A viral photo of Andrew Tate in Speedos led to conspiracy theorists suggesting he doesn't have male genitalia and is therefore a trans man.

In a post on Facebook on Tuesday (6 August) which was also cross-posted to X/Twitter, someone named Rob Anderson shared a photo of Tate in what appeared to be a pair of Speedos, also nicknamed budgie smugglers in Australia, and zoomed-in close on his crotch area.

“I guess she forgot to wear her fake,” Anderson captioned the photos, alongside an aubergine emoji, misgendering Tate – who identifies as a cisgender man – and implying that there was no male genitalia present, thus making the controversial figure trans.

Anderson also said Tate was among a number of people who are notable for being “part of the inverted show”.

Several of Anderson’s followers commented that they believed in the conspiracy too, with only a number of people pushing back, leading Anderson to say: “Don’t like what I post, think it’s crazy, get off my page. I don’t care, it’s the truth.”

Anderson further claimed that Tate is transgender in order to “blaspheme the Father”, referring to God.

…

When asked if he supports transgender people, Tate said he “supports individual liberty” because he is “a libertarian”.

However, he has also said that YouTuber Mr Beast and trans influencer Kris Tyson were part of a “psyop” to normalise transgender people among children.

They are coming for your children, everybody at home. Your children are the future which they want to control,” he claimed.

Tate is also a self-proclaimed misogynist and claims to be the “pinnacle of masculinity.”

  • jabjoe@feddit.ukEnglish
    61·
    3 months ago

    And if we mock him for being dickless, doesn’t that make us hypocrites? He mocks trans and men who don’t want to be like him. How about we just keep calling him a criminal scale dickhead regardless. Let’s avoid the trans baiting.

    • DarkThoughts@fedia.io
      22·
      3 months ago

      No, it doesn’t, because we just use what he thinks are valid reasons to attack others, which means it would also upsets him if fired back at him. You’re arguing like racists who claim that calling someone a racist is also racism.

      • jabjoe@feddit.ukEnglish
        41·
        3 months ago

        But that’s the thing, it’s not a valid reason. He’s wrong. By using it as a reason against him, it undermines saying it’s a not a valid reason.

          • jabjoe@feddit.ukEnglish
            2·
            3 months ago

            But he’s not making trans jokes about himself. It’s others directing it at him, like he directed it at others. Frankly I can’t believe we’re still talking him!

        • intensely_human@lemm.ee
          13·
          3 months ago

          This debate highlights an excellent example of framing, for anyone who’s just now learning the concept.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        13·
        3 months ago

        And your strategy implicitly values upsetting Andrew Tate over upholding your own standards of behavior. This is known as a negative external focus, aka being a hater.

        Don’t base your strategy on hate. It’s a path to the dark side. Keep your eye on the ball and pay attention to your values hierarchy.