• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

High school commencement speaker tells females: stay at home, don’t be CEOs

Your Star said:
I think you are ignoring a lot of context that doesn't paint his message in such a pretty light. Also you are ignoring the words he used, he said the world doesn't need women CEO's, can't get much more clear than that.
Click to expand...

Again, wrong - he didn't say the world doesn't need women CEO's, he said the world doesn't need MORE women CEO's - maybe if you knocked that chip off your shoulder you'd be able to have a rational discussion of the subject. The commencement speaker actually did a great job of addressing a topic that should engender passionate debate, but rational debate too.
 
CanadaJohn said:
What a gross misrepresentation of the words quoted in the OP - and you claim I got it wrong??
Click to expand...

Well - I would be fine with his sentiment if it wasn't aimed at just mothers - but parents in general. Parents should play a more decisive, active role in upbringing their children.

But, no, that was not his focus - thus, it's sexist tripe. . . the same as always:
“I challenge you to devote yourself to your families and your children. If you choose to have a career, God’s blessings upon you,” Heck orated. “But I challenge you to recognize what the world scoffs at, that your greatest role in your life will be that of wife and mother. The greatest impact you could ever contribute to our world is a loving investment in the lives of your precious children. To solve the problems plaguing our society, we don’t need more women CEOs. We need more women as invested mothers.”
Click to expand...

And in reality - what he DOES say - is much more offensive than people realize:
To solve the problems plaguing our society, we don’t need more women CEOs.
Click to expand...
He's basically blaming every issue he sees in society on working mothers. (nevermind that he overexaggerates on his way to trying to make a point)


Marina, sadly, doesn't get what he said (never mind the fathers, according to him - it's all on the mothers - not the parents)
“It was good that he said that,” junior Marina Swaggerty told WRTV. “Parents need to be there for their kids. Lately people are getting too into their jobs and not caring enough about their kids, and they are failing through high school.”
Click to expand...

If he was talking about parents - it would have been a solid and noble statement to make - and very true. He wasn't, though. No, to people like him the world is falling apart because I worked for 5 years as a parent.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
Well - I would be fine with his sentiment if it wasn't aimed at just mothers - but parents in general. Parents should play a more decisive, active role in upbringing their children.

But, no, that was not his focus - thus, it's sexist tripe. . . the same as always:


And in reality - what he DOES say - is much more offensive than people realize:

He's basically blaming every issue he sees in society on working mothers. (nevermind that he overexaggerates on his way to trying to make a point)


Marina, sadly, doesn't get what he said (never mind the fathers, according to him - it's all on the mothers - not the parents)


If he was talking about parents - it would have been a solid and noble statement to make - and very true. He wasn't, though. No, to people like him the world is falling apart because I worked for 5 years as a parent.
Click to expand...

As a poster noted previously, in the entire commencement speech, he does also get into the important role of men as fathers and husbands - the single paragraph quoted in the OP doesn't get into that so it appears it's entirely one-sided.
 
Risky Thicket said:
The men in the United States who would, who do, demand their women stay home are cut from the same bolt of cloth as Peter Heck and the people who support him. Muslim extremists get away with it because the societies in the countries in which they live tolerate/support their extremism. If it were tolerated/supported by the American society at large, US religious extremists would no doubt tell their women the same thing Muslim men tell their women.
Click to expand...
I don't deny that comparisons can be made between non-Muslim sexism/misogyny and Muslim sexism/misogyny. I'm also sure that there are non-Muslim men in this country who, if permitted by US law, would treat women as poorly as many Muslim extremists do. Even so, there are degrees of sexism and misogyny. Telling women to stay at home is a much lesser degree than stoning women who don't do what you want them to. The two, contrary to your implication, are different.

We will have to agree to disagree regarding John Lennon's intent.
Click to expand...
So you disagree that Lennon had good intentions? Why?
 
CanadaJohn said:
As a poster noted previously, in the entire commencement speech, he does also get into the important role of men as fathers and husbands - the single paragraph quoted in the OP doesn't get into that so it appears it's entirely one-sided.
Click to expand...

I don't even understand what was that wrong with what he said, really. The most important job of any parent is the job of raising our children. Of course, being a wife or a husband is far more important than your everyday job you could be doing. Yes, he hinted at traditional roles, but he did so for both men and women. People just need to chill. He didn't say women should not work, ok? Geez...

Anyway, why is everything that is traditional considered sexist? WTF is that about?
 
Henrin said:
I don't even understand what was that wrong with what he said, really. The most important job of any parent is the job of raising our children. Of course, being a wife or a husband is far more important than your everyday job you could be doing. Yes, he hinted at traditional roles, but he did so for both men and women. People just need to chill. He didn't say women should not work, ok? Geez...

Anyway, why is everything that is traditional considered sexist? WTF is that about?
Click to expand...

In fact, he said God bless women who choose to work.
 
CanadaJohn said:
In fact, he said God bless women who choose to work.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The only reason he said the CEO comment is to use it as an example of picking work over family in which that jobs calls for if you have children.

Anyone that says you can be a successful CEO and still put family first has no idea what they are talking about.
 
Dragonfly said:
High school commencement speaker tells females: stay at home, don




I'm gonna guess a few people here at DP think this train of thought hits a big nail squarely on the head. :shock:
Click to expand...



He did NOT say "stay home barefoot, pregnant, ignorant and submissive".



He said "IF you choose a career, bless you", followed by "BUT I challenge you to recognize the greatness of motherhood/etc".



Slightly paraphrased but I see nothing wrong there. So what? Quite a few of the female grads will do exactly that, why denigrate them so as some wish to do?



Who really gives a **** anyway, they're just high school grads. The standard blow-smoke-up-ass "You are the future; go out and change the world!" bull**** isn't any better.

I'd only ever be asked to speak to a graduating class one time, because I'd tell them the truth. "None of you are going to change the world in any significant way... only one or two people in a generation do that. Instead, the world is going to change YOU, or else crush you to dust if you won't change. Oh and btw, you are NOT the future, not yet at least... you are, mostly, a bunch of idiots who don't know anything about the real world yet, like how to work a job in a way that won't make your employer want to fire you... most of you don't even know how NOT to be a dick or a bitch all the time yet... but you'll learn. The hard way."

:mrgreen:
 
CanadaJohn said:
Again, wrong - he didn't say the world doesn't need women CEO's, he said the world doesn't need MORE women CEO's - maybe if you knocked that chip off your shoulder you'd be able to have a rational discussion of the subject. The commencement speaker actually did a great job of addressing a topic that should engender passionate debate, but rational debate too.
Click to expand...

We don't need more women ceo is the same as we don't need any.
 
captainawesome said:
We don't need more women ceo is the same as we don't need any.
Click to expand...

Only if you have an agenda and you don't understand the English language.

If you have a million dollars and someone says you don't need any more money, is that the equivalent to saying you don't need any money?
 
CanadaJohn said:
As a poster noted previously, in the entire commencement speech, he does also get into the important role of men as fathers and husbands - the single paragraph quoted in the OP doesn't get into that so it appears it's entirely one-sided.
Click to expand...

Oh I see what you mean - his entire speech content VS the selected quote in the *article* . . . upon reading 'OP' a few times I connected that with 'Original Post' instead.

I'll have to listen to the entire speech he gives later on.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Again, wrong - he didn't say the world doesn't need women CEO's, he said the world doesn't need MORE women CEO's - maybe if you knocked that chip off your shoulder you'd be able to have a rational discussion of the subject. The commencement speaker actually did a great job of addressing a topic that should engender passionate debate, but rational debate too.
Click to expand...
Oh please. He's not doing anything more than reinforcing archaic restrictions on gender roles. Let's not pretend it's anything more than it is.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Oh please. He's not doing anything more than reinforcing archaic restrictions on gender roles. Let's not pretend it's anything more than it is.
Click to expand...

Since you have no interest in what the man actually said, why don't you call him a racist too and get it all out there.
 
CanadaJohn said:
As a poster noted previously, in the entire commencement speech, he does also get into the important role of men as fathers and husbands - the single paragraph quoted in the OP doesn't get into that so it appears it's entirely one-sided.
Click to expand...
His comments on men don't do anything, but prove the point of the OP.

In the article, the speaker states, "I was addressing both the ladies in the audience and the men, stressing to them that the most important role any of us will ever have is the role that we play in our families,” he told WRTV. “I challenged the men by telling them that, to solve the problems of our society, we don’t need more millionaire entrepreneur men. We need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children."

It's just him perpetuating stereotypical gender roles. Women stay home while men provide and "protect" their wives.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Only if you have an agenda and you don't understand the English language.

If you have a million dollars and someone says you don't need any more money, is that the equivalent to saying you don't need any money?
Click to expand...

In the case of women ceo the percent is so low that to say we don't need anymore is to suggest they shouldn't be there at all.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Since you have no interest in what the man actually said, why don't you call him a racist too and get it all out there.
Click to expand...
It's too bad that I just quoted him in my other response to you demonstrating that what he said is exactly what I "care" about. But keep those ad homs going if it makes you feel better, LOL.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
It's too bad that I just quoted him in my other response to you demonstrating that what he said is exactly what I "care" about. But keep those ad homs going if it makes you feel better, LOL.
Click to expand...

I'll leave that to you, since you're proficient at it.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I'll leave that to you, since you're proficient at it.
Click to expand...
Let's do a rundown of our interaction:

CJ makes argument.
TPD counters argument.
CJ responds with an ad hom; ignores TPD's argument.
TPD makes another argument with supporting quotes and notes CJ's ad hom.
CJ responds with another ad hom; continues to ignore TPD's argument.

Notice how none of that interaction includes you defending your argument with anything other than ad homs while I defended my arguments with actual evidence from the original article. I'll take that as you admitting you're wrong, but having too much pride to say it.

Congratulations, LOL.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Let's do a rundown of our interaction:

CJ makes argument.
TPD counters argument.
CJ responds with an ad hom; ignores TPD's argument.
TPD makes another argument with supporting quotes and notes CJ's ad hom.
CJ responds with another ad hom; continues to ignore TPD's argument.

Notice how none of that interaction includes you defending your argument with anything other than ad homs while I defended my arguments with actual evidence from the original article. I'll take that as you admitting you're wrong, but having too much pride to say it.

Congratulations, LOL.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to get into a hissy fit with you - until you came along I was debating the content of the OP and the main issue with people who had different views - you're original post began "oh please" and your second post began "his comments on men don't do anything" - that's some counter argument you tossed out. Don't expect me to counter your nonsense or take you seriously and if it makes you feel superior to claim victory then, congrats, you're king/queen of the playground - trophy's in the mail.

Have a good night and take care.
 
CanadaJohn said:
I'm not going to get into a hissy fit with you - until you came along I was debating the content of the OP and the main issue with people who had different views - you're original post began "oh please" and your second post began "his comments on men don't do anything" - that's some counter argument you tossed out. Don't expect me to counter your nonsense or take you seriously and if it makes you feel superior to claim victory then, congrats, you're king/queen of the playground - trophy's in the mail.

Have a good night and take care.
Click to expand...
Okay, I get it. You need to be coddled. I'll coddle you then and see if you can scrounge up an honest response.

Listen, CJ, you are a really smart guy and I love reading your posts because they really teach me a lot about life. I see your point and everything, but I happened to notice that in the article posted by the OP, the speaker in question says the following: “I was addressing both the ladies in the audience and the men, stressing to them that the most important role any of us will ever have is the role that we play in our families,” he told WRTV. “I challenged the men by telling them that, to solve the problems of our society, we don’t need more millionaire entrepreneur men. We need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children.”

It sounds to me like he's doing exactly what people have been claiming he's doing: perpetuating gender stereotypes. That would mean that your original analysis was, despite being quite revolutionary, inaccurate. What do you think about that, sir? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Okay, I get it. You need to be coddled. I'll coddle you then and see if you can scrounge up an honest response.

Listen, CJ, you are a really smart guy and I love reading your posts because they really teach me a lot about life. I see your point and everything, but I happened to notice that in the article posted by the OP, the speaker in question says the following: “I was addressing both the ladies in the audience and the men, stressing to them that the most important role any of us will ever have is the role that we play in our families,” he told WRTV. “I challenged the men by telling them that, to solve the problems of our society, we don’t need more millionaire entrepreneur men. We need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children.”

It sounds to me like he's doing exactly what people have been claiming he's doing: perpetuating gender stereotypes. That would mean that your original analysis was, despite being quite revolutionary, inaccurate. What do you think about that, sir? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
Click to expand...

I think that's your view, your interpretation of his words, because you come from a certain perspective in life and that's fair - I see it differently, as I've stated before - I see him challenging young women not to accept today's stereotype that a stay at home wife and mom is a lesser person than a business woman or CEO and I see him saying to young men that success in business, making more money than you actually need in life, isn't as important as being there for your wife and family, protecting them and providing for them.

Some people see that is being a devolution to the troglodytes - I see it as a clarion call to young people to forego some of the materialistic aspects of 21st century life and get back to what's important in a person's development and contribution to society.

Is a lack of stay at home moms and family invested dads the only problem in western society today - hell no - but it damn well sure is one of the problems with society today. I'm old enough to know that in my youth, teens killing teens was unheard of - teens having no appreciation or sense of value for life was unheard of - teens disrespecting older people was rare but virtually unheard of - and in my view one of the biggest contributors to this is young people and teens not having role models in their homes who mold and teach their children how to be productive, contributing, respected members of society.
 
Dragonfly said:
So you're the prototypical "a woman's place is in the home, cooking, cleaning, barefoot, and pregnant" type of girl ???
Click to expand...

Liked because that's the most amazingly bone-headed thing I've seen anyone say to Maggie since someone accused her of being a Democrat.


...“I challenge you to devote yourself to your families and your children. If you choose to have a career, God’s blessings upon you,” Heck orated.
Click to expand...

Funny how everyone who is so quick to Get So's Upset Oh Yes So's Upset And Mortified And Offended, So Offended At The Offensiveness is also so quick to gloss over this part.

“But I challenge you to recognize what the world scoffs at, that your greatest role in your life will be that of wife and mother. The greatest impact you could ever contribute to our world is a loving investment in the lives of your precious children. To solve the problems plaguing our society, we don’t need more women CEOs. We need more women as invested mothers.”...
Click to expand...

He's absolutely right. Society doesn't suffer from a lack of companies whose boss has a vagina (and to suggest so is, frankly, sexist - if you believe it doesn't matter what the genitalia is, then guess what, you don't get to complain when the genitalia isn't what you'd prefer). Society suffers from a severe lack of adequate parenting.

I also don't know if he mentioned it, but the main driver behind our lack of invested mothers is absent fathers. Being a dad is more important than hanging out with your buddies and playing video games at 3 a.m., or your preferred party lifestyle, and the prevalence of young men in our society who don't get that is (frankly) devastating.
 
ThePlayDrive said:
Okay, I get it. You need to be coddled. I'll coddle you then and see if you can scrounge up an honest response.

Listen, CJ, you are a really smart guy and I love reading your posts because they really teach me a lot about life. I see your point and everything, but I happened to notice that in the article posted by the OP, the speaker in question says the following: “I was addressing both the ladies in the audience and the men, stressing to them that the most important role any of us will ever have is the role that we play in our families,” he told WRTV. “I challenged the men by telling them that, to solve the problems of our society, we don’t need more millionaire entrepreneur men. We need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children.”

It sounds to me like he's doing exactly what people have been claiming he's doing: perpetuating gender stereotypes. That would mean that your original analysis was, despite being quite revolutionary, inaccurate. What do you think about that, sir? I'd love to hear your thoughts on this.
Click to expand...

I think you could give a crap about gender stereotypes. I think because you are all about the gays that you are upset because you see it as a backhanded way of telling gays they do not matter as much because most of them will never have kids.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Is a lack of stay at home moms and family invested dads the only problem in western society today - hell no - but it damn well sure is one of the problems with society today. I'm old enough to know that in my youth, teens killing teens was unheard of - teens having no appreciation or sense of value for life was unheard of - teens disrespecting older people was rare but virtually unheard of - and in my view one of the biggest contributors to this is young people and teens not having role models in their homes who mold and teach their children how to be productive, contributing, respected members of society.
Click to expand...

Ignorance is bliss

1954 Red Wings & Fordham Baldies | New York City Fighting Gangs

50 years of West Side Story: the real Gangs of New York - Telegraph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom