Former WAFL Player Faces Backlash Over Controversial Social Media Directive
Tom Baulch, a 26-year-old former WAFL player turned social media personality, has found himself at the centre of a significant online controversy. Known by his online moniker Prime Train, Baulch sparked widespread criticism after publishing an Instagram post that encouraged male followers to sever their digital connections with female influencers.
The Controversial Message That Ignited Debate
In his now-notorious Instagram post titled "Unfollow Every Female Influencer," Baulch presented a directive that quickly drew condemnation from users across the platform. The former footballer advised his male audience that they "shouldn't be following girls that you aren't dating or that could be distracting you." He further cautioned against engaging with content he described as "promiscuous photos," asserting that "no one wants to see your name under a girl's photo."
The post concluded with a call for self-control: "Control your lust. Control your brain. Control what you see. If a man can control lust, he can control his goals."
Immediate Backlash and Comparisons to Andrew Tate
The response to Baulch's message was swift and overwhelmingly critical. Comments flooded his post, with many users labelling his perspective as "juvenile and sexist" while others expressed that they found his message "deeply concerning." High-profile Australian influencers including Olivia Rogers, Georgie Parker and Laura Henshaw joined the chorus of disapproval in the comments section.
One user challenged the underlying assumptions of Baulch's post, questioning: "By this logic, should men also avoid the streets, workplaces and gyms so they don't accidentally see women and 'lose control'? Women aren't the problem, and men aren't helpless creatures who need to curate their lives around avoiding them."
Perhaps most significantly, numerous commenters drew direct parallels between Baulch's rhetoric and that of self-proclaimed misogynist Andrew Tate, with some dubbing him "WA's Andrew Tate" and declaring "this man is the new Andrew Tate."
Baulch's Defence and Clarification Attempt
In an exclusive interview with PerthNow, Baulch defended the core message of his post while acknowledging problems with its delivery. "It was the delivery — the feedback was very very clear that the post was done completely the wrong way," he conceded.
The social media personality attempted to clarify his original intent, explaining: "I follow female influencers, I have a lot of female influencers that I love for fitness and fashion, but I don't follow anyone that does any type of pornography or Only Fans. That was meant to be the overarching message of my post, and that was not clear enough so I should have worded it much better."
Baulch also revealed that the controversial nature of the post was somewhat intentional, describing it as an "engaging hook" designed to capture attention in the competitive social media landscape. "No one would be commenting if it wasn't some engaging hook, so you run a fine line with a lot of risk — and I guess I flew too close to the sun this time," he reflected.
Rejecting the Andrew Tate Comparison
When confronted with the comparisons to controversial internet personality Andrew Tate, Baulch firmly rejected any similarity. "I've got an amazing mum, an amazing sister, and an amazing partner, something Andrew Tate doesn't have," he asserted. "He's got multiple girlfriends, multiple cars, and all that, and that's probably the big difference between Andrew Tate and I."
Baulch emphasised his commitment to family values, stating: "What I value most in my life is family and my partner as well, and I think that is what also sparked me to make my post."
Academic Analysis of the Controversy
Curtin University professor of gender politics Amy Dobson identified clear parallels between Baulch's controversial post and discourse promoted by 'manosphere' influencers like Andrew Tate. "We can definitely see similar kinds of discourse going on here that this certain masculinity is about self control and the narrative or discourses that women, just by their very existence, disrupt that," Professor Dobson observed.
The academic expressed particular concern about Baulch's focus on cutting out only "promiscuous" women, noting: "I find the use of that word really interesting and problematic, as if we can judge someone's sexual promiscuity through the way they dress. That's obviously a kind of problematic play into rape culture, and the assumption that we can judge someone's sexual behaviour, or that we should be, by the way they dress or represent themselves in photos online."
Professor Dobson further explained: "We see it all the time in everyday digital culture, this kind of assumption that if women are presenting themselves in a certain way, or in a common everyday, feminised self presentation, that somehow they're putting themselves up for judgement around their appearance. It's a really problematic assumption to play into — not just objectifying women, but that someone's self presentation online has anything to do with their sexual activity or desire."
Apology and Final Reflection
Following the intense backlash, Baulch was compelled to issue an apology on his Instagram platform. Speaking to PerthNow, he expressed that he was "100 per cent sorry if I offended you" while maintaining that his message had been misunderstood.
"I think (the post) has been blown way out of context," Baulch reflected. "But everyone is entitled to feel the way they feel, I guess. At the end of the day though, I know who I am and I know what I was saying so that's all that really matters."
The controversy highlights ongoing tensions in digital culture regarding gender representation, influencer responsibility, and the boundaries of acceptable discourse on social media platforms.
