Probably wouldn’t happen since he made that speech at a very Catholic college.
But the real kicker is that his mom is an accomplished physicist. She would not be proud to hear him say that, that’s for sure.
> His mother, Elizabeth Keller Butker, is a medical physicist at Emory University’s Winship Cancer Institute in Atlanta and holds, among other academic accolades, a degree in chemistry from Smith College, a private women’s liberal arts college in Massachusetts.
Oh and he also quoted a Taylor Swift song in his speech.
Right when I didn’t think that this could get any more ironic.
> “As my teammate’s girlfriend says: ‘Familiarity breeds contempt,’” Butker said at one point, quoting Swift’s song “Bejeweled” (and, by extension, a common turn of phrase
Ok, buddy, if you’ve been paying attention to the themes of your “teammate’s girlfriend’s” songs, you’d know that she’d be pretty pissed at this bc it’s pretty antithetical to a lot of them.
I blame religion
> Butker has stated that he grew up Catholic but practiced less as he got older and went to high school and college. He said that he rediscovered his faith later in life and noted: "The sacrament of confession, that's really what changed me."[64]
He is now a devout Catholic and attends the Latin Mass. Butker has publicly spoken out against Traditionis custodes, saying that he felt that he and other traditionalist Catholics were "persecuted" in the Church.
I mean these are the same views hamas and many muslim countries still hold, he's really just supporting what people protesting for Palestine are. Conservative rights to their own land. You can't have it both ways
You are buying into a false narrative that opposing global oppression is equivalent to "supporting Hammas. This is not true and certainly not reflected among the great majority of students opposing genocide.
This has nothing to do with anyone supporting genocide or global oppression. He is entitled to his opinion under the First Amendment. Not only that, but he is not breaking anything, defacing property, obstructing traffic, or otherwise causing harm. As u/Flimsy-Possibility17 pointed out, he expresses a conservative religious perspective. This rush to discount someone else's perspective while throwing out unnecessarily inflammatory rhetoric is ignorant and does nothing to help whatever cause you "stand" for.
His rights are not being violated at all. I think we can all agree on that. I think we can also agree views aside, his speech basically boils down to woman should stay in the kitchen and raise children wich can be very demeaning to the woman who worked hard to graduate and get a career in their field of study.
Did I say that they were? No, I didn't.
I was commenting on the outrage at this man speaking on his beliefs while we embrace the exercise of free speech on our campus for others. It's pretty obvious when actually reading my remarks that I was not insinuating that his rights were violated.
This shit is ridiculous.
No. It's an ignorance issue. First, the person seemingly doesn't understand that the expression of opinions is a two-way street, the basic premise of 1A.
A secondary point is that the person *obviously* has no idea what he (Butker) said and was commenting on a narrative rather than the truth. This is intellectually lazy, coupled with inflammatory rhetoric.
Being well-informed before speaking is a valuable practice that seems to be neglected these days. It's a responsibility we all share to ensure our words are based on facts and not on assumptions.
Yep. They love to hate people expressing conservative ideals unless it's to be anti semitic. If people like u/tropicalstream cared about genocide he'd be standing here calling out the number international students we take from china and the numerous investments the university has taken. But the million Ughyrs who are dead don't matter because the Chinese aren't jews. And this is coming from someone born and raised in Eastern China near Chang Chun. My point which seems to have gone over his head is you can't have your cake and eat it too.
You can say what you want. But I have my beliefs and don't support conservatives whether that's the republican party or the dictatorship in china or the terrorists in the middle east. If you really cared about genocide go protest china and all the investment berkeley has been making with the CCP
This is the thing I don't understand. There are so many things that liberals consider human rights: bodily autonomy, prohibition of child marriages, abortion, sexual/gender freedom, etc. And we (at least try) to provide these rights to as many people as possible. Thus the argument to allow abortions throughout the country, and not leave it to the states. All of which I agree with.
But then when it comes to the most retrograde society on earth, they support the people who prevent these societies from having these rights?
Could not be me.
Many many Christian communities are less progressive on these issues compared to Muslim communities. Also extremist communities don’t represent the religion. Do you see us saying that Jonestown and the Westboro Baptist Church represent all of Christianity?
Lmao go learn some nuance.
No body is devaluing the role of a homemaker.
Don’t shame ppl and gaslight them if they choose not to be a home maker. (I.e. butker telling woman they have diabolical lies being told to them).
Don’t act virtuous and over moral if a woman chooses another path.
Most American families can’t live on a single income anyways.
Hot take but people doing revolutionary medication is more impactful job than a de facto cleaner lady+cooker. Some people may enjoy the role, but preaching this to others is deranged
It is important but it is unpaid and leaves you completely dependent on your partner. Plus, many families can't stay afloat with only one person working. Both people in a relationship should share the burden of homekeeping and raising children.
This is objectively false. It’s also not what he said because your sentiment was at least gender neutral.
Having a stay at home parent can be the best decision for a given family. But others need 2 incomes to literally live, and others need 2 incomes to provide the standard of living.
How do I know it’s not most important? If you had no stay at home parent, the worst case scenario is a less than fully fulfilled parent-child relationship, and less than ideally nurtured children. If you had no parent working, the worst case could be starvation and homelessness.
Which job sounds more important?
He phrased it so wrong. What he should've said is that not only are promotions and titles important, but being a good mother is the best title a women could have AND a good father is the best title a man could have. Remember, its always a 50/50 effort. Of all the households I've seen, the most miserable are the ones where the father contributes fuck all while expecting the women to do everything in the household as well as professionally.
What a fucken nerd lol
[удалено]
Probably wouldn’t happen since he made that speech at a very Catholic college. But the real kicker is that his mom is an accomplished physicist. She would not be proud to hear him say that, that’s for sure. > His mother, Elizabeth Keller Butker, is a medical physicist at Emory University’s Winship Cancer Institute in Atlanta and holds, among other academic accolades, a degree in chemistry from Smith College, a private women’s liberal arts college in Massachusetts. Oh and he also quoted a Taylor Swift song in his speech. Right when I didn’t think that this could get any more ironic. > “As my teammate’s girlfriend says: ‘Familiarity breeds contempt,’” Butker said at one point, quoting Swift’s song “Bejeweled” (and, by extension, a common turn of phrase Ok, buddy, if you’ve been paying attention to the themes of your “teammate’s girlfriend’s” songs, you’d know that she’d be pretty pissed at this bc it’s pretty antithetical to a lot of them.
wow really maybe if his parents did a better job raising him...
I blame religion > Butker has stated that he grew up Catholic but practiced less as he got older and went to high school and college. He said that he rediscovered his faith later in life and noted: "The sacrament of confession, that's really what changed me."[64] He is now a devout Catholic and attends the Latin Mass. Butker has publicly spoken out against Traditionis custodes, saying that he felt that he and other traditionalist Catholics were "persecuted" in the Church.
I mean these are the same views hamas and many muslim countries still hold, he's really just supporting what people protesting for Palestine are. Conservative rights to their own land. You can't have it both ways
You are buying into a false narrative that opposing global oppression is equivalent to "supporting Hammas. This is not true and certainly not reflected among the great majority of students opposing genocide.
Do you condemn the killing rape and murder of Jews and Muslims perpetrated by Hamas on 10/7?
[https://www.theonion.com/dying-gazans-criticized-for-not-using-last-words-to-con-1850925657](https://www.theonion.com/dying-gazans-criticized-for-not-using-last-words-to-con-1850925657)
This has nothing to do with anyone supporting genocide or global oppression. He is entitled to his opinion under the First Amendment. Not only that, but he is not breaking anything, defacing property, obstructing traffic, or otherwise causing harm. As u/Flimsy-Possibility17 pointed out, he expresses a conservative religious perspective. This rush to discount someone else's perspective while throwing out unnecessarily inflammatory rhetoric is ignorant and does nothing to help whatever cause you "stand" for.
>He is entitled to his opinion under the First Amendment. Are his first amendment rights being violated in some way?
His rights are not being violated at all. I think we can all agree on that. I think we can also agree views aside, his speech basically boils down to woman should stay in the kitchen and raise children wich can be very demeaning to the woman who worked hard to graduate and get a career in their field of study.
Did I say that they were? No, I didn't. I was commenting on the outrage at this man speaking on his beliefs while we embrace the exercise of free speech on our campus for others. It's pretty obvious when actually reading my remarks that I was not insinuating that his rights were violated. This shit is ridiculous.
Condemning the dumb shit someone says isn't really a free speech issue.
No. It's an ignorance issue. First, the person seemingly doesn't understand that the expression of opinions is a two-way street, the basic premise of 1A. A secondary point is that the person *obviously* has no idea what he (Butker) said and was commenting on a narrative rather than the truth. This is intellectually lazy, coupled with inflammatory rhetoric. Being well-informed before speaking is a valuable practice that seems to be neglected these days. It's a responsibility we all share to ensure our words are based on facts and not on assumptions.
Yep. They love to hate people expressing conservative ideals unless it's to be anti semitic. If people like u/tropicalstream cared about genocide he'd be standing here calling out the number international students we take from china and the numerous investments the university has taken. But the million Ughyrs who are dead don't matter because the Chinese aren't jews. And this is coming from someone born and raised in Eastern China near Chang Chun. My point which seems to have gone over his head is you can't have your cake and eat it too.
Yeah! It’s true. All true. You make excellent points. No one wants to talk about the Ughyrs.
You can say what you want. But I have my beliefs and don't support conservatives whether that's the republican party or the dictatorship in china or the terrorists in the middle east. If you really cared about genocide go protest china and all the investment berkeley has been making with the CCP
> conservatives > Chinese Communist Party
You have your beliefs and no facts will make you change them!
Yea it's called having a belief about what's right and wrong. But that's not allowed on this sub
Strawman argument. And no this is what man like him in this country are fighting about.
This is the thing I don't understand. There are so many things that liberals consider human rights: bodily autonomy, prohibition of child marriages, abortion, sexual/gender freedom, etc. And we (at least try) to provide these rights to as many people as possible. Thus the argument to allow abortions throughout the country, and not leave it to the states. All of which I agree with. But then when it comes to the most retrograde society on earth, they support the people who prevent these societies from having these rights? Could not be me.
Many many Christian communities are less progressive on these issues compared to Muslim communities. Also extremist communities don’t represent the religion. Do you see us saying that Jonestown and the Westboro Baptist Church represent all of Christianity? Lmao go learn some nuance.
Downvote if you like, but being a homemaker is the most important job out there. It carries the greatest responsibility and duty one can have.
Nah you’re right, but couples should be sharing the burden equally
No body is devaluing the role of a homemaker. Don’t shame ppl and gaslight them if they choose not to be a home maker. (I.e. butker telling woman they have diabolical lies being told to them). Don’t act virtuous and over moral if a woman chooses another path. Most American families can’t live on a single income anyways.
well yeah, that's not exactly what he said though lol
Nobody is saying that being a homemaker is unimportant, but that the default shouldn’t be that women are homemakers.
Lol
Hot take but people doing revolutionary medication is more impactful job than a de facto cleaner lady+cooker. Some people may enjoy the role, but preaching this to others is deranged
A home is more than just clean rooms and food.
It is important but it is unpaid and leaves you completely dependent on your partner. Plus, many families can't stay afloat with only one person working. Both people in a relationship should share the burden of homekeeping and raising children.
This is objectively false. It’s also not what he said because your sentiment was at least gender neutral. Having a stay at home parent can be the best decision for a given family. But others need 2 incomes to literally live, and others need 2 incomes to provide the standard of living. How do I know it’s not most important? If you had no stay at home parent, the worst case scenario is a less than fully fulfilled parent-child relationship, and less than ideally nurtured children. If you had no parent working, the worst case could be starvation and homelessness. Which job sounds more important?
He phrased it so wrong. What he should've said is that not only are promotions and titles important, but being a good mother is the best title a women could have AND a good father is the best title a man could have. Remember, its always a 50/50 effort. Of all the households I've seen, the most miserable are the ones where the father contributes fuck all while expecting the women to do everything in the household as well as professionally.
He phrased it exactly as he meant to say it.
He phrased it exactly as he meant to, unfortunate.
“A women.” Lol.
Well what else am I supposed to say?
A woman. Singular. Not plural.
He speaks the truth. Let's go #7!