A petition to get Spotify to remove Andrew Tate’s instructional trafficking courses has reached over 45,500 signatures.
The petition, created by anti-trafficking advocate Renee Chopping and Collective Shout, is demanding the digital streaming service to immediately remove Tate’s courses and “commit to stronger content policies that prevent its platform from being used to promote sexual exploitation”.
It has accused Spotify of “cashing in on the exploitation of women and girls” and of “hosting courses by misogynist influencer and accused sex trafficker Andrew Tate – courses that actively teach men how to manipulate, control, and profit from the exploitation of women.”
Chopping described herself as a trauma counsellor supporting survivors of sex trafficking who has seen how contents such as Tate’s can fuel global harm, especially with young people in Australian schools.
“In classrooms, I’ve sat with young boys who admire influencers like Andrew Tate, believing that dominance, aggression, and entitlement define success and masculinity,” she said. “I’ve also listened to young girls express the daily impact of these toxic ideals – how they feel pressured to meet unrealistic beauty standards, tolerate degradation and rape threats, and navigate a world where they are seen as objects rather than equals.”
In her petition, she accused Tate of recruiting women “under the pretence of a romantic relationship, which is also known as the ‘loverboy’ or ‘romeo’ pimp method – manipulating victims into trusting him, only to later force or coerce them into sexual exploitation under the guise of love and care.”
“I’ve counselled survivors – some trafficked as young as 9 – who have endured repeated abuse at the hands of men who used the same tactics Tate brags about. It takes years, if not a lifetime, of rehabilitative care to undo the damage, yet Tate boasts about profiting from their pain. And Spotify is helping him cash in.”
“Despite multiple allegations of rape, sex trafficking, and abuse – including trafficking of minors – Spotify continues to give Tate a megaphone. His courses, some requiring a paid subscription to access, show men how to recruit and exploit women for pornography, under the guise of ‘business advice’. Spotify directly profits from these lessons in predation.”
Caitlin Roper, campaigns manager at Collective Shout, added, “Not only do these courses document Tate’s own sexual exploitation of women, he equips eager prospective pimps and traffickers with the tools to exploit women for profit themselves.”
“Tate also offers consulting services, to help them get set up and to produce promotional videos in order to recruit women. These courses incite violence and abuse against women.”
Collective Shout, a grassroots campaigns movement working to end the objectification of women and the sexualisation of girls, has previously called out Spotify for hosting explicit audio porn, hardcore porn images and sexually explicit fanfiction.
Now, it is calling on Spotify to remove Tate’s harmful courses on how to traffic women “as a matter of urgency.”
“We’re calling on Spotify to take down all of Tate’s instructional trafficking courses: PHD (“Pimpin Hoes Degree”), Webcam, and OnlyFans Fortunes and ensure Tate cannot use their platform to profit from crimes against women,” Roper said.
On her social media platform, Chopping announced yesterday that Spotify has already removed two of Andrew Tate’s exploitative courses, and encouraged supporters to take the necessary steps to demand it remove the remaining course on the streaming service.
“Just ONE more to go! We’re so close to victory. Let’s make sure Spotify takes the final step,” she wrote. “We’re almost at the finish line. One last push, and we WIN. Let’s do this!”
She advised supporters to email Spotify directly, report the remaining course under “Hate Speech/Exploitation/Violence” and share her Instagram post while tagging @Spotify.
“The more noise we make, the faster they’ll act,” she wrote.
Last week, a new study by Monash University found that Tate’s most harmful content is being “packaged as a self-improvement product” for boys and men and that the content often contained concerning parallels to other forms of radicalisation, such as terrorism and religious extremism.
“What gives this content its appeal is that it’s packaged as a self-improvement product with hateful themes subtly woven in,” said Dr Stephanie Wescott, one of the study’s authors. “As with any form of extremism, this feel and appearance of non-threatening, non-radical, and life-improving support is what makes it insidious, attractive and ultimately influential.”
Previous studies from the same university have revealed that the anti-feminist “manfluencer” has been casting an influence over male teenagers, with teachers reporting seeing images of Tate on computer desktop backgrounds, and students using common body language and gestures made by Tate.
Last month, an American woman filed a countersuit against Andrew and Tristan Tate — the first US civil case against the Tate brothers, alleging she was lured from Florida to Romania by Tristan Tate under the pretense of a romantic relationship. She accused Tate of conspiring to traffic her for sex work.
The brothers had previously filed a defamation lawsuit against the woman for cooperating with Romanian authorities, who are prosecuting them in Romania for charges related to sex trafficking and other serious sex crimes, including against minors.
Dani Pinter, Senior Vice President and Director of the Law Center at the National Center on Sexual Exploitation said the woman “did the right thing by telling the truth of what she saw and experienced while she was in Romania to Romanian authorities.”
“And for that, Andrew and Tristan Tate have worked to ruin her life by suing her and her parents – an abuse of the legal system and blatant witness intimidation,” she said. “She is fighting back against this use of lawfare and her counterclaim against the Tate brothers shows that she will not be intimidated by their attempts to silence her.”
“[She] has been relentlessly harassed, threatened, and sued for merely cooperating with Romanian authorities. The Tate brothers’ lawsuit against [her] is a grave abuse of process brought—not for any legitimate purpose—but instead, to bully and harass [her] into recanting her testimony. [She] was left with no choice but to countersue, and deserves every measure of justice.”
Image credit: Shutterstock