Chiefs kicker Harrison Butker bashes Pride Month, tells women to stay in the kitchen

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, User said:

Again, saying you were also demeaning men too, is hardly the big argument you think it is. 

Even now, you prove it again with your example. You outright say that you do not respect women who are Homemakers. That is the very definition of demeaning. 

You can say I demean a choice or behavior, but it's an outright lie to say I demean women as a category.

And it's not that I don't respect them at all. I respect them less. Because they are doing less. Literally and objectively.

 

[User]

3 minutes ago, Hodad said:

You can say I demean a choice or behavior, but it's an outright lie to say I demean women as a category.

And it's not that I don't respect them at all. I respect them less. Because they are doing less. Literally and objectively.

A lame obfuscation attempt. 

My comment was: "You outright say that you do not respect women who are Homemakers."

Then you respond with some lame response about "women as a category"

Yes, you literally demeaned them, do you not understand the meaning of demean? You are outright sitting here saying that you respect them less. And you continue on with your demeaning characterizations of them doing less. 

YOU are the one being demeaning here to women. 

[Hodad]

11 minutes ago, User said:

A lame obfuscation attempt. 

My comment was: "You outright say that you do not respect women who are Homemakers."

Then you respond with some lame response about "women as a category"

Yes, you literally demeaned them, do you not understand the meaning of demean? You are outright sitting here saying that you respect them less. And you continue on with your demeaning characterizations of them doing less. 

YOU are the one being demeaning here to women. 

I take it back. Maybe you're not playing stupid. 

I don't know how to say it slower or more simply. It is a fact that I hold "homemakers" (parents or otherwise) in lower regard than many other occupations. 

There is no specificity whatsoever to women. 

Again, an analogy for the particularly slow: I don't respect liars. Lying is a behavior. People of Hispanic descent (among every other category of humanity) are capable of lying. 

To apply your specious logic, you would then say that I am demeaning Hispanics when I say that I don't respect liars.

Obviously this is false. I have said nothing to demean Hispanics by identifying a behavior that I don't respect. If you can't understand how that is logically invalid and dishonest, I don't know how you tie your shoes in the morning.  

 

Edited May 20, 2024 by Hodad

[impartialobserver]

To conclude, I believe in free speech so would defend Butker's right to express these views. The divide (at least on here) is the interpretation. I interpret his speech as being one where he thinks that women should focus more on being mothers  and homemakers and not pursuing degrees and careers. The validity of that is not the point though. You can agree or disagree with it and that's fine. I do like that when pressed about it.. his coach Andy Reid simply said, "I support free speech". He should not be released or any action such as that. Plenty of athletes away from the field express all sorts of unpopular views. 

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

To conclude, I believe in free speech so would defend Butker's right to express these views. The divide (at least on here) is the interpretation. I interpret his speech as being one where he thinks that women should focus more on being mothers  and homemakers and not pursuing degrees and careers.

The difference is not 'interpretation'.  The difference is ascribing intent that is not evident. 

One side is taking him at his literal word.  He actually said in plain english that some women will choose to go down the career path, but that he believed that many women there were most looking forward to being wives and mothers and home makers. 

Not even women in general.  THe women there.  At a catholic university. For Catholics. Those specific women.

However - YOUR side insists on inventing and creating things he did NOT say to people he did not say them to.  That is not 'interpretation'. 

What he said was that a lot of of the women there would find a life of being a mom and home maker very rewarding and hes' probably 100 percent correct - a lot of them will. 

But the left has portrayed him as evil for speaking a simple truth - mostly by creatively re-imagining the 'interpretation' of what he said 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

The difference is not 'interpretation'.  The difference is ascribing intent that is not evident. 

One side is taking him at his literal word.  He actually said in plain english that some women will choose to go down the career path, but that he believed that many women there were most looking forward to being wives and mothers and home makers. 

Not even women in general.  THe women there.  At a catholic university. For Catholics. Those specific women.

However - YOUR side insists on inventing and creating things he did NOT say to people he did not say them to.  That is not 'interpretation'. 

What he said was that a lot of of the women there would find a life of being a mom and home maker very rewarding and hes' probably 100 percent correct - a lot of them will. 

But the left has portrayed him as evil for speaking a simple truth - mostly by creatively re-imagining the 'interpretation' of what he said 

to conclude.. I support free speech so no matter how I interpret it, he should be allowed to say it. I am done with this discussion so feel free to talk with yourself about it. 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

to conclude.. I support free speech so no matter how I interpret it, he should be allowed to say it. I am done with this discussion so feel free to talk with yourself about it. 

LOL - well i undrestand why you'd say you're taking your ball and running home   ROFLMAO

to conclude - i agree with you on free speech and I think we both know your 'interpretation' angle was disingenuous and more of a statement about you than him.  

But of course you're free to run with your fingers in your ears humming if that's what you prefer. 

[West]

19 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The difference is not 'interpretation'.  The difference is ascribing intent that is not evident. 

One side is taking him at his literal word.  He actually said in plain english that some women will choose to go down the career path, but that he believed that many women there were most looking forward to being wives and mothers and home makers. 

Not even women in general.  THe women there.  At a catholic university. For Catholics. Those specific women.

However - YOUR side insists on inventing and creating things he did NOT say to people he did not say them to.  That is not 'interpretation'. 

What he said was that a lot of of the women there would find a life of being a mom and home maker very rewarding and hes' probably 100 percent correct - a lot of them will. 

But the left has portrayed him as evil for speaking a simple truth - mostly by creatively re-imagining the 'interpretation' of what he said 

I just ignore the woke mostly now. They've created a hostile country full of radical looney looking to pounce on anyone who doesn't say what they want them to

[CdnFox]

8 minutes ago, West said:

I just ignore the woke mostly now. They've created a hostile country full of radical looney looking to pounce on anyone who doesn't say what they want them to

Ignoring them or even simply disagreeing with them would be a fine option if it wasn't for the fact that they are not willing to leave it there. They are not simply out there making false claims about what he said, they are insisting that he get fired based on their false claims.

They are not only demanding that people they disagree with be punished, but now even people that didn't say something that they disagree with must be punished.

I can at least respect impartial Observers statements to the effect that he should be allowed his free speech. And if all leftists were like him and we're willing to leave it there with their own opinions or reimaginings of what he said, then that would be fine. But it doesn't stay there. And that's why it's difficult to ignore.

[User]

2 hours ago, Hodad said:

I don't know how to say it slower or more simply. It is a fact that I hold "homemakers" (parents or otherwise) in lower regard than many other occupations. 

There is no specificity whatsoever to women. 

This is not a vague generic discussion thread on the occupation of Homemaker. It is a thread lying about what Butker said to women, where you jumped in to continue to distort what he said regarding women and then proceeded to say far more insulting things than he ever did about women homemakers. 

Now, you are trying to play some game like this has nothing to do with women at all. 

I have repeatedly focused on your demeaning women who are homemakers. I have spelled this out time and time again. Now you are playing some dumb game as if I made some absolute claim about all women. 

At this point, you can only play dumb games to obscure your own demeaning language. 

 

[West]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Ignoring them or even simply disagreeing with them would be a fine option if it wasn't for the fact that they are not willing to leave it there. They are not simply out there making false claims about what he said, they are insisting that he get fired based on their false claims.

They are not only demanding that people they disagree with be punished, but now even people that didn't say something that they disagree with must be punished.

I can at least respect impartial Observers statements to the effect that he should be allowed his free speech. And if all leftists were like him and we're willing to leave it there with their own opinions or reimaginings of what he said, then that would be fine. But it doesn't stay there. And that's why it's difficult to ignore.

Truly cold and vile people I know 

[impartialobserver]

42 minutes ago, West said:

Truly cold and vile people I know 

I do not support him being released/fired or any legal action of any kind taken against him. I disagree with his views but we are allowed to disagree. When it comes time for the next NFL season, my guess is that folks will have moved on to other issues to whine about. 

[Nationalist]

Are you folks still wound up about this? Flippin' ridiculous. 

[Hodad]

2 hours ago, User said:

This is not a vague generic discussion thread on the occupation of Homemaker. It is a thread lying about what Butker said to women, where you jumped in to continue to distort what he said regarding women and then proceeded to say far more insulting things than he ever did about women homemakers. 

Now, you are trying to play some game like this has nothing to do with women at all. 

I have repeatedly focused on your demeaning women who are homemakers. I have spelled this out time and time again. Now you are playing some dumb game as if I made some absolute claim about all women. 

At this point, you can only play dumb games to obscure your own demeaning language. 

 

 

Butker told a crowd of women that they had wasted their time educating themselves to pursue the "diabolical lie" of career ambitions and that he and Jesus think a woman's place is cooking and cleaning. Like that's all they are good for. Now that's farking demeaning. 

I, on the other hand, think women are capable of  doing and being all the great things they dream of achieving and should be supported in those efforts. Like little boys, they should dream big and shoot for the stars. And have faith that they can achieve. And they need all the support they can get, because all along the way they are going to meet a-holes like Butker who will tell them not to be astronauts and not to cure cancer and not to become leaders, that they'll be much more fulfilled if they abandon those dreams and follow god's plan to cook and clean and breed. 

The conversation definitely has something to do with women, but you lie when you claim that I demean women. I demean all the patriarchal bullshit that would sideline half the world's brains and talent and turn them into a servant class. 

[User]

11 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Butker told a crowd of women that they had wasted their time educating themselves to pursue the "diabolical lie" of career ambitions and that he and Jesus think a woman's place is cooking and cleaning. Like that's all they are good for. Now that's farking demeaning. 

No, he did not say those things at all. Quote him. Stop making crap up. 

12 minutes ago, Hodad said:

... like Butker who will tell them not to be astronauts and not to cure cancer and not to become leaders... that they'll be much more fulfilled if they abandon those dreams and follow god's plan to cook and clean and breed. 

No, he did not say this at all. Quote him. Stop making crap up. 

Yes, we already know that YOU have characterized women as homemakers being little more than breeders. YOU are the one demeaning them. 

14 minutes ago, Hodad said:

The conversation definitely has something to do with women, but you lie when you claim that I demean women.

You just did, again. See above. 

14 minutes ago, Hodad said:

I demean all the patriarchal bullshit that would sideline half the world's brains and talent and turn them into a servant class. 

You keep on demeaning women, calling them servants now. YOU are the one with this insulting language, not Butker. 

[Hodad]

31 minutes ago, User said:

No, he did not say those things at all. Quote him. Stop making crap up. 

No, he did not say this at all. Quote him. Stop making crap up. 

Yes, we already know that YOU have characterized women as homemakers being little more than breeders. YOU are the one demeaning them. 

You just did, again. See above. 

You keep on demeaning women, calling them servants now. YOU are the one with this insulting language, not Butker. 

Do you seriously think quoting him again and again is going to change the meaning? It's not. He said what he said and was quite plain about it. 

And you continue to lie. It's NOT demeaning a category to say they are equally capable of doing great and amazing things with their lives and that they don't have to settle for facilitating the lives of others.

I think less of people who choose to do less, who do not try to achieve their potential. Women, men, non-binary, alien, whatever. 

 

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

 

Butker told a crowd of women that they had wasted their time educating themselves to pursue the "diabolical lie" of career ambitions and that he and Jesus think a woman's place is cooking and cleaning. Like that's all they are good for. Now that's farking demeaning. 

 

He never said anything like that. And this is the point that's being made to you, you must lie and change what he said in order to make your point. If you actually use what he said then your point is completely invalid. He said that while many of them may be looking at going on to having a career and climbing the promotions ladder and such he was willing to bet that most of them were most looking forward to being a homemaker and a wife and the mother.

He didn't say anything about wasting 4 years. He didn't say any of them shouldn't have a career. You had to add that in otherwise everything you have said is a lie. Which means everything you have said is a lie because it was never in there.

And that is very demeaning to women.

And the diabolical lie comes from people like you who have told women that they are not allowed to be Homemakers and wives and mothers. And that they will have lives of lesser value if they do.

[Aristides]

On 5/19/2024 at 9:52 AM, CdnFox said:

They absolutely have said that, and look at the attacks on this guy for saying it is a good thing. 

That's the problem. If the left didn't think it was a bad thing they wouldn't have said anything.  If he'd got up and said  "My sister chose to be a doctor and it's very rewarding and some of you will chose to be home makers but you will find it very fulfilling to be a doctor",  then we'd have never heard his name. 

The moral outrage and hatred being directed at this guy is not because the left thinks staying home to raise kids is a GOOD thing. 

Well she must be a terrible terrible person then according to the left
 

Would you agree with the leftist posters here who have said that she is worth less as a person because she stayed home? Would you tell other women that she seemed to enjoy that choice or would you tell them that she should have been out of the home working and you're disappointed in her?

You can't have it both ways.  either you have a problem with women staying home and being a home maker and mother, OR this guy said nothing wrong. 

Clearly you have an issue with it. 

Bull, no one has said that. You are just making crap up because you have no other way of defending what he said.

[User]

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Do you seriously think quoting him again and again is going to change the meaning? It's not. He said what he said and was quite plain about it. 

So, you have all the time in the world to repeatedly make up crap he didn't say... but when asked actually to quote him, well, now you balk at that because you can't.

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

don't have to settle for facilitating the lives of others.

Most careers are built on facilitating the lives of others; in Homemaking, women choose to invest more into their own families instead, while you mock and demean them for it. 

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

I think less of people who choose to do less

Yes, we already know that you think less of women who are Homemakers... which is why I keep saying you are demeaning them. 

36 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Bull, no one has said that. You are just making crap up because you have no other way of defending what he said.

Talk about projection. 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Bull, no one has said that. You are just making crap up because you have no other way of defending what he said.

But they did say that.  And i've defended what he's said in every single post    

What he said very clearly is that he thinks many women there will be looking forward to being a mother and a wife. He said he is sure some will choose the corporate route but that life as a mother and a wife can be the most fulfilling life for many people. He noted that his own wife has found it extremely fulfilling

There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of that. 

But you hate that he's telling the truth. You can't refute what he said so you add a whole bunch of things he didn't say. To cover your tracks you attempt to accuse someone else of the same thing that you yourself have done.

This is very simple what he actually said is that it's okay to be a mother and a wife, and in fact Many women find it to be an extremely rewarding and fulfilling thing to do. That's it.

So either you can explain what's wrong with that statement without adding on any additional things that he didn't say, or you are being dishonest and simply don't like the idea of women making their own choice and choosing something other than having a career.

Which would make you the misogynist

Edited May 21, 2024 by CdnFox

[Aristides]

14 hours ago, CdnFox said:

But they did say that.  And i've defended what he's said in every single post    

What he said very clearly is that he thinks many women there will be looking forward to being a mother and a wife. He said he is sure some will choose the corporate route but that life as a mother and a wife can be the most fulfilling life for many people. He noted that his own wife has found it extremely fulfilling

There is absolutely nothing wrong with any of that. 

But you hate that he's telling the truth. You can't refute what he said so you add a whole bunch of things he didn't say. To cover your tracks you attempt to accuse someone else of the same thing that you yourself have done.

This is very simple what he actually said is that it's okay to be a mother and a wife, and in fact Many women find it to be an extremely rewarding and fulfilling thing to do. That's it.

So either you can explain what's wrong with that statement without adding on any additional things that he didn't say, or you are being dishonest and simply don't like the idea of women making their own choice and choosing something other than having a career.

Which would make you the misogynist

Quote

“I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolic lies told to you.

Misogynists are those who talk down to women, not those who think they should have choices. Choices not dictated to them by men like you and Butker.

[CdnFox]

56 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Misogynists are those who talk down to women, not those who think they should have choices.

You don't think they should have choices - you're mad as hell this guy even discussed one of their "choices".   I guess it would be more fair to say you only want them to have choices you approve of i guess 

Quote

Choices not dictated to them by men like you and Butker.

You're the one trying to take chocies off the table.  He said you have choices, here's one i think you'll like  Nothing wrong with that.  I haven't said ANYTHING other than to point out that's what he said. 

remember our talk about if you have to lie to make a point you probably don't have a good one?  You don't have a good one here. 

Quote

“I think it is you, the women, who have had the most diabolic lies told to you.

And he's absolutely right. People like you have been telling women for some years now that it is wrong to choose to be a mother and wife. That Homemakers are failed women and no good woman would want to choose that. That only women who are in the workplace being executives have any value. In fact people on it your side of the debate have expressed those very thoughts in this thread. They look down on housewives.

It is a diabolic lie that a woman Who focuses on having children and caring for them and being a good chatelaine is of low value. Or is somehow leading an unfulfilled life. That you can only have a fulfilled life if you've had no less than three careers and four abortions. This is the story that the left has spun.

And he's right to call it a lie. Some women will enjoy the career track, some women may find their best fulfillment doing works of charity like Mother Teresa, but many women will find a life of being a mother and wife to be extremely fulfilling and satisfying and that's just a simple truth.

And you're still mad that it's true. If you agree, why do you say he said something wrong? And why do you have to lie about it?

 

[User]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

Misogynists are those who talk down to women, not those who think they should have choices. Choices not dictated to them by men like you and Butker.

Where did he say they should not have choices? 

He was talking about the lies pushed by folks like Hodad on here, demeaning to women who choose to be Homemakers. 

[impartialobserver]

There has been a story going through social media that Kansas City cancelled three Pearl Jam shows. Eddie Vedder, singer for Pearl Jam, at a show in Las Vegas expressed his dislike of Butker's views. Supposedly Kansas city stands behind Butker and so cancelled three Pearl Jam concerts. The problem is that there never was any scheduled Kansas City shows in the upcoming tour cycle. If you want to, go to https://pearljam.com/tour, and look. Second, to have 3 dates in one city and not have it be a residency... is almost unheard of. If Pearl Jam was going to do 3 nights in one city.. it would be Vancouver or Seattle. 

This reminds me of the fake story that Jason aldean and Oliver Anthony would be performing at the Super Bowl halftime show. Quite a few (on here and elsewhere) reflexively reacted saying things like, "the NFL is getting it right. They know that we wont put up with those woke, mediocre hip hop acts".. and then guess what? Usher was the actual halftime show act. 

Edited May 21, 2024 by impartialobserver

[CdnFox]

15 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

There has been a story going through social media that Kansas City cancelled three Pearl Jam shows. Eddie Vedder, singer for Pearl Jam, at a show in Las Vegas expressed his dislike of Butker's views. Supposedly Kansas city stands behind Butker and so cancelled three Pearl Jam concerts. The problem is that there never was any scheduled Kansas City shows in the upcoming tour cycle. If you want to, go to https://pearljam.com/tour, and look. Second, to have 3 dates in one city and not have it be a residency... is almost unheard of. If Pearl Jam was going to do 3 nights in one city.. it would be Vancouver or Seattle. 

This reminds me of the fake story that Jason aldean and Oliver Anthony would be performing at the Super Bowl halftime show. Quite a few (on here and elsewhere) reflexively reacted saying things like, "the NFL is getting it right. They know that we wont put up with those woke, mediocre hip hop acts".. and then guess what? Usher was the actual halftime show act. 

I can't find any reference to that story on the web anywhere. 

I think someone was just messing with you bud