Of course it has to be done too. I suppose I’m not really seeing what the two things have to do with each other though.
Police and justice systems should go after people who sex traffic women.
Police and justice systems should go after people who harm children.
These just seem like two separately true statements. Can you explain the connection you think they have? What does prosecuting Andrew Tate have to do with these children? Do you think Andrew Tate is harming children?
So the question simply is… why aren’t they doing both?
I’ll tell you why they aren’t doing both… because they won’t like what they find, in who is involved in being party to that kinda crime.
As a female, I’ve been approached by all kinds of men, who propose all kinds of crap to me… my free-will dictates that I do what is best for me… which is use my legs and walk away. Sadly, children don’t have that option.
I don’t know anything about the Romanian system failing to even try to protect children in the way you’re saying. But if Andrew Tate is harming children, you’re right, they should be protecting children from him too, not just women.
Apparently minors are also on a separate list of trafficking charges being investigated, against him… according to bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-65959097
[b][i]“The trial will not start immediately and is expected to take several years.
A Romanian judge now has 60 days to inspect the case files before it can be sent to trial.
There are also separate charges still under investigation which could lead to a separate indictment, including money laundering and trafficking of minors.”[/i][/b]
Several years seems quite an extreme length of time, to investigate so few charges… unless there’s more to the matter than just the several charges, made. 
…but if there isn’t, several years is long… imo.
Yes, apparently the legal system of Romania doesn’t have much respect for the idea of a speedy trial.
Tate went to Romania because he liked their legal system, according to himself. Ironic.
_
I, personally, have no idea whether he is guilty of [all or some of] the charges, made against him…
The evidence, will decide.
I don’t believe you. I think you do know and you’re hiding it from us.
_
Lol!^
I want the truth, and you’re going to give it to me, one way or another.
If you consider yourself a man, who knows a woman they care for, be they mother, daughter , partner of wife you cannot speak a good word for Tate.
He is scum.
Anyone who thinks otherwise hold your manhood cheap to follow such a pathetic incel moron.
Sculptor… doesn’t saying incel sort of neutralize the good of the rest of what you said?
this feels like an ad hom just sayin
Oh yeah… ; )
Um! 
I think he is basically an incel, since he does not regard women as human beings. Celibacy is avoiding sex with people.
Women are, for him, objects to jack to.
Someone who has lots of sex isn’t an incel. Just pointing out the obvious here.
there are a lot of women out there who in private want to be treated as though they’re not human. some real fucked up bitches out there i’m telling you
here is one example
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cgdZVLfi_Y[/youtube]
Ah yes, the well-known contradiction in female psychology. And the bane of nice guys everywhere.
Women going for the “bad boy” type, especially when he ignores them or treats them like dirt. Funny stuff.
Nobody wants to be sexually harassed or sexually assaulted.
But women can’t have sexual interest if no means yes isn’t engaged.
I actually went through all the stages of grieving …
Things like anger, sadness, depression, acceptance. There are 4 billion women I can’t have sex with because I care about the no means yes problem. Even if women know…. They have no interest.
Women are non beings to me. It’s actually quite surreal. The men who choose the no means yes to get access are also non beings to me.
Imagine being so densely autistic you can’t even navigate basic non-verbal communication with the opposite sex.