Andrew Tate’s social media ban is “light” punishment, shows lack of equality – The Elm

Andrew Tate’s social media ban is “light” punishment, shows lack of equality – The Elm


By Iris Scherr

Staff Writer

Internet personality Andrew Tate is being accused of the same crimes as actress Amber Heard; only one of them is being sued. 

Tate, former kickboxer and current internet personality, was accused of assaulting a woman on Big Brother (2016). He has also made many rude comments on social media platforms, causing him to be banned on the following platforms: Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, Twitch, and Twitter, according to CNET.

“I’m not saying they’re property. I am saying they are given to the man and belong to the man,” Tate said in an episode of the BFF’s podcast.

Many critics viewed his comments as possessive and objectifying women. In addition to his history of abuse, it makes sense that Tate was banned from social media.

As said in a TikTok video by user @jericoserious, “Amber Heard and Andrew Tate are both accused of the same thing, and yet men still champion Andrew.”

This video brings up a bitter irony that people are defending Tate’s right to freedom of speech despite him being an abuser. 

Meanwhile, Heard, in conflict with Johnny Depp, was sued for almost $10 million for posting a line in her op-ed, according to The Washington Post, that said she was in an abusive relationship. The op-ed did not mention Depp’s name, instead saying, “[Two] years ago, I became a public figure on domestic abuse, and I felt the full force of our culture’s wrath for women who speak out.”

While many people argue that Heard should have been tried for abuse, she was instead sued for defamation.

Both Tate and Heard are being punished for using their platforms. However, one was sued for millions of dollars on a trial where massive misinformation was spread. 

Heard continues to be in debt while Depp receives fame and recognition. 

Should Tate be banned from social media? The answer should come as no surprise: yes, he should. If Heard can be put into debt for life for speaking out about her experience in a toxic and abusive environment, then a known abuser can handle not posting on social media.

One could easily see Tate being banned from social media as a lighter punishment than going into debt for millions of dollars and receiving so much backlash to the point where Heard had to limit comments on her social media posts. 

Taking Tate off of social media was the least that could be done when compared to the Heard trial. His comments are encouraging toxic masculinity and hate in many viewers and fans who may not understand the weight of the situation.

According to Jezebel, a twelfth grade teacher said, “[My students who are boys] haven’t been given not only the literacy skills, but the critical literacy [skills they need].”

By removing him from these platforms, young boys are now less impacted by his “freedom of speech.” 

Freedom of speech is not equivalent to hate speech, and should never be used to hide accountability, especially to celebrities like Tate, who have endless amount of money to spend on educating themselves further to work on understanding the history of marginalized groups of people. 

This brings up a new question entirely: how can we all be equal if we’re not all viewed as important? Heard’s voice was important, but we live in a society where some are valued more than others.

If Heard can be tried for using her platform to speak out about an abusive relationship, Tate’s harmful comments are enough of a reason to ban him from many social media platforms.

Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Photo Caption: Internet personality Andrew Tate is banned from many social media sites, including Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok, due to his recent comments about women and his history of abuse.


Source link