Australian influencer Abbie Chatfield sparks outrage over message to young American men
The clip, which was posted earlier this week, has since been deleted by Chatfield but is being circulated online by furious Australians.
In the video, Chatfield appears to address American 'incels' — a term which refers to a subculture of young men who are hostile towards women because they consider themselves unable to attract women sexually.
'Americans, when are you going to do it? Why isn't it already done?' Chatfield says in the video.
'Every day there is another (gun symbol) happening. Awful for your country. Awful, right.
'Why don't you redirect this energy towards something else? There are all these incels going 'no one wants to f*** me' so they go and do (gun symbol).
'Do you know what would actually make people respect you and maybe actually want to f*** you? Is if you did it.
'You'd get heaps of fan mail. Oh my god.
'Just do it.
'Like you are all doing it every day anyway.'
Social media users have flocked online to share the clip, calling for punitive measures to be taken against Chatfield.
Victorian Senator Ralph Babet slammed Chatfield's behaviour, noting she recently interviewed Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ahead of the 2025 federal election.
'Prime Minister Albanese must immediately condemn Abbie Chatfield's vile rhetoric,' he wrote on X.
Another Australian said: 'Chatfield needs to be arrested for inciting violence.'
'This is the person who Albanese promotes.'
'What is going on in this world that people like Abbie Chatfield think this is acceptable?!' a third person wrote.
7NEWS.com.au has contacted Abbie Chatfield's management team for comment.
Chatfield, a left-wing commentator with over 1.225 million followers on Instagram and TikTok, is no stranger to controversy.
Last year, she was blasted online after calling Americans 'uneducated' in the wake of Donald Trump's presidential victory.
Earlier this year, Chatfield interviewed Labor PM Anthony Albanese on her podcast It's A Lot.
The sit-down sparked an Australian Electoral Commission investigation amid concerns it may have breached electoral laws by not including an authorisation message.
Authorisation statements are legally required on political content from someone communicating an electoral or political matter.
Chatfield was ultimately cleared of any wrong doing after the AEC department found her content 'does not need an authorisation statement'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
44 minutes ago
- Sky News AU
Trump-Putin meeting will be a ‘listening exercise' amid ongoing Ukraine war
The White House announced US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will meet in Anchorage, Alaska to discuss the war in Ukraine. The Trump Administration called the meeting a 'listening exercise', which the American President hopes will help bring an end to the war. The meeting will take place without Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky, who is highly sceptical about what it can achieve.
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
Victoria and WA's surging crime stats expose The Conversation expert's claim that Australia is becoming less violent
The term 'gaslighting' was born in the arts, but it found its true home in academia. And today, nowhere is the practice more pervasive than in Australia's universities. As readers know all too well, these institutions have become safe havens for left-leaning gaslighters, skilled at persuading the public that what they see and hear can't be trusted. It's a culture built on denial, where tidy theories and carefully scrubbed statistics are paraded out to wash away the fears, frustrations, and daily struggles of ordinary Australians. The latest example comes courtesy of Griffith University's Samara McPhedran, who confidently informs the nation that violent crime isn't rising. Such a claim presents a very narrow-minded version of reality. It's the kind of contrived intellectual thought that can only survive in the stale, insulated air of a lecture theatre, far from the streets where the damage is actually done. Perhaps Dr. McPhedran should speak with the families in Victoria watching their state's crime rate surge by 15 percent in a single year, each percentage point measured in stolen cars, broken bones, and lives violently knocked off course. Or she should consider the lengths the Victorian Allan government have gone to recently in an attempt to reduce violent crime, including the bizarre move to place more than 40 bins at police stations across the state so machete-wielding gangsters can safely dispose of their weaponry. She might then visit the residents of Perth's suburbs, where more than 25 suburbs have endured crime surges topping 30 percent in just 12 months. Perhaps she should speak with the parents who bolt their doors before the sun slips behind the rooftops, with the shopkeepers sweeping glass from their doorways for the twentieth time this year, with the pensioners who have abandoned the short walk to the corner shop because the risk now outweighs the reward. Instead, she remains sealed inside a bubble, an elitist echo chamber utterly detached from the realities and hardships of the people whose lives her theories claim to explain. If McPhedran's analysis reads like a masterclass in sidestepping the obvious, that's because it is. She leans on decades-old datasets, sanding down the jagged spikes of recent surges with long-term averages that bury the scale of the problem and don't engage with other aspects, such as recent rises in crime rates generally. In Victoria alone, police logged 627,268 criminal offences over a single twelve-month stretch (a shocking 17.1 per cent jump). Youth offenders now dominate robbery figures. In the 12 months to March 2025, according to the Crime Statistics Agency a range of theft offences were up significantly: motor vehicle theft was up 39.3 per cent, theft of number plates up 49.6 per cent and retail theft up 38.6 per cent. Cost-of-living pressures have driven this type of crime to levels that are breaking small businesses. Knife attacks have cut through once-secure communities, turning quiet shopping strips into places where tension lingers with every step. Yet McPhedran waves it away, insisting that reliable statistics aren't always available and that violent crime rates have fallen when compared to decades ago. When the evidence refuses to fit, she doesn't grapple with it. Unlike the principal research fellow, the public doesn't have the luxury of retreating into a spreadsheet. They live with the fallout of policy failure every day. They watch as the Albanese government's soft-on-crime stance emboldens offenders who know that the most likely consequence of repeat theft or assault is a token caution, not a meaningful sentence. They see state governments trial diversion programs that sound virtuous in a seminar room but collapse in the chaos of real streets with real victims. And while those failures multiply, academics step forward to supply the intellectual alibi for political leaders more intent on shielding their ideology than shielding their citizens. This is the point where the insulated arrogance of modern academia ceases to be an oddity and becomes a political weapon. Theories that clash with lived experience might remain harmless curiosities if they stayed buried in dusty journals, but they never do. They seep into ministerial speeches and bureaucratic talking points; they harden into legislative proposals. They turn genuine public concern into a 'perception problem' to be managed, not solved. Once that narrative takes root, the facts are bent until they break. The modern university system is built to protect that narrative. Scholars who dare to challenge progressive orthodoxy on crime, immigration, or public order find themselves quietly cut off from funding, promotions, and platforms. Those who repeat it are crowned as 'independent experts,' their words treated as gospel by journalists eager to paint public dissent as nothing more than hysteria. The result is a closed loop in which those most insulated from the damage their ideas cause are the very ones most empowered to write the laws everyone else must live under. Over time, this drip-feed of denial trains the public to second-guess themselves—until eventually, we begin to gaslight ourselves. Mention the knife-wielding teenagers roaming your streets, and you'll be branded a paranoid provocateur. Point to the boarded-up shopfronts in your town, and you'll be told you're cherry-picking. Describe a loved one's assault on public transport, and you'll get a lecture about 'isolated incidents.' The aim is not to convince you you're wrong; it's to make you doubt you were ever right. This gaslighting reaches far beyond crime statistics; it's now woven into the reflexes of Australia's academic and political class. The unspoken assumption is always that ordinary people misread reality, while they alone hold a higher, purer truth. In a university setting, that arrogance is tedious – but in the halls of power, it's lethal. Crime policy leaves no margin for theoretical blunders; every wrong assumption is paid for in screaming sirens, scared citizens, and suburbs drained of trust. Australians deserve far more than ivory-tower ignorance. They deserve leaders willing to face brutal truths—men and women prepared to say plainly that crime is climbing and the nation is hurting. They also deserve to know that the truth on their streets outweighs the fairy tales pushed by officials whose paychecks depend on avoiding inconvenient facts. And they deserve academics who leave the seminar room for the suburbs, who speak with business owners, walk with police, and listen—really listen—to victims. Because only then can their theories carry the weight of the world they claim to explain. John Mac Ghlionn is a researcher and essayist who writes on psychology and social relations. He has a keen interest in social dysfunction and media manipulation.
Sky News AU
2 hours ago
- Sky News AU
'Appalling mistake': Prime Minister Anthony Albanese ‘adopts' language of terrorists in calling slain fighters ‘martyrs'
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has come under fire for 'adopting the language of terrorists' during his press conference to announce Australia would recognise a Palestinian state. Mr Albanese, alongside Foreign Affairs Minister Penny Wong on Monday, said Australia would formally recognise Palestine in the UN next month. Sky News host Chris Kenny said he was 'surprised' Mr Albanese's use of the word 'martyrs' had not gotten more backlash. 'Our government has made it clear that there can be no role for the terrorists of Hamas in any future Palestinian state. This is one of the commitments Australia has sought and received from President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority,' Mr Albanese said. 'The Palestinian Authority has reaffirmed it recognises Israel's right to exist in peace and security. It has committed to demilitarise and to hold general elections. 'It is pledged to abolish the system of payments to the families of prisoners and martyrs.' Speaking to Sky News, Shadow Finance Minister James Paterson said it was an 'appalling mistake, I hope'. 'Of course, that is what the Palestinian Authority calls people who get on school buses and blow themselves to smithereens and take Israeli and Jewish children with them,' Mr Paterson told Kenny on Tuesday. 'No Australian Prime Minister should endorse or use language like that. We should call it for what it is. The Palestinian Authority pays money to the family of terrorists after they kill Israelis. It's one of the many reasons why we should not recognise a Palestinian state.' Senator Paterson said the 'flimsy promise of reform' from Palestinian Authority president Mahmoud Abbas should be treated with 'contempt'. Mr Abbas is the Palestinian Authority President, Chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the leader of radical political party Fatah. Fatah has numerous military arms - including the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades which participated in the October 7 attacks in Gaza. Mr Albanese was given assurances about the future of democracy in Palestine, the demilitarisation of the territories and the elimination of Martyr funds by Mr Abbas. The Palestinian Authority operates a so-called 'Martyrs Fund,' which pays monthly stipends to the families of Palestinians killed or imprisoned for carrying out attacks against Israelis civilians. The longer the prison sentence, the higher the payment - with some families receiving the equivalent of $5,155 per month which have been linked to incentivising terrorism. Textbooks used in Palestinian Authority-run schools have long been condemned by international watchdogs for promoting hatred and glorifying violence. In one instance, a children's book about female suicide bomber Hanadi Jaradat - who killed 21 people in a 2003 bombing - was shared by the organisation's South Hebron Directorate of Education.
