Andrew Tate is far from an ideal of masculinity, but it might not be bad for boys to look up to him.
obsidian
approved
Published: 2026-06-21
Added: 2026-07-01
--
andrewtate
masculinity
philosophy
psychology
selfimprovement
source/instagram
tate
---
title: "Andrew Tate is far from an ideal of masculinity, but it might not be bad for boys to look up to him.
To be clear on my thesis: toxic masculinity is morally bad (it is an embodiment of vice), but it p"
type: source
source_type: instagram
platform: instagram
url: "https://www.instagram.co...
Show more ▾
---
title: "Andrew Tate is far from an ideal of masculinity, but it might not be bad for boys to look up to him.
To be clear on my thesis: toxic masculinity is morally bad (it is an embodiment of vice), but it p"
type: source
source_type: instagram
platform: instagram
url: "https://www.instagram.com/reel/DSijFLRDven/"
source_id: "instagram:reel/dsijflrdven"
creator: ""
captured_at: "2026-06-18"
processed_with: "yt-dlp + faster-whisper"
capture_status: media_downloaded
review_status: intake
confidence: high
relevance_score: 50
source_chat: "ig-fb-export"
topics:
- philosophy
- mindset
tags:
- source/instagram
---
# Andrew Tate is far from an ideal of masculinity, but it might not be bad for boys to look up to him.
To be clear on my
## Source Metadata
- **Platform:** instagram
- **URL:** https://www.instagram.com/reel/DSijFLRDven/
- **Relevance:** 50/100
- **Topics:** philosophy, mindset
- **Source:** ig-fb-export
- **Method:** yt-dlp + faster-whisper | **Confidence:** high
- **Language:** en | **Duration:** 162.425s
## Summary
Toxic masculinity is a necessary evil for the proper development of men. This means that attacking it while morally justifiable poses deeper social developmental issues for boys. Stay with me now. I propose that masculinity is a set of character virtues. Courage, willpower, leadership, physical capa...
## Corrected Transcript / Extracted Text
Toxic masculinity is a necessary evil for the proper development of men. This means that attacking it while morally justifiable poses deeper social developmental issues for boys. Stay with me now. I propose that masculinity is a set of character virtues. Courage, willpower, leadership, physical capacity, independence, and confidence, perhaps among many others. Aristotle explained that all virtues lie at the golden mean between a vice of deficiency and a vice of excess. For example, take courage, too little courage in your coward, too much in your rash, or willpower, too little in your indulgent, too much in your self deprecating. This same schema works for every single virtue. Now here, we find three archetypes of man, the boy, the man, and the villain. As boys, we find ourselves with vices of deficiency along every axis. We are physically and emotionally helpless, scared, indulgent to our desires, submissive to and dependent upon our parents within a world that we have no experience within. As we grow into adolescence, we're told to grow up to stop being wimpy, soft, and gay, to be a man. So how does one go from a boy to a man from a vice of deficiency to a virtue? Aristotle said you have to overshoot the mean by replicating those who act according to the traits that you wish to embody. For example, if you're a coward, you must strive to be rash in order to eventually self-correct and embody the virtue of courage. Why? Because you can't possess a virtue unless you have a capacity for the two vices that frame it. A man cannot be courageous without the capacity to be rash, to make hard, potentially dangerous decisions on an instinct. He cannot be physically competent to protect and provide for his loved ones without the capacity for violence. He can't be independent without the capacity to detach from others and his feelings about them. The same scheme applies to every virtue. You must have the capacity of the villain in order to have the virtue of the man. As boys, we intuitively understood this. It's why damn near every dude wants to idolize rash, domineering, violent, detached, narcissistic men. It's why boys look up to villains real and fictional. Not because the villain is good. The villain doesn't represent virtue any more than the boy. But the villain represents a capacity that boys must possess before they can be virtuous, before they can be men. Therefore, as a society, if we want virtuous, strong, capable, courageous men, we must first grant boys the capacity, the freedom to admire and replicate villains. Not because the villain is good, but because he is necessary for the good and man.
## Caption / Post Text
Andrew Tate is far from an ideal of masculinity, but it might not be bad for boys to look up to him.
To be clear on my thesis: toxic masculinity is morally bad (it is an embodiment of vice), but it plays an important developmental role for boys to become morally good men.
#selfimprovement #masculinity #tate #andrewtate #psychology #philosophy #
## Key Claims
- Toxic masculinity is a necessary evil for the proper development of men.
- This means that attacking it while morally justifiable poses deeper social developmental issues for boys.
- I propose that masculinity is a set of character virtues.
- Courage, willpower, leadership, physical capacity, independence, and confidence, perhaps among many others.
- Aristotle explained that all virtues lie at the golden mean between a vice of deficiency and a vice of excess.
## Topic Application
- **philosophy**: Philosophy
- **mindset**: Mindset/psychology
## Caveats
Show full content ▾