Social Studies teacher tells female graduates to stay home and make babies

Oh - I do have an addition. I read the portion of the speech that he posted on his website, and he does tell men not to screw around as well.

I still think he's wrong for judging anyone by the number of sex partners they've had, but at least on that he was consistent across genders.

But he doesn't tell men to stay home with kids; it's the class religious paternal crap

Link to portion he posted: http://www.peterheck.com/speaking/rebellion
 
Ariana also used to be Republican; she's changed a lot over the years.

There IS nothing wrong with a man or woman choosing to stay home with their kids if that's what they prefer and if their partner agrees to it and they can afford it. That's what feminism is all about - choices; people doing what works for them (given physical and economic constraints, of course)

Among the things that were wrong with this speech -
> addressing it just to females
> the whole "body is a temple" thing implying women who have sex are "dirty". No, they aren't.
> Beauty in "modesty and self-respect"? Puh-lease. Why not beauty in intellect? beauty in creative skills? beauty in being a capable person?
> The world scoffs at careers? BS. Usually said by men to cut down on competition in the marketplace
> He implies that stay at home moms are better at taking care of children than moms who go to work. The many children of working parents would probably debate this.
> We don't need more women as CEOs? BS. Maybe if we had more women as CEOs, women would be paid better; men who want to take family leave to be home with their children wouldn't feel "lessened"; maybe we'd have more day care opportunities - better quality, more affordable, open more hours; maybe- it's possible - we'd have companies that cared about kids along with profits. Can't guarantee that, of course; I'm sure female CEOs can be just as jerky as male CEOs.

He's a sexist jerk...given this is a school function and he is a teacher, there might be those in the audience who thought he was spouting the school's official stance on women. I hope he wasn't.

The linked article in the original post gives a good explanation of why his speech was incredibly wrong for a public school graduation.

And again - there is nothing wrong with ANYONE wanting to stay home with their kids - if they can afford it. But stuff happens; and that man who stayed home with his kids while his wife was a corporate lawyer - if she dies, he's left having to fend for himself and the kids. I strongly recommend to everyone that they have the skills they need to support themselves and their family, even if at the moment the partner is able to support the family. Sickness, death, divorce happen.

I wonder how this speaker feels about single moms home with their kids living on welfare and food stamps? Since they are fulfilling their "greatest role" according to him, is he ok with taxpayers supporting them?

She was pilloried and harried by the left for having those views, you can see something of that in the video. I did say he expressed himself clumsily but, and I may be wrong, he seemed to be saying that it wasn't an inferior choice to want bring up children as a full time activity.
 
Oh - I do have an addition. I read the portion of the speech that he posted on his website, and he does tell men not to screw around as well.

I still think he's wrong for judging anyone by the number of sex partners they've had, but at least on that he was consistent across genders.

But he doesn't tell men to stay home with kids; it's the class religious paternal crap

Link to portion he posted: http://www.peterheck.com/speaking/rebellion


This guy's a fundamentalist minister and crazy right wing radio host and an active teabagger.

http://www.peterheck.com/speaking/home


This is good...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/morgan-mohr/peter-heck_b_3417399.html

While it seems Heck centers on the importance of childrearing, at no point in his commencement address does he attempt to refute the vast amount of scientific data that demonstrates the positive effects of maternal employment. Instead, Heck seems concerned only with the emotional state of husbands. Heck tells girls that "the greatest role of your life" will not only be that of mother, but wife. In a later part of the same speech, Heck says that "we need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children." His desire for a deeply patriarchal gender divide was chronicled by the Huffington Post:

In a blog post from July 2012 in the wake of the Aurora shooting, Heck described the present day as "an age where we too often yield to the idiotic sniveling of modern feminism that suggests there is no place in our enlightened society for men to act as 'protectors' of women -- - indeed, they suggest that it is insulting and demeaning for [men] to do so.
Heck is not warning young women of the negative effect their jobs will have on their children; his primary concern is for their husbands, who will lose their roles as "defenders," "providers," and "protectors" if their female companions show any autonomy or financial freedom.

This should be his next book:

 
I just find incredibly ironic and a little hypocritical that Ariana Huffington is allowing her eponymously named website to ridicule views which she herself previously vehemently espoused. Anyway this is what he actually said.

Excerpt from "A Life of Rebellion" by Peter Heck]


When I wrote the challenge to the graduating seniors of the Eastern High School class of 2013, I never had any idea that The Today Show, MSNBC, MSN, Yahoo, the Daily Caller, the Huffington Post, and ABC News would care what I said. As it turns out, after perusing their coverage of my speech, I’m pretty convinced I was right – they didn’t care what I said. They did care to sensationalize and distort my words for the sake of creating controversy, and thus getting attention. What high journalistic integrity.

After all, it’s kind of amazing when you explicitly state to the females, "If you choose to have a career, God's blessings upon you" that the headline could be written: "Teacher tells girls don't work, stay at home." Good grief.

So, for the sake of providing full context that our illustrious media is not providing to anyone, here is the transcript of the relevant portion of the speech.

Ladies, I challenge you to a life of rebellion. To recognize that your body is a temple that is deserving of honor, not indiscretion. I challenge you to be women of virtue, finding beauty not in how many unprincipled men you can attract, but rather finding beauty in modesty and self-respect. I challenge you to devote yourself to family, to your childr

If you choose to have a career, God’s blessings upon you, but I challenge you to recognize what the world scoffs at…that your greatest role of your life will be that of wife and mother. That the greatest impact you will ever contribute to our world is a loving and devoted investment into the lives of your precious children. To solve the problems plaguing our society, we don’t need more women as CEOs, we need more women as invested mothers.
Men, I challenge you to a life of rebellion. To recognize that manliness is not defined by who bench presses the most, or who scores with the most women. I challenge you to recognize that the measure of a man is found in his character – his honesty, how well he can control his urges, his temptations, his desires...setting them aside for the good of others. I challenge you to find a woman to love, to commit yourself to her and her alone for the rest of your life.

I challenge you to be man enough that when a provocatively dressed woman comes on the television, turn the channel. Send the message to your wife that she alone captivates you and she is in competition with no one. You want to be a rebel – that’s a rebel. I challenge you to lead your homes in the pathway of righteousness. Provide moral clarity for your children and unyielding hard work for your wife.
So many times I’ve heard others compliment my wife for supporting my ministry, supporting what I do. They have it backwards. I work to support her ministry, what she does in raising our children. And it’s an honor to do so. To solve the problems plaguing our society, we don’t need more men as millionaire entrepreneurs, we need more men acting as fierce defenders of their wives and providers for their children.
Please note the instruction to men that we don't need more men entrepreneurs. Oddly, this was not made the headline. What was fairly self-evident to the open minded members of the audience, apparently eluded our always responsible national media. That, sure we need CEOs and entrepreneurs, but "to solve the problems of our society," we need both men and women to remember their most lasting legacy is what they leave with their children.

I doubt that Meg Whitman would look at her children and tell them that what she's done at work is more significant and important to her than what she did raising and caring for them. That's my point. Home is most important for all of us.

As Micah Clark at the AFA-IN, to date the only news agency I am aware of that has bothered to report this story accurately, stated:

True or False: "You can never invest too much time in your children, but you can spend too much time in the office." If that statement is true, (and it is) what does that reveal . . . other than Peter was right? Besides, all he really said was that the pursuit of career must not crowd out, or overrule, your primary and most important role as a mom or a dad.

Those are comments, those are sentiments that I stand fully behind. God help our culture if others do not.

http://www.peterheck.com/speaking/rebellion
 
She was pilloried and harried by the left for having those views, you can see something of that in the video. I did say he expressed himself clumsily but, and I may be wrong, he seemed to be saying that it wasn't an inferior choice to want bring up children as a full time activity.

He was not clumsy. His point was quite clear. A woman has no value as an individual and her only value is to God, her husband, children and the collective. He's just an ass.
 
> The world scoffs at careers?
he didn't say the world scoffs at women with careers, he said the world scoffs at women who raise their children....

> Beauty in "modesty and self-respect"? Puh-lease.
you have something against modesty and self respect....

> addressing it just to females
are you assuming he said nothing to the males in the audience or is that reported somewhere....

> He implies that stay at home moms are better at taking care of children than moms who go to work. The many children of working parents would probably debate this.
some of them may even be articulate enough to do it successfully.....
 
He was not clumsy. His point was quite clear. A woman has no value as an individual and her only value is to God, her husband, children and the collective. He's just an ass.

sometimes it amazes me how stupid liberals actually are.....you just made up a bunch of crap, pretended the guy said it and now your patting yourself on the back thinking you are astute at analysis......
 
he didn't say the world scoffs at women with careers, he said the world scoffs at women who raise their children....


you have something against modesty and self respect....


are you assuming he said nothing to the males in the audience or is that reported somewhere....


some of them may even be articulate enough to do it successfully.....

It is one of the rare occasions that I pretty much agree with you on all counts.
 
Back
Top