Just another idiot kicker

OK, @Bills over Jets. What was your very own personal take-away from what Butker said? The entire speech, state it plainly. "It wasn't that bad," is a nebulous escape clause. Do you think this is a case of a cancel culture witch hunt and that Butker is a victim of his words being cherry-picked out of context? Do you agree with Butker's sentiments and what he said or not? Or, is it simply because he didn't use openly pejorative terms that you're giving him a pass, which is how sexism often works. Just make a serious attempt at a display of honesty here and alliterate your actual point. I don't think you'll do that. Just a guess.

 

What did you think was sexist?

 

Still amazes me we let those silly ninnies own property and enter into contracts

 

I saw him give a commencement speech at Georgia Tech, and it basically is what he said, and the female graduates were offended!

 

Just what I thought. Challenge made, and I got the expected non-answer with a question, the last bastion of a coward. Table flipping and lack of commitment to a stance in specifics because you'll hang yourself with your own rope, how predictable. It's not up to me to tell you what you think and why. I asked you to tell me. I was direct and clear, and you backed away like a spineless turd.

 

Same for you. You came here and launched personal attacks at the guy, called him an idiot and a moron, then rambled on about your own father in a clear and odd display of some deep personal nerve that was so obviously touched, so I inquired what your thoughts are which caused the tension in your posts so climb so high. You are so unhinged that you are clawing at me like I’m attacking you, when in reality I’ve given no opinion on the matter at all.

 

Many have listened to it and read the complete transcript of it available online. It is certainly not a "Your world is an oyster" speech to those commencing a new stage in their lives created to encourage graduates to explore their many opportunities - those he characterizes as "diabolical lies."

Since you seem to have a problem with the media using Busker's own words to "portray" it, why not give us your interpretation?

 

There is no “interpretation” if you just listen to it. The only people interpreting anything are the ones that didn’t listen to it. If you want to watch it, go ahead. It’s not my job to give people the cliff notes. The people that want to be mad regardless will do so, and the ones curious about what he actually said will go listen for themselves. If people listened to it, then I don’t really care whether they are outraged or agree with him. Think how you want to think. I only have a problem with those who didn’t read the book spouting off opinions because they saw a paragraph or two.

 

I couldn't have been more clear about what I asked you.

Edit: A word.

 

You can barely read, and certainly can’t think (we’ve discussed this before), so it’s not surprising to me that you read “I’ve offered no opinion here” with “I have no opinion.” I don’t care to discuss my opinion with anyone who hasn’t listened or watched it, because that is utterly pointless and a waste of time. I am, though, interested in peoples “conclusions” they’ve formed from listening to 2% of the information. No one has really answered my questions on why the guy is an idiot, a moron, and what they found to be sexist.

 

No, I’m more interested in the conclusions you and others in this thread formed and posted with vitriol about. You don’t want to discuss it though, probably because by now you realize you did not listen to the entire thing and don’t know what the other 98% of it contained, so you are backing off for fear of looking stupid. I get it.

 

I agree that the conversation of a woman being a housewife is irrelevant today, because unless you’re in the top 5% of income or so, it’s not even an option to think about. However, people jumped to that discussion even though that’s not what he was even saying anyway, and that became clear to me once I listed to the entire thing. For example, he said the same thing about men. “The lie men have been told is that they shouldn’t be in the home.” He then talked about what it means to be a father and husband. He basically said the same for women, that families should be home/kids focused and not focused more on hanging plaques on the wall. He actually broke down and cried in the middle of his speech talking about his own wife, how he watched her chase the dream she thought she was supposed to chase (focused on career) only to watch her experience true joy once she had children. He then suggested others might find more joy in that (than careers) as well. That’s the clip they chose to play. The broader point of the speech was that these kids are about to enter the world, which everyone agrees is messed up (whether you’re on the right or left, religious or secular, man or woman). Then he suggested it’s because we’ve gotten away from the basics, which is being good human beings and showing our kids how to be good human beings. But no one showed the clip of him saying men should be in the home, or the one about his wife’s personal struggle/breakthrough. They only want to show what pushes their agenda and get everyone all upset. I guess I gave you the cliff note version after all.

 

If you don't care what anyone else has to say on the matter, whether they listened to it or not, why are you even posting in this thread?

 

That’s not what I said.

 

He told the women that just worked for 4 years to earn a degree that he thinks they would be happier as housewives than working in the field they have been studying for at least 4 years. I think the only ones that don't think that is sexist are probably sub 75 IQ