

We recognize several limitations of the sample and the methods used in this study. Firstly, our empirical data and methodology are based on a limited sample of only 56 survey respondents in Romania. To gain a broader perspective, a larger survey could be conducted on comparing opinions of different age group respondents in both Romania and the UK to capture much broader perceptions of Romanian and British citizens regarding the Tate brothers’ digital influence and misogynistic narratives. Secondly, our analysis did not include an extensive digital examination, which may mean that there are additional ramifications of the Tate brothers’ narratives that we have not addressed. Lastly, we did not conduct interviews with women who have been harmed by the Tates’ misogyny; in-depth interviews with these individuals could provide valuable insights for future research. However, the data we gathered from our 56 respondents was huge and very useful for our study.

3. Study Area and the Representation of the Tate Brothers in Digital Media

Romania is a country in Eastern Europe with a population of 19 million which is known for permissive laws and corruption. It has become evident that Romania provides an environment conducive to violence against women, particularly in the realms of video chat and prostitution. Andrew and Tristan Tate are British-American social media influencers and businessmen who relocated to Romania. They gained notoriety for promoting misogynistic, sexist, and bigoted messages to millions of followers on social media. Their messages resulted in them being banned from several social media accounts. They own multiple businesses in Romania, including a webcam studio, a casino, and a management company for Only Fans. In June 2023, they were charged with forming an organized crime group to exploit women sexually. They deny all those charges.

The Tate brothers gained public attention in 2009 as they became successful in sporting activities, particularly kickboxing [72]. This early success established their public personas and provided a platform for their subsequent ventures. They first gained significant attention in 2016, when Andrew Tate appeared on the British reality TV show Big Brother, from where he was removed due to sexual assault allegations [73]. As they moved from sports to social media, the Tates received considerable media attention. By analyzing the social media content presented by the Tate brothers, it becomes evident that they promote toxic masculinity in several ways. They portray themselves as hypermasculine, emphasizing physical strength, aggression, and dominance, thereby normalizing harmful stereotypes about masculinity and pressuring young men to conform to these ideals. They focus on wealth, luxury, and material possessions as markers of success, leading young men to believe that their worth is tied to their financial status and possessions rather than their character. Their use of misogynistic and sexist language or jokes further normalizes misogynistic attitudes.

The main digital platform associated with them is Hustlers University, founded in 2021 by Andrew Tate, an online learning platform claiming to teach individuals how to earn money online and achieve financial freedom but only emphasizes the importance of wealth. The platform claims to be the first education platform in the world, with over 228,962 members in 2024. They offer courses on E-commerce and Dropshipping, Stocks and Options, Cryptocurrencies, Marketing and Business, Fitness and Nutrition, Content Creation, and Copywriting for an enrollment fee of USD 49, which soon increases to USD 147. This fee includes access to all courses, future program releases, and the exclusive network. Another website they use is The Real World, where Tristan Tate promotes his image as a successful entrepreneur and influencer. The content often emphasizes traditional masculine traits and the importance of wealth and power.

They were an extremely active presence on social media, especially on YouTube and TikTok, Instagram, and Twitter, with Andrew Tate being one of the most famous persons on TikTok, with videos of Andrew being watched about 11.6 billion times. Their rapid rise to fame was not by chance but through a coordinated effort by his followers to flood social media with his most controversial clips. Their channels, such as Tate Brothers Zone, Tate Brothers Official, and Best of the Tate Brothers, cover a range of content from their shows, podcasts, and personal insights, showcasing their luxurious lifestyle, describing women with such terms as “bitches”, “hoes” and “intrinsically lazy”, stating there was “no such thing as an independent female”. Despite being banned on several platforms, the Tate brothers continue gaining influence through their media literacy, using platforms like Rumble to spread their controversial views, promising everybody who follows them to achieve a similar status. They use these platforms to attract a following of young men seeking guidance, instructing them to escape “the Matrix”. Their content often includes themes of male dominance, aggression, and the objectification of women, considering them to be inferior, who are good only for sex, and who deserve to be emotionally, physically, and sexually abused, also considering that women are responsible for their attacks in rape cases. Andrew Tate has also published several books on Kindle, including “The Tate Bible”, “The Tate Bible—Book II: The New Testament”, “Andrew Tate: Lesson 1: Procrastination: Stop Being” and “Tateism: The 41 Tenets: The Philosophy of Andrew Tate”. These books reflect their controversial views and philosophies. Andrew Tate has faced criticism for advocating toxic masculinity and making derogatory comments about women and LGBTQ+ people [74], where he often presents himself as an authority on male dominance and success [75]. The media has highlighted how these harmful ideologies have contributed to their notoriety [76], with many others condemning their rhetoric as dangerous and inflammatory [74]. Their videos have sparked significant debate and criticism, and there has been much public debate about the impact of such views on young audiences and the broader societal implications of their widespread dissemination [77]. However, their digital media presence took a darker turn as allegations of criminal activities, including human trafficking and exploitation, emerged [78,79]. These serious allegations have overshadowed their past accomplishments and have been extensively covered in the media [80], highlighting concerns about their negative impact on young audiences [79].

Their presence in Romania was first mentioned in 2014 when they appeared at a show in Constanta [81]. Their coverage began with their rise to fame through social media and business ventures, highlighting their online success [82]. As they became more famous, Romanian online newspapers and multimedia platforms started to mention their controversial opinions [83] and the allegations of illegal activities [84]. In recent years, digital media coverage has intensified, focusing on their legal problems and the use of women as objects [85]. Major Romanian news agencies, such as Digi24, Adevarul [86], Hotnews [87], and ProTV [88], have provided in-depth analyses of their controversies, activities, and legal developments.

In summary, digital newspapers and multimedia platforms portrayed the Tate brothers negatively. Their hegemonic masculinity, misogyny, and objectification of women were highlighted against the backdrop of the power they established on the Internet, as well as weak Romanian legislation that enabled them to treat women as objects.

4. Results

Following the interpretation of our survey on young and younger adults in Romania, we identified two themes that emerged from the narratives provided by our survey respondents, which are outlined below: societal implications of the Tates as wealthy online influencers and the Tate brothers’ rhetoric on normalization of misogyny.

4.1. Societal Implications of the Tates as Wealthy Online Influencers and Misogynists

Our survey revealed that respondents’ perceptions of the Tate brothers include their image, online presence, and the societal implications they propagate. When asked about their knowledge of the Tate brothers, most respondents identified them as former kickboxers who became extremely wealthy through their online activities, showcasing their wealth and lavish lifestyle.

R8, woman, 21: “They are two British citizens, former kickboxers, who settled in Romania and became famous for their online misogynistic and extremist ideas”.

R22, male, 22: “They are two millionaire brothers who settled in Romania. Andrew Tate was a multiple kickboxing champion”.

Other respondents consider that the Tates are former kickboxers turned influencers who are very rich and famous for organizing parties with women and brothers who have great access to young women. In this respect, we noticed a perception based on the correlation of wealth, sports activity and their online lavish lifestyle activities, with most male respondents recognizing Tate’s sports achievements and lifestyle advice and most female respondents focusing more on their harsh discourse on women.

The Tates’ successful online platforms, including their so-called Tate Academy or Hustlers University and The Real World, attract people aspiring to achieve similar financial success. These platforms advise life and financial strategies, appealing to those pursuing fame and wealth. Financial success and their online influence are also reverberated in the narratives of our respondents. However, their methods for achieving success are wrong as they prioritize luxury and objects over individuals. They also instruct the young to become rich and influential in society and earn respect.

Some respondents argue that the brothers’ influence is built on using controversial statements to attract young people, selling them unrealistic dreams of a similar lifestyle. Their controversial remarks, often capturing the attention of the youth, contribute to this. The image they project and their advice lead people to believe they can achieve wealth and success like them, a notion that is far from reality.

Most respondents believe that the brothers chose to settle in Romania deliberately because it is considered a corrupt country where affluent people can do whatever they want and escape any investigation. It is considered that Romania is a country where people with money can do almost everything. Romania is seen as a favorable environment for the wealthy, and the Tates are not scrutinized. In this society, financial success garners admiration. Respondents consider that the corrupt system allows them to become wealthy very quickly and easily or because they found a place with a corrupt and weak judicial system that is easily manipulated, allowing them to amass wealth rapidly. It is considered that the country’s laws are much more permissive than those in other countries, and thus, they would never be caught. Some woman respondents even consider Romania a safe country with a relatively low crime rate, where the state organs perform their duties, and taxes are low, which is another reason for Tate’s decision to settle in Romania.

Additionally, more male respondents consider that Romania offers cheap high-speed Internet and corrupt authorities, enabling people to make outrageous fortunes.

Respondents provided various reasons for the high number of followers the Tate brothers have on the Internet. Many consider it unsurprising, given their massive online promotion. Their messages are well-constructed for their audience, and their wealth and appearance attract followers who aspire to become as rich and famous as they are, even if it involves exploiting women. They are followed on social media mainly by young people who are drawn to their physical appearance, as highlighted by the following quotes of our respondents:

R25, woman, 22: “They are followed on social media where they behave like spoiled brats as if they own the world because they have money. They are followed mainly by young people because they are interested in their physical appearance”.

R27, male, 21: “There are numerous women following them as they are good-looking”.

A significant part of respondents associated the Tates with societal influence on illegal activities such as human trafficking and promoting misogynistic ideas. Some respondents consider that they settled in Romania after a series of illegal transactions, such as human trafficking and casinos, and they are involved in illicit businesses but publicly share some controversial truths.

Significant concerns exist regarding the misleading nature of their messages. This raises the possibility that the younger generation, particularly adolescents, may be adversely influenced by such advice. The lack of genuine real-life role models leads some individuals to follow figures like the Tates, believing they have discovered what they were missing. Without proper education, these people view their opinions as relevant and can be easily influenced. Many who lack a real-life role model often mistakenly turn to the Internet in search of one.

Some respondents attribute their fame to extensive online promotion, while others believe it stems from their sporting backgrounds or public curiosity about their personalities. A few male respondents suggested that their followers may lack intelligence or be easily misled, often referring to teenagers with so-called lower IQ levels.

Most respondents agree that the Tate brothers should not be viewed as societal role models. They cite several reasons, including the brothers’ involvement in unlawful activities, their misleading and deceitful behavior, and their promotion of a lifestyle that only a select few can realistically achieve. While most respondents dislike their ideas, few consider them worthy of being regarded as role models. Those who view the Tates as role models appreciate their promotion of a healthy lifestyle and hard work, which they believe leads to wealth and prosperity. These narratives include the idea that they rose from the bottom and obtained everything through their own efforts, giving good life advice, and they made lots of money, and that they provided good advice on how to become rich.

In conclusion, respondents attributed the Tate brothers’ online popularity to extensive promotion and their extravagant lifestyle. Their well-crafted messages and portrayal of wealth attract followers, particularly young people, who aspire to similar success despite the methods involved. However, concerns were raised about the unrealistic and misogynistic nature of their messages, which may negatively influence young people. Most respondents agree that they should not be seen as role models due to their involvement in illegal activities and the promotion of unreachable standards, highlighting the problematic nature of their online societal influence on the younger generation.

The Tates are frequently associated with illegal activities, including human trafficking and exploitation, further damaging their reputation among respondents. Our study indicates that educated younger individuals condemn the Tates for accumulating wealth through the online commodification of women and the promotion of hegemonic masculinity.

4.2. The Tate Brothers’ Rhetoric on Normalization of Misogyny

The survey responses clearly indicate that the image of women promoted by the Tate brothers is largely regarded negatively and that their rhetoric moves toward the normalization of misogyny. Most respondents observe that the Tate brothers depict women as inferior to men, reduce them to mere objects, and suggest that they should not express their own ideas or opinions. Women are viewed as sexual slaves without dignity and are considered objects for financial gain.

The brothers are also known for their misogynistic messages and advice on lifestyle and making money, often portraying themselves as “alpha” males. Therefore, they promote misogynistic and hateful ideas, encouraging their followers to use everything and everyone to achieve their goals.

Several respondents argue that the Tates promote violence against women and misogynistic ideas, emphasizing that wealth and superficiality should not be the basis for respect in society. Respondents believe that the brothers were falsely created to distract people from the real issues in society.

Others argue that the Tate brothers advocate for a specific standard of female appearance, encouraging women to undergo plastic surgeries to meet this ideal while discouraging women from expressing their free will:

R25, woman, 21: “A woman who is always submissive, easily manipulated, very good-looking, with numerous plastic surgeries, and incapable of making it on her own in society”.

R29, male, 22: “Women with big breasts, aesthetic surgeries, shallow, and easily influenced”.

Some male respondents consider that this image aligns with the loyal, faithful, and obedient woman. On the other hand, a few male respondents understand that the Tate brothers promote the idea of a strong and independent woman who acts as self-development and success.

There is a link between the two wealthy men and vulnerable women. Belonging to the class of wealthy people, their power to the harmful and regressive depiction of women reinforces negative stereotypes and may exacerbate gender inequality and violence, especially in traditional communities, where hegemonic masculinity is inherent and highly regarded. This situation emphasizes the necessity for a critical evaluation and proactive measures to combat such damaging narratives. Our survey results indicate that educated younger individuals largely reject the behavior misogynistic model promoted by the Tate brothers, which is considered a negative example that should not be emulated.

In conclusion, the Tate brothers perpetuate a negative image of women, viewing them as inferior to men, objectifying them, and discouraging them from expressing their ideas and opinions freely. As such, they promote the normalization of misogyny. This includes perceptions of women as physically and mentally inferior, sexual objects, and commodities for financial gain. Some respondents noted that the Tate brothers advocate for women to conform to specific physical appearances through plastic surgeries while suppressing their free will. Some respondents equate this image with traditional gender roles, viewing women as loyal, faithful, and obedient, reminiscent of past societal norms. Conversely, a few respondents interpret the Tate brothers’ messages as promoting strong, independent women, although this view is less common. The most interesting opinions suggest that the Tate brothers see women as impediments to personal success or as a counter to feminist movements.

Although we noticed diverse and ambivalent responses from the respondents, the overall results of our survey indicate that there could be a broader perception of how the relationship between wealthy people, masculinity, and misogyny is evident in the case of the Tate brothers. Respondents have strong disapproval of the Tates’ behavior and influence among young individuals. Furthermore, respondents express a desire for better role models who promote positive values and respect for women. However, some of our respondents seem not to take an attitude against Tate’s misogynistic discourse. For some, even the gender stereotypes promoted by the brothers are seen as normal.

The survey also reveals that the Tate brothers portray women in a harmful and regressive manner, which reinforces negative stereotypes and may worsen gender inequality and violence, especially in traditional communities. Our results call for the importance of addressing the negative effects of online influencers and emphasize the need for increased awareness and education to counteract harmful messages.

5. Discussion

Some wealthy people could use their power to take advantage of vulnerable women as objects. Wealthy individuals influence the younger generation through displays of misogyny, hegemonic masculinity, and toxic masculinity. Misogynous masculinity practices could obscure the structural and institutional aspects of gender violence [23]. Sexual violence and harassment are often used to reinforce gender hierarchies. These forms of masculinity arise due to social acceptance of such practices [89], leading to negative effects on men’s harmful cultural norms, including physical strength, emotional and sexual aggression, and social dominance [24,25], especially in patriarchal societies [26,27,28,49]. As Levant and Wong [30] argue, hegemonic and toxic masculinities have negative effects on the mental health and social relations of men.

We respond as follows to the research question of our study on how wealthy (online) influencers, masculinity, and misogyny could be related and how this potential relationship portrayed by the Tate brothers is perceived by the younger generation. First, there can be clearly noticed an intersection of class privilege, masculinity, and misogyny, which creates a powerful and dangerous dynamic in which affluent men leverage their financial status to perpetuate harmful gender norms and reinforce patriarchal power structures. Wealthy individuals, such as the Tate brothers, may feel entitled to certain privileges, including sexual access to women, due to their social and economic status. Their financial resources can grant them power and influence, which they may exploit to objectify women, viewing them merely as objects of male desire and consumption. Additionally, such hegemonic wealthy men can shape cultural norms, promoting harmful stereotypes about women and masculinity, thereby perpetuating a culture where women are objectified and toxic masculinity flourishes. Their wealth and status may also shield them from accountability, creating a sense of impunity that allows them to engage in harmful behaviors without fear of repercussions.

Based on these aspects, discussions could be led on three aspects: (1) digital platforms and societal implications of the online wealthy influencers; (2) poor regulatory (online) environments and the need to enforce better laws on digital platforms; and (3) societal enablers of figures like the Tate brothers.

(1)

The actions of the Tate brothers on digital platforms could contribute to violence, misogyny, sexual crimes, homophobia [32,33,39], and even bullying [12,34] and sexual objectification of women. For the Tate brothers, women are seen as objects for their desires. On TikTok, they have amassed thousands of followers by showcasing their lavish lifestyle and entrepreneurial skills, particularly in making quick money. Additionally, as our survey revealed, younger adults increasingly view Tate’s entrepreneurial skills as having a darker side, which involves attracting young women for video chats and prostitution. The societal implications of online influencers like Tristan and Andrew Tate, who promote misogyny, are profound and far-reaching. By leveraging their wealth and influence, these figures normalize harmful stereotypes about masculinity, emphasizing aggression, dominance, and the objectification of women. Their content often glorifies material success and physical strength, pressuring young men to conform to these ideals and equating their self-worth with financial status and possessions. This not only perpetuates gender inequality but also fosters an environment where misogynistic attitudes and behaviors are normalized. The widespread reach of their social media platforms amplifies their impact, influencing a large audience and potentially radicalizing young men. This can lead to increased instances of gender-based violence, the devaluation of women, and the reinforcement of patriarchal power structures. The normalization of such behaviors and attitudes poses a significant threat to societal progress toward gender equality and respectful, inclusive communities.

(2)

There is a pressing need for more stringent online regulatory environments in Romania. The Tate brothers have exploited social media and their online influence to promote and justify their misogynistic views and the objectification and exploitation of women in their business, which is facilitated by Romania’s permissive laws. They strategically chose to settle in Romania, a country known for its excellent Internet connectivity and lenient regulations on misogyny. Their ability to present online courses on rapid wealth accumulation has attracted a large following of young people across various social media platforms, through which they recruit young women for video chat activities. This highlights the need for regulatory reforms to prevent the perpetuation of such harmful practices,

(3)

Societal factors that enable figures like the Tate brothers can be categorized into four levels. First, we must ensure access to justice for both women and men. Second, we must advocate for a more gender-equal society in Romania and elsewhere. Third, it is essential to work toward societies free from discrimination and stigmatization against women. Lastly, we should enhance collaboration across various social development sectors to reduce the exclusion of women and even to break the cycle of poverty that disproportionately affects them.

The main findings of our study focus on the perceptions of educated urban young men and women regarding the image of women portrayed by two members of the wealthy class, Tristan and Andrew Tate. We addressed this aspect by revealing that the majority of our respondents reject the Tates’ practices of treating women as objects. However, we also discovered that some respondents view Andrew and Tristan Tate as role models, appreciating their perceived intelligence and management skills. In comparison to other recent studies on misogyny which have highlighted the negative influence of online influencers such as Kevin Samuels, Joe Rogan, and Dan Bilzerian and personalities in positions of power, such as Donald Trump [54] and Sean “Diddy” Combs [14,60,61,62], our research indicates that the Tates also normalize misogyny using derogatory language and perpetuating harmful stereotypes and attitudes towards women. This normalization of misogyny can lead to a range of negative consequences, including the reinforcement of gender inequality, the devaluation of women, and the perpetuation of gender-based violence [64]. This can also contribute to unhealthy relationship dynamics, victim-blaming narratives, and the marginalization of women [59,90]. Therefore, we must counteract these harmful influences to foster a more equitable and respectful society by educating young and adult audiences to identify and reject such discourse. As objectification of women is also induced by society, young women whom the Tates abused could have longer-term mental health problems such as depression, body-shaming, sexual dysfunction, and eating disorders [8,44,45,46].

6. Conclusions

By examining the intersection of social media influencers and gender dynamics, this study provides insights into how most younger respondents disagree with the way in which online platforms can be used to reinforce masculinity and exploitative practices. We, therefore, underline the need for further thorough analysis of online influences and the promotion of awareness and education to counteract damaging narratives against women.

Our study contributes to the theoretical understanding of privileged online influencers, masculinity [23,27,40], and misogyny [14,15] by highlighting the role of wealthy class influential figures like Tristan and Andrew Tate in perpetuating these harmful ideologies. The practical implications of our study emphasize the need to defend women’s rights against misogyny and violence. We need more vigilance on the discourse of wealthy online influencers in shaping societal values and behaviors and a call for increased awareness, better education, and the promotion of positive role models to mitigate the influence of such harmful online influencers on young audiences, aiming to prevent the perpetuation of gender-based violence and inequality.

The online presence of the Tate Brothers, the display of their wealth, and controversial views and homophobic rhetoric exemplify how class privilege men leverage wealth and influence to perpetuate harmful gender norms. This behavior is dangerous as they are seen as role models by many young people, especially from marginalized backgrounds, who aspire to similar financial success and status. By normalizing regressive ideologies, the Tate brothers’ messages propagate gender violence and misogyny, influencing impressionable individuals. The respondents to our study mostly disapprove of the Tate Brothers’ behavior, but they seem not to take attitude against their misogynistic attitudes and discourse, perceiving some of the gender stereotypes promoted by the brothers as normal as they state that women in the Tate brothers’ entourage are stupid.

To sum up, the rise of the Tate brothers exemplifies the dangerous intersection of social media’s power and misogynistic ideologies, highlighting the persistent appeal of regressive gender norms and the harmful impact on societal attitudes towards women, necessitating efforts to challenge and dismantle these toxic narratives. The profound impact of such personalities as the Tate brothers can perpetuate gender-based violence and inequality. Their portrayal of women as objects and their promotion of a luxurious lifestyle resonates with many young people, especially those from marginalized backgrounds, who may adopt such regressive behavior in their pursuit of wealth and class status. This highlights the need for some policy recommendations, including the urgent need for increased vigilance by law enforcement, stricter regulations, the need for national and international authorities and NGOs to improve the surveillance of misogynic men’s discourses and practices, and comprehensive education to counteract the damaging narratives propagated by such influencers. By raising awareness and promoting positive role models, we can mitigate the influence of harmful personalities and foster a more equitable and just society.

Our study has several limitations and potential areas for follow-up research. First, we conducted the survey exclusively with educated young and younger adults (under 40 years old). Future studies could include participants from a broader age range and various professional backgrounds. Second, we could expand the sample size of interviews and surveys in both Romania and the United Kingdom to create a more comprehensive understanding of the misogyny and masculinity associated with the Tate brothers. Lastly, conducting systematic analyses of social media and news articles could provide deeper insights into how the issue of misogyny surrounding the Tate brothers is reflected in the media.